More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Nigel Hamilton

Nigel Hamilton

Posted: September 23, 2010 10:30 AM

The news today of a Republican "Pledge To America" -- a deliberate evocation of Newt Gingrich's egregious "Contract With America" in 1994 -- sickens me. I'm reminded of Karl Marx's famous dictum, that history repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce.

We're heading for the tragedy part! It isn't that we've forgotten the past -- and its consequences -- it's just that we seem unable to reverse the historical tide. The political philosopher Hegel had pointed out in 1837 that "a coup d'état is sanctioned as it were in the opinion of the people if it is repeated... Through repetition, what at the beginning seemed to be merely accidental and possible, becomes real and established." Marx hated that idea -- and his famous dictum was, in fact, a historian's protest against human nature.

We, too, can protest -- but can we fight the evil tide of Know-Nothingness that is sweeping the country and potentially handing congressional power over to a group of dimwits, determined to ruin the American empire?

It may be instructive, if sad, to re-read what I wrote about September 1994 in the second volume of my Clinton biography, published three years ago.

****

Why did Bill Clinton, possessed with such supersensitive antennae to political danger, not appreciate the WMD that Newt Gingrich was preparing throughout the summer of 1994?

Newt Gingrich was, in the summer of 1994, simply a firebrand in Clinton's eyes: a controversial, attention-seeking, "confrontational activist" congressman; a clever man who understood the sea-change that had taken place in media coverage of politics since Watergate, and with the help of moguls such as Rupert Murdoch had made his Faustian bargain with it. "You have to give them confrontations," Gingrich told a group of conservative activists. "When you give them confrontations, you get attention; when you get attention, you can educate." It was a feisty approach to self-promotion, but hardly the stirrings, in the President's eyes, of a real threat to the Democratic Party's hold on the House of Representatives.

How wrong he was, he would now discover.

Confrontation was certainly the key to Gingrich's strangely aggressive behavior. For years he'd made a name for himself as a lecturer and speaker, without ever getting significant press coverage. Then, one day, he'd deliberately crossed swords with the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Congressman "Tip" O'Neill, and had won the national attention he craved. "In the minute Tip O'Neill attacked me," Gingrich later boasted, he and I got 90 seconds at the close of all three network news shows."

From there, Gingrich had gone on to achieve further television-grabbing notoriety on the Hill by charging O'Neill's successor, distinguished World War II-veteran and Speaker of the House of Representatives, Jim Wright, with ethics violations in 1988 over a vanity book he'd published. (These soon rebounded, however, onto "bomb-thrower" Gingrich - indeed reduced him to a sobbing wreck when Democrats attacked him the following year as a neo-McCarthyite, and countercharged him with no less than 84 ethics violations of his own. A special prosecutor had to be appointed to investigate the charges -- a process which would eventually cost American taxpayers $1 million.)

Such had been the opening salvos in a series of bitter new, internecine, profoundly partisan uncivil civil warfare in Congress that could only bring dishonor to the House.

Gingrich had only himself to blame. Drying his eyes, the Georgian Republican congressman had merely continued his antics. If that was the only way he could get his ideas written about, mentioned on television and radio, and debated in modern, tabloid America, then so be it, he reasoned - content to be considered in his own words, "just about the most disliked member of Congress."

This was the very opposite of Bill Clinton - who wanted everybody to like him, and would go to almost any pains to elicit approval. What President Clinton failed to acknowledge, however, was Gingrich's relentless if subversive generalship, compared with his own. Newt Gingrich's private life might be a mess, and his insensitivity to real people - especially ailing people - heartless, but his political drive and dogged

organizing capacity were extraordinary. Clearly there was a messianic quality to the teachings of radical-conservative Congressman Newt Gingrich -- something skeptics dismissed as psychologically inspired by his rootless background as the son of a manic-depressive mother and tyrant military stepfather: an attempt to create order out of disorder -- disorder he himself was intent upon creating!

Trust was not a quality that Gingrich's behavior inspired in Congress, but there was certainly sincerity in his belief in a revitalization of the American economy and society by promoting a Reagan/Thatcher-like cultural shift from dependence on welfare to freedom of economic opportunity....

It was in the context of his "Renewing American Civilization" lectures that Congressman Newt Gingrich - bookworm, lecturer and proseletyzer -- had decided to go one step further in his long campaign to convert younger people to Republican opportunity-led values and wrest the House of Representatives from Democratic control. There was a chance for Gingrich not only to succeed Michel as minority leader but, if the Republicans could win enough seats in Congress in the 1994 mid-term elections, for Gingrich to become Speaker of the House.

For Republicans to win back control of the House after some 41 years, however, they would need a document, a solemn declaration, a manifesto, Gingrich reasoned: a clearly defined agenda of political goals that would distinguish them from their opponents. Traditionally, mid-term elections were fought locally, not nationally. In a step that would put Newton LeRoy Gingrich into the political history books, he decided to reverse that approach. In the 1994 gubernatorial, senate and congressional election campaigns he would wage war as a national revolutionary army, controlled from a central headquarters, not as guerrilla warriors fighting in penny packets.

