Newt provided another display of his genius, courage and realism. Newt’s first criticism was of the “fundamentally flawed” debate system and political discourse. Newt described requiring a prospective POTUS to wait 30 minutes to give a 30 second sound bite as an absurdity that ill serves the process or the public. It inherently presents a serious discussion of the very real problems facing America. Newt likes to say that Lincoln and Douglas went man to man for three hours with no moderator. Wouldn’t that be a great way to force a serious discussion of the issues, problems and solutions?
Gingrich pointed out the obvious, yet all too frequently unspoken-our system of politics and government (that more or less developed in the Cold War environment) is broken. Gingrich aptly describes the political impact of this break down: the Republicans don’t recognize the system is broken and the Democrat solutions are based on a complete lack or realism with no hope of success. The Ds look better because something beats nothing (how did W and Bubba get elected twice each-always a plan for every problem) and the Rs are offering nothing right now.
Gingrich used examples like the slow death of the Michigan schools and economy, as an example of a problem that require real change to solve. The teacher’s union in Michigan is so powerful that it chokes off any change in schools that have in graduation rates in the teens. The auto industry was another example of the early 20th Century union model killing an industry. Unlike most of the field, however, Newt was immediately able to articulate several very creative solutions to the problems he described.
Gingrich also had the courage to say the obvious but unpopular truth about the liberal left that the left wing Democrats are opposed to American victory. Gingrich used the Vietnam example of Ds cutting off funding for aid to South Vietnam a year after the American troops left. Gingrich then used the Killing Fields and mass executions the Vietnamese refugee crises as an example of the “price” associated with the peach at any price Democrat agenda in the War on Terror. Newt drew the analogy to the abandonment of Iraq and our allies there to our enemies who, as he described, machine gun girls walking to school. Newt closed by asking if General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker say we’re winning in Iraq why any American in good faith would legislate defeat?
Wallace led off with the legislative defeat question, citing the signs of success. Feingold then returned to the childish idea that the existence of American casualties was the definition of failure. Feingold followed that fallacy with the even sillier notion that the war’s financial cost and the recent defection of a couple of Republicans voting for withdrawal were evidence of failure in Iraq. It was just like watching two ships passing in the night. Feingold, of course, provided no evidence of failure in historical context. Feingold is exactly one of those liberals who Gingrich said are heavily invested in American failure, not just in Iraq but everywhere. Feingold provided another example of defeat at any price in the War on Terror by opposing even intercepting suspected terrorists’ calls from one foreign country and another if the fiber optic cable runs through American lines.
The “Attorney General“scandal” was the next Feingold departure from reality. After learning that AG Gonzales was correct in describing the dispute over the terror phone monitoring program Feingold still insisted that a crime of some kind had been committed in Gonzales’s testimony, although he failed to even describe, much less reiterate, a single false statement made by Gonzales, either under oath or otherwise that was false.
Same with the firing of U.S. Attorneys, who I must remind the reader serve at the pleasure of the President and can be fired for failing to pursue the Administration’s polices or any other reason. When asked to provide a single factual “smoking gun” Feingold twice replied that he could not give hard evidence but he feels that something illegal went on. When Wallace asked about the failure of Congress to take any action on any major issue before the public, Feingold answered that this was a week of “accountability”. While Feingold talked about bills that might happen in the future he came back to the minimum wage hike as Congress’ only substantial accomplishment. Feingold closed with a sixty second stump speech attacking President Bush.
Feingold is Exhibit A in the case for the 14% Congress.
Gingrich pointed out the obvious, yet all too frequently unspoken-our system of politics and government (that more or less developed in the Cold War environment) is broken. Gingrich aptly describes the political impact of this break down: the Republicans don’t recognize the system is broken and the Democrat solutions are based on a complete lack or realism with no hope of success. The Ds look better because something beats nothing (how did W and Bubba get elected twice each-always a plan for every problem) and the Rs are offering nothing right now.
Gingrich used examples like the slow death of the Michigan schools and economy, as an example of a problem that require real change to solve. The teacher’s union in Michigan is so powerful that it chokes off any change in schools that have in graduation rates in the teens. The auto industry was another example of the early 20th Century union model killing an industry. Unlike most of the field, however, Newt was immediately able to articulate several very creative solutions to the problems he described.
Gingrich also had the courage to say the obvious but unpopular truth about the liberal left that the left wing Democrats are opposed to American victory. Gingrich used the Vietnam example of Ds cutting off funding for aid to South Vietnam a year after the American troops left. Gingrich then used the Killing Fields and mass executions the Vietnamese refugee crises as an example of the “price” associated with the peach at any price Democrat agenda in the War on Terror. Newt drew the analogy to the abandonment of Iraq and our allies there to our enemies who, as he described, machine gun girls walking to school. Newt closed by asking if General David Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker say we’re winning in Iraq why any American in good faith would legislate defeat?
Wallace led off with the legislative defeat question, citing the signs of success. Feingold then returned to the childish idea that the existence of American casualties was the definition of failure. Feingold followed that fallacy with the even sillier notion that the war’s financial cost and the recent defection of a couple of Republicans voting for withdrawal were evidence of failure in Iraq. It was just like watching two ships passing in the night. Feingold, of course, provided no evidence of failure in historical context. Feingold is exactly one of those liberals who Gingrich said are heavily invested in American failure, not just in Iraq but everywhere. Feingold provided another example of defeat at any price in the War on Terror by opposing even intercepting suspected terrorists’ calls from one foreign country and another if the fiber optic cable runs through American lines.
The “Attorney General“scandal” was the next Feingold departure from reality. After learning that AG Gonzales was correct in describing the dispute over the terror phone monitoring program Feingold still insisted that a crime of some kind had been committed in Gonzales’s testimony, although he failed to even describe, much less reiterate, a single false statement made by Gonzales, either under oath or otherwise that was false.
Same with the firing of U.S. Attorneys, who I must remind the reader serve at the pleasure of the President and can be fired for failing to pursue the Administration’s polices or any other reason. When asked to provide a single factual “smoking gun” Feingold twice replied that he could not give hard evidence but he feels that something illegal went on. When Wallace asked about the failure of Congress to take any action on any major issue before the public, Feingold answered that this was a week of “accountability”. While Feingold talked about bills that might happen in the future he came back to the minimum wage hike as Congress’ only substantial accomplishment. Feingold closed with a sixty second stump speech attacking President Bush.
Feingold is Exhibit A in the case for the 14% Congress.
No comments:
Post a Comment