From the timing of it it looks like Newt McPherson, a 19 year-old mechanic living in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, had a shotgun wedding in September 1942 when it was discovered that 16-year old Kit Daugherty was pregnant. The marriage lasted three days and was over long before their baby, Newt Gingrich, was born. It would seem, then, that Newt Gingrich should be able to relate to someone like Barack Obama Jr., whose father abandoned him at a young age. Maybe Newt has had dreams of his father, the mechanic. Maybe he has wondered why his father didn’t want to help raise him. What I don’t think Newt has done is make every political decision with an eye to finishing his missing father’s unfinished business.
But, for some reason, that’s what he’s now accusing the president of doing.
Citing a recent Forbes article by Dinesh D’Souza, former House speaker Newt Gingrich tells National Review Online that President Obama may follow a “Kenyan, anti-colonial” worldview.
Gingrich says that D’Souza has made a “stunning insight” into Obama’s behavior — the “most profound insight I have read in the last six years about Barack Obama.”
“What if [Obama] is so outside our comprehension, that only if you understand Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior, can you begin to piece together [his actions]?” Gingrich asks. “That is the most accurate, predictive model for his behavior.”
“This is a person who is fundamentally out of touch with how the world works, who happened to have played a wonderful con, as a result of which he is now president,” Gingrich tells us.
“I think he worked very hard at being a person who is normal, reasonable, moderate, bipartisan, transparent, accommodating — none of which was true,” Gingrich continues. “In the Alinksy tradition, he was being the person he needed to be in order to achieve the position he needed to achieve . . . He was authentically dishonest.”
We all know that the president wrote a book entitled Dreams of My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance. Anything contained in that book is obviously not a secret. Millions of Americans have read it. And a typical review of the book doesn’t even mention any discussion of colonialism. But Dinesh D’Souza has a different interpretation (that Gingrich considers a ‘stunning insight’):
Incredibly, the U.S. is being ruled according to the dreams of a Luo tribesman of the 1950s. This philandering, inebriated African socialist, who raged against the world for denying him the realization of his anticolonial ambitions, is now setting the nation’s agenda through the reincarnation of his dreams in his son. The son makes it happen, but he candidly admits he is only living out his father’s dream. The invisible father provides the inspiration, and the son dutifully gets the job done. America today is governed by a ghost.
We might ask D’Souza if the House of Representatives during the mid-1990’s was ruled by a mechanic from Harrisburg of the 1940’s. A seducer of children and a deadbeat dad. Does Newt abandon his wives in their greatest time of need in order to continue his father’s practice of doing the same?
These are cruel questions to ask, but then is it not cruel to refer to the president’s father as a “philandering, inebriated African socialist”? Barack Obama Sr. did meet a sad fate, as retold by his college friend and current Hawai’ian gubernatorial candidate Neil Abercrombie:
Although he didn’t say it at the time, Abercrombie privately feared that the relationship [between the president’s parents] would be short-lived. Obama was one of the most ambitious, self-focused men he had ever met. After Obama was accepted to study at Harvard, Stanley Ann disappeared from the University of Hawaii student gatherings, but she did not accompany her husband to Harvard. Abercrombie said he rarely saw her after that.
“I know he loved Ann,” Abercrombie said, but “I think he didn’t want the impediment of being responsible for a family. He expected great things of himself and he was going off to achieve them.”
The marriage failed. Stanley Ann filed for divorce in 1964 and remarried two years later, when her son was 5. The senior Obama finished his work at Harvard and returned to Kenya, where he hoped to realize his big dreams of taking a place in the Kenyan government.
Years later, Abercrombie and another grad school friend looked up their old pal during a trip through Africa.
At that point, the senior Obama was a bitter man, according to the congressman, feeling that he had been denied due opportunities to influence the running of his country. “He was drinking too much; his frustration was apparent,” Abercrombie said.
To Abercrombie’s surprise, Obama never asked about his ex-wife or his son.
Obama Sr. died in a car crash in 1982. He had seen his son once since leaving him for Harvard. It should be noted that Kenya only won its independence from the United Kingdom in December of 1963. It shouldn’t be seen as surprising that a man of Obama Sr.’s intelligence would hope to help lead the newly independent government and prove that Africans were capable of efficient self-governance. I don’t know why this is supposed to be indictment of the son or the father. It’s certainly a better ambition than being a serial homewrecker.