As a student of military history, the stepson of a colonel, an "army brat" who'd visited the battlefields of Normandy, the Somme and Verdun, and who'd probed the battles of the Revolution and the Civil War for their lessons at home, Gingrich thus presented himself as a new kind of Republican general. A man of ideas. And an inspiring, if insensitive, trainer of troops.

Bill Clinton, though ex officio Commander-in-Chief of the United States of America's military, had perilously few forces to face insurrection at home. Indeed the problem for General Clinton in America was his Party... His brand of Democratic centrism, as a New Democrat, had appealed to many voters tired of liberal-versus-conservative ideology and gridlock, and responsive to the promise of a new, middle-of-the-way forward. But his subsequent administration hadn't cured gridlock, despite a three-way lock on the White House and the Capitol....

Amid the national lamentations [over the death of the health care reform bill] there were, inevitably, doomsday prognostications about its likely effect on the Democratic Party's performance in the November elections. But, before Dee Dee Myers could try to pin the defeat of health care reform on Republican obstructionism, the Democrats in Congress and the White House found themselves completely outflanked. On Tuesday, September 27, 1994 - one day after the final, official announcement of the death of health care reform in the 103rd Congress - Newt Gingrich launched his Scud missile. Standing on the steps of the Capitol's West Front beneath a vast banner rippling in the late summer breeze, and accompanied by a brass band, Congressman Gingrich stepped forward to face the banks of assembled cameras. He was there, he declared, to make a solemn promise to the nation, along with no fewer than 375 other congressional and would-be congressional signatories. The American welfare state was over; the era of opportunity was about to unfold. And to kick it off, the signatories were putting their names to a sort of Bill of Rights for Conservatives, based on ten bills that Republicans would present in the House of Representatives, if they defeated the Democrats in November 1994....

The legislative program was, as Gingrich later admitted, poorly received by the press, and soon trashed by the White House. But - as the House Republican Party whip knew from a prior, four-day flight around the country - it was exactly, emphatically what Republican candidates and voters had longed for: a blue-print for the neo-Reaganite future: a renewed "morning in America."

Excerpted from Bill Clinton: Mastering the Presidency, Public Affairs, 2007, pp. 333-348

 

Follow Nigel Hamilton on Twitter: www.twitter.com/NigelHamilton1

 
 
  • Comments
  • 26
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
08:18 AM on 09/24/2010
Krugman is worth reading today:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/24/opinion/24krugman.html?ref=todayspaper

To save tax cuts for the top 2% and balance the budget without touching SS, Medicare or Defense, the GOP would have to abolish the rest of the Federal Government. No more highway repairs, homeland security, Medicaid, national parks, N.I.H., SBA loans, child nutrition or health programs and...no Congress! Oops.
11:04 PM on 09/23/2010
Partisan gridlock is a natural result of the current two-party system. I know other parties (i.e. Green and Libertarian) have tried to change this, but the established parties are too strong. I believe the answer lies in individual states making elections non-partisan. The top vote-getters in the primary square off for the general election. This would keep Republicans from going far right to get elected and Democrats from going far left. With the current system it is no wonder that the result is gridlock in Congress. The parties can still exist and promote their candidates, but the result would allow more mainstream candidates to get elected.
06:51 PM on 09/23/2010
The central mistake of all Americans is believing that "I am right and you are wrong." (You can substitute moral, good, or whatever set of dualistic terms you want.) The Republicans believe this about themselves vis-a-vis Democrats, and conversely for the Democrats; the Libertarians believe themselves solely possessed of virtue, while both Republicans and Democrats are evil.

By accepting this simplistic--and false--dichotomy, you also are mistaken both in your analysis and prescription. You also do not understand the whole basis on which the oligarchy maintains its control of the country--by having a perennial lurch-to-the-left, then lurch-to-the-right political game. There's nothing "natural" about this constant back-and-forth feature of politics; it is a planned, deliberate, way to keep the slaves from being able to actually gain any political--and economic--power. The oligarchy knows that the minute all the people figure out that they have more in common than they have differences, then the game is over; and the oligarchy also knows that that day will never come. So, it is divide and conquer, today and forever. Mostly, it's Democrats versus Republicans, but when these two get boring, why not enliven people and bring in a new bunch to keep the divisions?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Carl Caroli
Give peace a chance
06:15 PM on 09/23/2010
Gingrich is very much an example of a man who achieved too much doing too little and then squandering it away on masturbatory efforts of self promotion rather than actually accomplishing anything significant. He does not deserve an insignificant fraction of the attention he gets.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
parlimentMike
Don't settle for less evil, demand good
06:15 PM on 09/23/2010
If the Democrats will only preserve the status quo, it is necessary to allow things to degrade further. Apparently only real-world pain will overcome their willful ignorance.

It sounds kind of cold, but if Progressives triangulated politics, that would be the PLC position.
03:51 PM on 09/23/2010
The GOP didn't do anything for America and they had 8 years.

