Contributors

Friday, December 09, 2011

Newt is Not the One

I read an interesting post over on Slate, asking whether Newt Gingrich is nuts:
We’re quick to describe politicians whose views we find extreme or whose behavior seems odd as “crazy,” and perhaps anyone who runs for president in some sense is. But I’ve long wondered whether Newt Gingrich merits that designation in a more clinical sense. I’m not a psychiatrist, of course, and it’s impossible to diagnose someone at a distance. Without medical records that he hasn’t released, we can’t know whether Gingrich may have inherited his mother’s manic depression. Nevertheless, one observes in the former House Speaker certain symptoms—bouts of grandiosity, megalomania, irritability, racing thoughts, spending sprees—that go beyond the ordinary politician’s normal narcissism.
But it's not just Newt: all of the Republican candidates for president have some degree of weirdness or craziness.

Michele Bachmann has the crazy eyes, the crazy conspiratorial ideas that constantly well up in her mind, a willingness to believe any unsubstantiated rumor, and the whole mission from God thing about being a tax accountant.

Herman Cain is a sex addict, a nonaphile, apparently unable to read, and terminally confused about everything except how great he is.

Rick Santorum is a religious fanatic who believes his win in the Senate was granted to him personally by God, but somehow doesn't think his subsequent loss means anything. His preoccupation with gays seems to be his way of stifling hidden urges.

Rick Perry has some kind of deteriorating dementia that prevents him from forming lucid and coherent thoughts and remembering what the hell he's talking about, from secession to abolishing federal agencies. You get the idea he'd just rather be out shooting coyotes.

Ron Paul is just a nice, batty 76-year-old man who thinks prostitution and drugs should be legal and corporations should be able to screw us any way they like.

And the two "normal" guys in the race, Mitt Romney and Jon Huntsman, are members of what many mainstream Christian denominations consider to be a cult that espouses ideas that most Americans consider to be weird and wacky, not to mention heretical.

And don't even get me started about Trump and Palin...

One begins to wonder whether there's something inherently unstable about Republicans who run for president. Many people considered George W. Bush to be suffering from a range of psychological problems, from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, to sociopathy or psychopathy. Reagan was suffering from symptoms of Alzheimers as early as his first term, and probably even during the 1980 election campaign. And Richard Nixon was paranoid criminal mastermind. But George H. W. Bush and Bob Dole were normal enough, so there have been bouts of normalcy in recent Republican presidents and candidates.

Yet now the constant roller coaster of the polls in the Republican primary race indicates that the Republican electorate shares these same concerns about the candidates at some level. First Bachmann is up, then Perry, then Cain, then Paul, then Gingrich.

Where are the regular Republicans, the fiscal conservatives that don't have daddy issues or aren't hell-bent on some wacky crusade? What happened to all the guys like George H. W. Bush and Bob Dole? The "normal" guys, like Mark Sanford and John Ensign. These men were once considered major contenders for 2012, but were put out of the running by their propensity for crazy extra-marital affairs, the same thing that just shot down Herman Cain. Somehow this hasn't stopped Gingrich's recent rise in the polls, though he's a serial philanderer and cad for ditching his wives as soon as they become ill.

One can only assume that Newt's past will catch up with him again in the next month and reverse his bump in the polls. That past includes flip-flopping on numerous issues like global warming and health care mandates, his history as a (not-)lobbyist, his divorces, his cynical conversion to Catholicism, his treasonous embrace of amnesty for illegal aliens who've lived in the US for decades, and the sheer hypocrisy of his pushing through Clinton's impeachment while banging his aide. Not to mention his shutdown of the federal government because Clinton made him sit in the back of Air Force One.

Sure, some Democratic candidates have been wacky: Dennis Kucinich and Al Sharpton. Jimmy Carter wasn't a very inspirational leader, and said some silly things about lust in his heart. But he wasn't nuts. Though Bill Clinton was apparently a terrible horn dog, he was still competent in other arenas. Al Gore and John Kerry suffered mostly from lack of charisma, though despite that both only barely missed being elected president by a single state. And I would be remiss if I omitted mention of Gary Hart's foolish challenge to the press and John Edwards, who nearly matched Gingrich's caddishness when he impregnated Ariel Hunter while his wife was ill with cancer, and then tried to deny it. But the last two Democratic front runners, Hilary and Obama, are completely normal.

What is it about the GOP these days that makes it impossible for rational men and women to run for president under the Republican banner?

6 comments:

rld said...

The impeachment was regarding lying under oath.

You probably like Dole because he lost the election he ran in.

Don't forget to say that the media covered for Edwards for as long as they could.

Juris Imprudent said...

This is what a liberal who can actually think sounds like. How much more interesting this place would be if you discussed these kinds of things - instead of throwing stale rhetoric into uninspired rants that only prove how intellectually stunted you all are.

C'mon yippee little dogs - bark, bark!

Juris Imprudent said...

Also considering how much Bush policy is still in effect under Obama - what rational man or woman can vote Democrat?

Mark Ward said...

I think it's a pretty honest analysis of the current GOP field. I'd add in that its origin lies in the right wing "Media Industrial Complex," a phrase recently coined by Andrew Sullivan. The GOP draws its voting power from the many people who follow Michele Bachmann, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, and Glenn Beck. Without them, they are indeed the minority party forever because there simply aren't enough numbers.

The Democrats, on the other hand, don't draw their power from the people who follow Dennis Kucinich, Bernie Sanders, Tom Hartman or Rachel Maddow. They draw it from folks like Harry Reid, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin and the president. These guys are center left and...well...sane.

Juris Imprudent said...

So again, regale me with all of the Bush excesses that Obama disavowed? We are out of Iraq (on Bush's schedule). We are still in Afghanistan. What is the status of Gitmo? Why does the Prez oppose the current NDAA (because he disagrees that his power to detain should be subject to Congressional review - not that it is overly expanded). The crony capitalism that budded during Bush is in full bloom now.

WRM has a much better take on this election (see my link above).

Paul is the most sensible candidate on the Republican side, and his flaws aren't the ones you play for guffaws. Of course you joke about what you can't argue. Prostitution and drugs - like you couldn't find that within 10 minutes of where you are. But keep it illegal - lest your hypocrisy be exposed. You mooks are too invested in the status quo, including pouring our blood and treasure into any shit-hole imaginable. You ought to be talking about how Paul makes more sense than Obama on foreign policy - but instead all you have is a half-assed take on Team America (it's bad if the other guys are doing it, good if it is our guy).

Juris Imprudent said...

I will have to give M this much credit - he engages (in his own strange way) with his critics. Nikto just shits and grins.