It’s sad that Newt Gingrich has gone certifiably insane. Maybe it was something in his upbringing.
Was he ever sane? Using Kenyan in this context is nothing short of using the n-word. Newt’s racism has been on full display for his entire tenure as the Republican’s supposed Messiah; what else is new?
This doesn’t strike you as a bit of departure from Newt’s prior behavior?
Not particularly. He’s always been as crazy as the threshold has allowed. It’s kind of how I’m farther to the left than our debate will allow, and will keep pushing it until I get to a comfort zone. Somewhere in the middle of Sweden’s leftist party or something.
For someone like Newt, that envelope doesn’t exist. All that exists is what stands in the way of importance and power, and if those barriers are broken and allow him to fill that vacuum, he will do it. The crazy is now the mainstream, and he will fully embrace it if it gives him prominence and a rise to power.
The same thing is true with Beck.
To further make my point, check out this piece from Yuval Levin. Wasn’t he supposed to be one of the right’s rising stars?
Now he’s writing screeds and bullshit like this:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/first-stop-obama%E2%80%99s-madness
H/T to Andrew Sullivan, who writes this:
They are who we thought they were.
Does to me. I’ve always had a visceral response to Newt such that I would involuntarily slap him if in person.
But I’ve also felt that he came off as reasonable and (faux) smart enough to whoo a lot of mainstream America. Well unless more of America has gone batshit crazy than I think (but Newt knows it) then I think Newt will badly hurt his chances (and his legacy) with much more of this batshit crazy talk.
Adam Serwer:
HaHAhaHaHaHAhahaha!!!
Especially because you know I know way too may Wesleyan alums. Even so you are being way too kind.
Did Serwer go to Wesleyan? Because I’ve been on campus there and they have people there that are more smug then Newt. Then again, they do have interesting choices of classes there.
Proof of the dangers of lead exposure to the unborn ..
projection much? he is more crazy than before.
Power, and in particular the loss of power, is well-known for its mind-warping tendencies. This appears to have been the case with Newt (or as a friend of my dad’s used to call him, “The Amphibian”).
the amphibian – lol! good point though, it’s the double whammy of power then loss of power. the video for his and callista’s “movie” is on its way to classic bad moviedom, maybe a double billing with battleship earth
Breathtaking. D’Souza has always been stark raving nuts in the most deeply dishonest, evil way possible. Gingrich decades ago at least bought into some intelligent discussion on topics like the impact of new technologies. It’s even possible that he might have had something interesting to say, wielded some useful influence. Apparently his character and mental illness came to outweigh his intellect and destroy his chance to win a significant role outside the Beck/Palin/D’Souza cult. It’s no wonder he projects bitter frustration onto Obama, who triumphed over the kind of background that wasted Gingrich.
Now all he has left is to get another 15 minutes by scrawling the most overt racist attack on Obama by any public figure so far. What is he really saying? All I see is an escalation of the neo-fascist hysteria over Obama as the black, unAmerican alien. Now he’s so alien that he’s “outside our comprehension”, like a swamp creature or the Brother from Another Planet.
It’s interesting, too, that such a cheerleader for even the worst excesses of capitalism should suddenly find it shocking that an ambitious person “was being the person he needed to be in order to achieve the position he needed to achieve.” Isn’t that kind of a summary of the American Dream? Isn’t that the very definition of the self-discipline that the Right so loves to bloviate about? Gingrich’s bitterness at his own destruction by his own failure of discipline is transparent here, and it seems to have colonized and destroyed his intellect and his character. He has completed his journey from prominent to pitiful. He has no further value to anyone. Sad indeed.
“Gingrich decades ago at least bought into some intelligent discussion on topics like the impact of new technologies. It’s even possible that he might have had something interesting to say”
No kidding. And more importantly I’ve witnessed various lunatic fringe types who consider him the smartest man on the planet and who would actually agree with Gingrich when/if he said something reasonable.
Nothing is more fatal for a public figure, actor or politician, than to believe his or her press notices.
