Posted on 01/25/2012 9:52:02 AM PST by T. Jefferson
In the increasingly rough Republican campaign, no candidate has wrapped himself in the mantle of Ronald Reagan more often than Newt Gingrich. “I worked with President Reagan to change things in Washington,” “we helped defeat the Soviet empire,” and “I helped lead the effort to defeat Communism in the Congress” are typical claims by the former speaker of the House.
The claims are misleading at best. In the Reagan years I was an assistant secretary of state — Mr. Gingrich voted with the president regularly, but equally often spewed insulting rhetoric at Reagan, his top aides, and his policies to defeat Communism. Gingrich was voluble and certain in predicting that Reagan’s policies would fail, and in all of this he was dead wrong.
President Reagan is clearly failing.” Why? This was due partly to “his administration’s weak policies, which are inadequate and will ultimately fail”; partly to CIA, State, and Defense, which “have no strategies to defeat the empire.” “The burden of this failure frankly must be placed first on President Reagan.” Our efforts against the Communists in the Third World were “pathetically incompetent.”
Gingrich’s called Reagan’s meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev “the most dangerous summit for the West since Adolf Hitler met with Neville Chamberlain in Munich.”
Far from becoming a reliable voice for Reagan policy and the struggle against the Soviets, Gingrich took on Reagan and his administration. It appears to be a habit: He did the same to George W. Bush when Bush was making the toughest and most controversial decision of his presidency — the surge in Iraq. Here again Gingrich provided no support for his party’s embattled president, testifying as a private citizen in 2007 that the strategy was “inadequate,” contained “breathtaking” gaps, lacked “synergism” (whatever that means), and was “very disappointing.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan Nat’l Security Advisor Bud McFarlane: http://bit.ly/zd9eAF
Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan Economist Art Laffer: http://bit.ly/xEDETi
Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan WH political director Jeffrey Lord: http://bit.ly/zw2ZMb
Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan Policy Analyst Peter Ferrara http://bit.ly/zq1QxI
Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan bonafides. Ask Reagan media consultant Richard Quinn: http://on.msnbc.com/y2sPM2
Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan’s older son Michael Reagan: http://bit.ly/yYVy7L
I don't know which “military leaders” you have in mind, but the Joint Chiefs of Staff were well-aware of Reagan's internal NSC directives in the first two years of his administration to take on the Soviets through economic warfare, covert operations, and increased defense spending.
IATZot ping
Great job Josh. Everyone should copy and paste your aggregation and post it all over the Net where Romulans are propigating their lies.
It would be great if Ronald Reagan’s other son endorsed Romney. That would be fitting. LOL.
There is no defense for how Gingrich handled his opposition to Reagan and his policies.
As a Congressman, he knew very well that the President was working with the knowledge of a great deal of classified information to which he, Gingrich, was not privy.
There are ways to voice “concern” and even opposition, while still respecting the President, the leader of your party, and the fact that he, not you, have more information.
Gingrich chose another way. He always has.
So when I hear Newt say that “the era of Reagan is over” with my own two ears should I stand up and cheer?
What specific facts do you dispute in this article?
I understand that you assume the author’s conclusions are biased. Fine. But are or are not the major facts accurately stated?
For example, did Gingrich say the things he is quoted as saying?
Have you not heard or seen the ads Newt is running against Romney? One was so bad that Newt had to take it down because Senator Rubio criticized it.
Oh, my. I can’t thank you enough for posting that link! I would have missed the article/thread, and it’s one of the best I’ve seen in days.
Indeed. The smell of sheer terror and desperation coming out of D.C. should cause reasonable people to stop for a minute and wonder why. I've never seen anything like this.
What Newt should do is explain that he underestimated Reagan and was dead wrong about him in some areas....”just the way people underestimate me and are dead wrong.”
Abrams is the typical, classic Neo-Con. He was a hardcore Leftist (even Communist) who saw the light about Socialism and underwent a conversion. They almost always have blind spots or areas where they retain some weird hybrid theories. You just have to allow them to be wrong some of the time. Reagan did.
Reagan's staff went nearly appopletic when he insisted on saying, "Mr. Gorbachoff, tear down this wall."
Reagan and Thatcher's charaterization of the USSR as an "evil empire" drew nothing but derision from the media and beltway insiders.
What, exactly, did Mr. Abrams contribute to Reagan's success in this?
Chirp. Chirp.
He suggests Gingrich went against Reagan, but what was the actual criticism?
Thus Gingrich concluded as he surveyed five years of Reagan in power that “we have been losing the struggle with the Soviet empire.”
Reagan would have said so himself!
It was not until Reagan actually visited the USSR that he became convinced he could dismantle their economy by forcing them into an arms race.
Man. I'm getting a real eye-opener on the machinations of the Republican elites and I'm not liking it.
“Has East Coast HACK written ALL over HIM!”
The term usually makes me yawn, but he sounds like the sort that made “neoconservative” a bad name.
“neoconservative” = East Coast HACK
“Gingrich was 180-degrees wrong. It was a master stroke and huge victory for Reagan.”
It was, but let it be noted partly by accident. Reagan trounced Gorby through his zealous devotion to Star Wars. But if he was at all serious about that “zero option” stuff, it was indeed dangerous.
Was newt really the party elite back then, critiquing reagan’s bold moves against Moscow? It’s worth finding that much out. Reagan was onto something.
so reagan put this guy in his state department?...so reagan was a fool..is that what you are saying...or does that only matter when he blasts newt....think hard now
Read the Book Reagan’s Secret War by Martin Anderson
Tells how he had to fight his military leaders and other conservatives including Thatcher when it came to negotiating nuclear weapons with the Soviets
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.