Who knew? Newt’s back, and he’s bad. And he seems to be moving deliberately into the power vacuum created by the implosion of Bush-style conservatism and the embarrassment caused by the dawning impression that Rush Limbaugh is now the intellectual heavyweight of American conservatism.
But Newt Gingrich has done three very visible and very vocal things that are very difficult to think together.
First, he converted to Roman Catholicism; second, he became a public sponsor of the nationwide “tea parties” held on Tax Day; and third, he has become the point person for a withering attack on President Obama’s emerging foreign policy approach.
This last issue has been the issue du jour as Newt makes the round of talk shows and television news. His talking points are impressive:
- The President permitted Chavez to use him for a photo op.
- The President bowed to the Saudi king.
- The President made concessions to Fidel Castro with absolutely nothing to show for it.
- North Korea fires a rocket illegally and the President does nothing.
In short, Newt Gingrich argues that President Obama’s foreign policy has been reduced to a laughable display of American weakness. He contrasts this to Ronald Reagan’s foreign posture which boasted American strength to the world.
It’s an intriguing contrast, actually. To be sure, Ronald Reagan could talk tough and stand tall, as when he challenged Michael Gorbachev to “tear down this wall” in Berlin. But Reagan also showed himself as eager to leave Lebanon when our Marine barracks were bombed as he had been quick to enter. Reagan also showed himself utterly without scruple in the Iran-Contra fiasco, the very Central American meddling that causes such ire among Chavez and his friends.
We have many fences to mend, and many messes to clean up. That is President Obama’s unfortunate and regrettable foreign policy starting-point. And American conservatism bears a great deal of the blame for this.
Conservative foreign policy for too long has also been characterized by impatience, hasty judgments, and foot-in-mouth disesase.
It is certainly a bit too early to write off the Obama foreign policy as Weakness 101. Give the man a year or two, and let’s see what happens in Cuba, in Iran, in North Korea, in Venezuela, not to mention in Europe itself. It’s also a bit early to forget the lessons of the last eight years: namely, that bluster combined with ignorance creates a destabilized anti-American zone than now runs from the Afghan highlands to the Mediterranean Sea.
There is more to be said about Newt Gingrich’s alleged fear of weakness. That a leading conservative would convert to Roman Catholicism suggests that he cares little for the coalition of fundamentalists and evangelicals that swept Ronald Reagan into office. He seems not to care about weakening the old Reagan coalition.
That Newt Gingrich would publicly call for “tea parties” on Tax Day is even more alarming. As I recall, the so-called Boston Tea Party involved the destruction of private property as a protest against taxation without representation. Is Newt Gingrich inciting Americans to riot, or revolt? Is he suggesting that we do not have proper representation in the legislature, or simply that it is too Democratic? Is he simply whining about paying taxes in time of war? It is a perplexing symbolic protest that seems designed to weaken the current administration and its citizens’ political commitments.
For such a man to worry about any display of American weakness while at the same time blasting this president publicly and undermining his policies at every turn is disingenuous. Newt Gingrich speaks from both sides of his mouth. And his behavior strongly suggests that this has less to do with foreign policy and more to do with narcissistic ambition—the very vices, I seem to recall, that canned his career the last time around.