“D’Souza has always been stark raving nuts in the most deeply dishonest, evil way possible.“
Thanks for saving me the trouble of saying all that and more about that little weasel. Oh wait, I just insulted weasels, who are actually rather nice creatures when all is said and done.
Newt’s and Dinesh D’Souza (wonder what his father’s dreams were) screed comes down to an old theme of the old order: Communist Negroes.
By their lights, Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Communist, John Kennedy was a Communist enabler, Robert Kennedy was John Kennedy’s agent of Communism, and Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren was the chief Communist in the US. Newt comes out of that Georgia and made his political career appealing to that Georgia.
Some things don’t change. And the propaganda keeps being recycled.
So, ummmmm, what exactly is wrong with being anti-colonial? Maybe it’s my own twisted sensibility, but I have always seen being anti-colonial as a good thing. In fact, wasn’t it the urge to overthrow a colonial regime that resulted in the creation of the United States of America?
Our revolution: the purest of good. Any other revolution: heinously bad. It’s part of American exceptionalism.
You probably haven’t read enough National Review, which is a positive.
what part of this is a shock from these racists?
D’Souza has always seemd like an interesting case. He is clearly a raving racist, among other things, and yet he himself is a “person of colour”.
if he were Black, I’d call him a Slave Catching Coon.
I’m sure there’s an equivalent in the Indian culture.
hasn’t history ended and made him white?
“…he was being the person he needed to be in order to achieve the position he needed to achieve.”
Doesn’t this describe every single successful candidate or elected official in the country? I mean, really.
Meantime, I am really tired of people – left, right, or center – psychoanalyzing public figures they don’t know (or, in Gingrich’s case, have met, but barely). I didn’t like it when Bush was the target, either. We know the actions – not the people. Invoking motivations from a position of complete ignorance tells us everything about the speaker, nothing about the subject. Doubly so when the alleged motivations are so preposterous.
On that score, similarly, we don’t know that Gingrich is a raving lunatic. What we know is that his are the actions of a raving lunatic. Maybe he’s, you know, being the person he thinks he needs to be, in order to achieve the position he wants to achieve.
I was reading another blog where I think they nailed it. Ole Newt has a problem getting to the nomination, let alone the White House.
It’s called WOMEN.
I believe, without even researching it, that his gender gap with Women must be HUGE.
Because he’s an asshole – through his treatment of women.
and that’s not something he can get past..
so, he’s trying to overcompensate by ramping up his male support.
I had to think about it, and I couldn’t disagree with that assessment.
Newt’s like a streetwalker. When the competition starts showing more t+a, he refuses to be undersold. Also, this is yet another sign that Newt has no interest in getting off the wingnut gravy train to haul his sorry ass around Iowa.
Wow! What a “surprise” that Newt quotes D’Souza who took a brief detour from his usual fluff wrapping white supremacist ideology in the veneer of academe speak, to writing this screed about Pres. Obama and anti-colonialism in the same veneer of academe speak!
Since when did a people fighting against the yoke of foreign oppression become a bad thing, especially when it involved the brutal expropriation of the indigenous people’s land and labor by a racist settler colonial regime? If fighting for one’s freedom is bad, then heaven help us.
Certainly Newt’s dissertation on the Belgian Congo must have given him a leg up on how to defend racism and greed as practiced in King Leopold’s brutal rubber kingdom in the Belgian Congo during the 20th century.
Sadly, Congolese still live with the legacy of the era.
Africans who heard Pres. Obama’s speech to the entire African continent in Accra, Ghana on July 11, 2009 would be surprised to hear Newt’s citation of D’Souza’s claims about Obama. Why? Because, In that address, Pres. Obama categorically told his audience that while he could quote chapter and verse on the effects of colonialism in Africa, he saw absolutely no benefit to Africans continuing to “blame” the West for their woes, economic stagnation and poor governance.
Of course, all Newt and D’Souza want was to inject their venal lies about the President and the meaning of “anti-colonial” into the public bloodstream. And there are apologists commenting here about this not being racist? Well…
Please disregard my last sentence about commenters here saying D’Souza was not being racist. I was re-posting my response at Adam Serwer’s site where some commenters were saying exactly that. I’m sorry.
I always knew Newt was really a bastard.
Great piece!!