Posted on 06/12/2007 6:16:39 PM PDT by Cincinna
It is time for some strong medicine for American conservatives and it does not get any stronger then this: if Republicans are going to have any chance of victory in 2008, they need to learn a thing or two from the French.
That’s right. The French.
(Excerpt) Read more at ft.com ...
NEWT GINGRICH COMMENTS ON THE FRENCH ELECTIONS:
Here is a synopsis and quasi “analysis” from BOZ at Politique, formerly French Election 2007
Please keep in mind that BOZ makes no claim to be a Conservative. In fact, he is a total (_!_) when it comes to American politics.
I thought it was worth posting anyway, for Newt’s thoughts, not BOZ’s.
Newt Gingrich on the French
Former US Speaker of the House and possible 2008 Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich has an editorial in today’s Financial Times entitled “A French lesson for America’s Grand Old Party”. Gingrich details that the situation Sarkozy found himself in is in many respects similar to that of American’s conservatives: he was a member of an unpopular and incumbent government which should have left the door open for a left-wing victory. The “lesson”, according to Gingrich, is that:
“it is possible to produce a decisive national decision in favour of more conservative reform when voters are faced with a choice between ideological failure on the left and bold solutions and bold leadership from a newly redefined right.”
Gingrich is obviously making the quite absurd assumption that there will be “ideological failure” on the left; to his credit, he does elaborate later, saying that:
“much like the the US Democratic party it (French Socialist Party) is trapped by its commitment to big labour, big bureaucracy, high taxes, and social values people do not believe in.”
And the moral of the story:
“If Republicans in the US hope to win the presidency next year, they had better find a canddiate who, like Mr. Sarkozy. is prepared to stand for very bold, very dramatic and very systematic change. Not only that, but they had better make the case that the leftwing Democrat likely to be nominated represents the failed status quo: the bureaucracies that are failing, the social policies that are failing and the weakness around te world that has failed so badly in protecting the US.
As Margaret Thatcher would say: “You have to win the argument before you win the vote.”
Unfortunately for Mr. Gingrich, almost none of the many, many Republican candidates are proposing anything “bold” and “dramatic” unless that includes torture and bombing Iran. Can he be thinking of any other possible contenders...
I think Newt would make a very good advisor to Fred. Anybody know if they get along or have worked together much?
Newt should play the orphan card.
I think Newt should just stay home and keep his newest wife happy.....
Agreed he should shut up.
Based on my personal knowledge, I do not trust the man and do not want him near any elective office.
The most he should be trusted with is an advisory position, where his brain can be picked without giving him any responsibility.
Newt should probably be somewhere within a Fred Thompson administration, but not as his Vice Presidential pick. Among many decent possibilities, the VP should be either Duncan Hunter, J.C. Watts, or Michael Steele IMHO.
I agree not VP. Newt is not good as a public face, despite a loyal following. I was thinking of an adviser on the campaign. I think he is extremely smart and should be giving tactical advice directly to Fred (who’s smart enough to pick and choose which advice to accept).
Gingrich, actually, has a very good capacity for learning, unlike most of our “leaders” who will just say what they think we want to hear at the time we want to hear it.
June 11, 2007
A Look at Gingrich’s Business Empire
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 4:02 a.m. ET
WASHINGTON (AP) — Republican Newt Gingrich has built a lucrative business as an author, pundit and consultant since leaving Congress nine years ago.
The former House speaker says he may run for president but won’t decide until later this year. Meantime, he is traveling the country making speeches, holding book signings and preparing for a national workshop in September.
Here is a look at his business operations:
POLITICS:
Gingrich’s political arm is a tax-exempt committee he started last October — American Solutions for Winning the Future. It has paid for Gingrich’s travel and recently hired a pollster and a fundraiser.
Its activities are aimed at putting together a national, Internet-based workshop in late September to develop solutions to the country’s problems.
Gingrich says he will decide on whether to run sometime after the workshop.
The committee has raised $2.1 million, mostly from two benefactors who each gave $1 million: Sheldon Adelson, chairman and CEO of the Las Vegas Sands Corp., and North Carolina real estate developer Fred Godley.