What exactly could they pledge?

The GOP pledges not to crash the economy?
The GOP pledges not to spend $200 Billion Dollars in Clinton surplus?
The GOP pledges not to leave behind a huge deficit?
The GOP pledges not to bail out Wall Street?
The GOP pledges not to take a balanced budget and trash it?
The GOP pledges not to give away American tax dollars to Corporate Special Interests?
The GOP pledges not to blame Americans for their own unemployment?

They broke every pledge they could ever make in exchange for being propped up by Corporate donations.

Voters wake up. You are falling for it again and it will be no different than the 2 Bush elections ending with a crashed economy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Carl Caroli
Give peace a chance
06:16 PM on 09/23/2010
They pledge to get us into wars we can't seem to get out of.
03:42 PM on 09/23/2010
I think the only real tragedy is Newt Gingrich's underestimation of the intelligence of the electorate. These chickens will come home to roost maybe not in 2010 but most definitely in 2012.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
parlimentMike
Don't settle for less evil, demand good
06:17 PM on 09/23/2010
It's not an estimation if it has been measured. The electorates intelligence may be judged by our Congress.
03:18 PM on 09/23/2010
The problem isn't with either conservative or progressice ideology. The problem is that both parties have been taken over by the waealthy elite and serve only them, We are no longer a democracy, but a plutocracy instead.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
edejan
01:09 AM on 09/24/2010
You have stated the true problem succinctly. F & F.
08:28 AM on 09/24/2010
Another popular false equivalency that serves the forces behind the GOP. Look at what the partys are actually doing, and who it benefits and choose a side!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dennidus1680
12:05 PM on 09/23/2010
And what did the contract with America accomplish, other than putting Republicans in power? Nothing but a slide toward what we have today. If they do it again, I shutter to think of the results.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:04 PM on 09/23/2010
This "Pledge" is a threat. The republican party is on a parallel course to the NSDAP of Germany in the years preceding the conflagration that was the last great war. That they are emulating hate and fear tactics of that reviled organisation as well as disseminatng manifestos with clearly ignorant, bigoted, racist ideologies is evidence enough of their dubious intent. No good can and will come of their efforts to control the government of the United States. Now only ill-will is being fomented and that which is simmering beneath the breathes of many citizens will be unleashed.
Unspeakable damage to our nation and our standing in the world may be upon us. With the inauguration of our president scores purchased weapons for what they saw as the need to enlist violence as a means of attaining their goals.
This present edict is but one more benchmark in their quest. And that quest threatens to spill over into social unrest. A conflict more civil in nature than that of the Reich, but just as nationally disastrous.

Intelligent and able bodied people cannot stand by with idle thoughts and hands as the GOP make a Broadside with their ridiculous pledge. It is wrought with coded insinuations calling their minions to arms for what they see as "American values." We know what they mean. We have to counter their offensive with our own but with just anger and action. The d-day clock is nearing Midnight people.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
blackraisin
Life, Liberty, Property.
02:49 PM on 09/23/2010
What was it that Jon Stewart the other day Oh yeah, "I disagree with you but I'm pretty sure you're not Hitler".

By comparing them to the Nazis, you've just pulled a Glenn Beck. Congratulations!
03:47 PM on 09/23/2010
Read about how the Nazis got into power. The parallels are much closer than you realize, I really don't believe that anything extreme about comparing these people to the Nazis, especially in terms of their methods and the way they see people that aren't white. It's extreme for anyone to call George W. Bush Hitler or to call Obama Hitler indeed, but to compare people like Newt Gingrich, Karl Rove, and Sarah Palin to Hitler, Goebbels and Goehring is a fair comparison than you might think.
Democrat in the South
Empathy, the most important word
11:06 AM on 09/23/2010
America must like to be abused by their elected politicians. If Newt gets his foot back in the door, that will be proof that voters are are happy with the state of America right now. It will mean that we like having huge wealth ineqaulity and unemployment. We ALL will continue to pay for ignorance.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JayPhilosopher
cineaste philosopher
10:55 AM on 09/23/2010
Good points. The election of Republicans to congress in 1994 turned what might have been a period of progress for the working class during the Clinton presidency into one that favored deregulation, an end to welfare programs for the poor, shrinking unions, and government cuts to the country's infrastructure. In other words it continued the conservative tide that Reagan started in 1980.
We face the same problem today. The working class in America must realize that the political- electoral aspects of the class struggle is a 24/7 365 day a year thing and not something to engage in once every four years.
Democrat in the South
Empathy, the most important word
11:30 AM on 09/23/2010
For the first time in my life I can see more clearly how Hitler got as far as he did. I always wondered how something like that could have happened.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
blackraisin
Life, Liberty, Property.
02:50 PM on 09/23/2010
I would hope you aren't comparing the Republicans to Hitler. Jon Stewart made it clear that such comparisons aren't helpful.
photo
Decorina
Hypocrisy means your karma ran over your dogma
02:58 PM on 09/23/2010
I am totally with you on that. Scary isn't it?