Showing posts with label Newt Gingrich. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Newt Gingrich. Show all posts

Thursday, December 22, 2011

Predictions for a wild 2012 - what the news could hold month by month

Newt Gingrich (EWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images)

It's that time of year again.  We can look back on another miserable year and, against all evidence to the contrary, hope for better things.  Herewith, some predictions for the year to come.

JANUARY: Since no one seemed to care when New York City Fire Department big wigs referred to Irishmen as “drunks,” budget crunchers devise a novel way to save money during tough fiscal times -- get rid of the Irish!

You might recall, in the summer, a former FDNY assistant commissioner testified that one FDNY honcho said, “You’re dealing with a lot of Irishmen who are drunks and they get into bar fights and they get arrested and they get arrested again. They fight, they sock their girlfriends…they get arrested because they fought with the police when they got arrested.”

With times so tight in New York City, officials in the police, sanitation and corrections departments quietly begin pointing out that the Irish are not only “drunks,” but also bad dancers who eat weird food.

“And what’s up with that ‘Irish goodbye?’” one anonymous source will be quoted as saying.
When asked if this is a slightly racist way to save money, another source will note: “Maybe.  But did you ever see those old cartoons that made the Irish look like apes?  They want to put that guy in the New Jersey Hall of Fame. So, I think we’re safe.”

FEBRUARY: On Valentine’s Day, Sinead O’Connor announces that her fourth marriage is coming to an end because she is going to get married to someone else.  She’s not sure who just yet.

MARCH: Recalling the surprising warmth of the reception given to Queen Elizabeth during her 2011 trip to Ireland, Pope Benedict heads to Dublin for St. Patrick’s Day.  He is baffled when greeted by signs reading “God Save the Queen.” He is no longer baffled when additional signs demand accountability for ongoing sex abuse cases.

“You guys weren’t so angry at the Germans back during World War II,” the Pope mutters before returning to the Vatican.

APRIL:  Recalling the warmth of the reception given to Barack Obama, Newt Gingrich visits Ireland.

He touts his conversion to Catholicism (even though he has been married three times), but trouble beckons when the former Baptist visits Northern Ireland.

At first Gingrich claims he is there to visit his family’s ancestral homeland, in Insihowen, Co. Donegal.
But Gingrich falls under the spell of local preachers and converts again to Presbyterianism. Gingrich also separates from his third wife.

MAY: All of the other Republican candidates for president head to Ireland with their campaign staffs and the massive infusion of tourist money lifts the nation out of its economic doldrums.

JUNE: Sinead O’Connor announces that she will marry Newt Gingrich.

JULY: Gingrich arrested during violent Loyalist July 12 march.  “This is awesome,” Gingrich says.  “In the U.S., all we have are those lame Occupy Wall Street guys.”

AUGUST: Stephen King had another blockbuster hit with his doorstopper novel 11/22/63.  The book explored what would happen if a character went back in time and tried to prevent the assassination of the first Irish Catholic president.

In his next book, entitled 8/22/22, King will go even deeper into the Irish genre.  On the 90th anniversary of the mysterious assassination of Irish freedom fighter Michael Collins, King sends a character back in time to find out exactly who killed Collins.

Collins infamously signed the treaty which freed the Republic of Ireland but left Northern Ireland in the hands of the British.  This topic turns out to be too gruesome even for Stephen King.

Once the assassination is thwarted, King’s characters come to life and look to assassinate the author himself.  Let’s just say the bullet wins out over the ballot.

SEPTEMBER-DECEMBER: Somehow, Gingrich hangs on to win the Republican nomination and he and Obama agree to a series of debates -- but only if they are held in Ireland.  Once there, the duo decide they don’t want to return to the U.S.

“The Irish people are a lot nicer,” Obama says.

Gingrich adds: “A lot of people wanted a diaspora president.  No one said it had to be the president of Ireland.”

Happy New Year!

(Contact “Sidewalks” at tomdeignan@earthlink.net or facebook.com/tomdeignan)

Thursday, December 8, 2011

Give Presidential hopeful Newt Gingrich credit on immigration views

Newt Gringrich
Imagine you are political advisor to Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich. 

For months, your campaign has floundered.  Your guy was once one of the most powerful men in Washington, the speaker of the House and a man famous for his intellectual power. 

But then he fell from power and more or less vanished from the Washington scene.  So much so that when Gingrich announced he was running for president, one was tempted to say, “1996 called, they want Newt Gingrich back.”

But the only thing weaker than Gingrich seemed to be, well, every other GOP candidate. 

Herman Cain has his woman problems and Michele Bachmann’s kook factor is just a bit too high and, finally, Mitt Romney has, well, a Mitt Romney problem.  In that, he can’t convince anyone that he is anybody other than Mitt Romney and, thus, simply a lackluster political candidate.
And lo and behold, in recent weeks, Gingrich has surged.  And so, you can imagine how his political advisors must have felt when Gingrich, finally in the lead, went ahead and made some crazy comments 
about immigration last week.

"If you've been here 25 years and you got three kids and two grandkids, you've been paying taxes and obeying the law, you belong to a local church, I don't think we're going to separate you from your family, uproot you forcefully, and kick you out."

Huh?  What was Gingrich, Mr. Conservative, actually saying?  Was he suggesting that not all immigrants are filthy freeloaders?

He continued, "I don't see how the party that says it's the party of the family is going to adopt an immigration policy which destroys families that have been here a quarter-century. And I'm prepared to take the heat for saying, ‘Let's be humane.’"

Humane?

That’s not a word that has been associated with Republican immigration policy since, well, since Rick Perry suggested it was heartless for candidates to bash immigrants.

Then again, we see how well Rick Perry’s candidacy is going these days.  And that’s why you must feel bad for Gingrich’s advisors.  But it’s also why Gingrich deserves credit for reframing the Republican debate over this contentious issue.

Needless to say, Gingrich’s opponents pounced on him, bashing his ideas as “amnesty” for illegal immigrants.

They did this, in large part, because they believe that Republican primary voters in general – and Tea 
Party backers in particular – are hungry for a hard-liner when it comes to immigration.
And they may be right.  After all, Perry’s thinking-outside-the-box did not exactly help him. 

Furthermore, as John Heilemann noted in this week’s New York magazine, there is disturbing evidence that elements in the Republican Party have anti-immigrant tendencies on their GOP wish list.

“In a landmark book-length study being published this month, the Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism, Harvard political scientist Theda Skocpol… --  on the basis of copious, careful, and not unsympathetic field reporting” found that an “animus against ‘freeloaders’…unifies the tea-partiers across the nation, with illegal immigrants preeminent in that category.”

That a group of people accused of working so hard that they steal American jobs can also be seen as 
freeloaders is another question for another time. 

As for Gingrich, perhaps he is simply hoping to make it through the Republican primaries and win some Hispanic votes in the November 2012. 

If so, maybe he has looked at past immigration voting patterns.  The Irish, for example, voted 
Democratic for over 100 years not only because local ward bosses, though often corrupt, were also responsive to their needs. 

It did not hurt that Republicans harbored some strong anti-Catholic, anti-immigrant candidates.  Then again, so did certain elements of the Democratic party in the south and Mid-West. 

And even then the Republicans could not sway significant numbers of white ethnic Catholics until the 1970s and 1980s.

There’s much talk among conservatives about the 11 million illegal immigrants in America.  They focus on the term “illegal” in that sentence. 

Perhaps Gingrich has realized that someone should focus on “11 million” and try and win some of those or their children’s’ votes.