SPEAKING AND COMMENTARY:
Gingrich makes hundreds of speeches each year, many paid. He won’t say how much he charges, and neither will the Washington Speakers Bureau, which books him. But some clients have said they paid $40,000 for a speech.
He also has a contract with Fox News for commentaries and specials; Fox said it does not disclose the terms of its contracts. And he is a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute.
Gingrich has a daily radio broadcast on more than 400 stations, and he writes a free online newsletter with 200,000 subscribers that is distributed by the conservative news magazine Human Events.
His speech topics include homeland security, health care, politics and leadership and, according to his Web site, ‘’living in the age of transformation.’’
BOOKS:
Gingrich has written more than a dozen books, three of them best-sellers. He branched out into historical fiction with a Civil War trilogy and has just begun a World War II trilogy with ‘’Pearl Harbor,’’ written with historian William R. Forstchen, in which the Japanese attack on the U.S. Pacific fleet is far more devastating than it actually was.
Most of his work is nonfiction, such as last year’s ‘’Rediscovering God in America: Reflections on the Role of Faith in Our Nation’s History,’’ and ‘’A Contract with the Earth,’’ due out in November.
Gingrich and his aides do not disclose how much he makes from his writing.
CONSULTING AND HEALTH CARE:
Gingrich started a communications and consulting firm, the Gingrich Group, after leaving Congress in 1999.
In 2003, the firm started a for-profit think tank, the Center for Health Transformation, that has largely eclipsed the work done by the Gingrich Group.
The think tank is now publishing books. ‘’Paper Kills: Transforming Health and Healthcare with Information Technology’’ has an introduction by Gingrich and was released this month.
It also has produced dozens of opinion columns by Gingrich and his aides that have been published by newspapers and magazines.
The columns routinely argue for the priorities of its member companies.
Aides say publications are alerted if a column specifically mentions a member company but that some issues are so broad, their impact would reach far beyond a particular member company.
Critics argue it’s a conflict of interest for someone of Gingrich’s stature to advance the views of companies that fund his think tank.
CHARITABLE:
Gingrich’s health care think tank has a nonprofit arm, the Center for Health Transformation Foundation. The foundation is funded by the center, and its officers also work for the center.
In 2005, the foundation reported giving $10,000 to the American Red Cross for hurricane relief, $7,500 to St. Joseph’s Mercy Foundation in Atlanta for hospital support and $3,000 to the Newport, N.J.-based Winn Feline Foundation for research into a disease that killed a kitten belonging to Gingrich’s sister, Susan.
Gingrich and his wife, Callista, have a foundation that in 2005 established a scholarship at her alma mater, Luther College in Decorah, Iowa.
Trouble for Newt is, the US isn’t France. Newt’s idea of bold leadership was to carry out votes on a number of reforms, but not binding his copartisans to voting yes.
Your point is well taken. But Newt is an excellent strategist, and he understands the brilliance of Sarko’s success.
I think the whole point of the article is that Sarko, the ultimate UMP insider, President of UMP, and minister of long date in the Chirac UMP government, considered a failing government, was able to run as an “outsider”, convince people only he was capable of changing the government. And accomplishing all this with the total support of every UMP leader (diffusing the opposition from within) and finally getting the endorsement of M et Mme Chirac, who campaigned tirelessly for Sarko at the end.
There is a lesson to be learned here.
MMmmmmmmmmmmmmmmaybe.
Hello Cincinna. First I’d like to thank you for referring to my posts over the past few months, I’m glad to have been of help. As for my comments on the Gingrich piece, you’re certainly allowed to take your position, but to clarify, my frustration lies with both parties major presidential candidates. Although Gingrich is stretching the French analogy, he is correct that for any Republican to win the general, he is going to have to present something new and bold, otherwise the Democrats are set to win by default, even though as of now they are a not too inspiring lot.
Personally, I think the only such platform that would appeal to enough independent voters would be a Republican candidate who is truly serious about conservative spending and limited government, as these are two things that a majority of Americans fully support but that Bush has been, by his actions, against. Gingrich has a point at least in the broad outlines of what a Republican needs to do to win, and I’d hope that at least one would attempt to do so.
Thanks,
Boz
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.