I’m not sure what in the hell is going on with the GOP right now. Poised to recapture the White House in 2012 all of our Prime Time Players are either undiscovered or for a variety of reasons not running and our slate looks more and more like the 1980 cast of Saturday Night Live — except I’d have loved to vote for Charles Rocket (R.I.P.) or Joe Piscopo over some of this current slate of whatever the hell they are. Where is our Eddie Murphy? Perhaps like Rick Perry he’s already in the cast but has yet to break out. I’m not excited about Romney and something about Gingrich makes my flesh crawl. Anyway… George Will makes the cases against Romney and Gingrich and for Perry and even Huntsman. Here’s a taste go read the whole thing:
Gingrich, however, embodies the vanity and rapacity that make modern Washington repulsive. And there is his anti-conservative confidence that he has a comprehensive explanation of, and plan to perfect, everything.
Granted, his grandiose rhetoric celebrating his “transformative” self is entertaining: Recently he compared his revival of his campaign to Sam Walton’s and Ray Kroc’s creations of Wal-Mart and McDonald’s, two of America’s largest private-sector employers. There is almost artistic vulgarity in Gingrich’s unrepented role as a hired larynx for interests profiting from such government follies as ethanol and cheap mortgages. His Olympian sense of exemption from standards and logic allowed him, fresh from pocketing $1.6 million from Freddie Mac (for services as a “historian”), to say, “If you want to put people in jail,” look at “the politicians who profited from” Washington’s environment.
His temperament — intellectual hubris distilled — makes him blown about by gusts of enthusiasm for intellectual fads, from 1990s futurism to “Lean Six Sigma” today. On Election Eve 1994, he said a disturbed South Carolina mother drowning her children “vividly reminds” Americans “how sick the society is getting, and how much we need to change things. .?.?. The only way you get change is to vote Republican.” Compare this grotesque opportunism — tarted up as sociology — with his devious recasting of it in a letter to the Nov. 18, 1994, Wall Street Journal (http://bit.ly/vFbjAk). And remember his recent swoon over the theory that “Kenyan, anti-colonial” thinking explains Barack Obama.
Gingrich, who would have made a marvelous Marxist, believes everything is related to everything else and only he understands how. Conservatism, in contrast, is both cause and effect of modesty about understanding society’s complexities, controlling its trajectory and improving upon its spontaneous order. Conservatism inoculates against the hubristic volatility that Gingrich exemplifies and Genesis deplores: “Unstable as water, thou shalt not excel.”
I’ll vote for Gingrich or Romney if they win the nomination, but I think Gingrich has authoritarian tendencies and is a bigger big-government type than George W. Bush ever thought about being because he thinks he’s smarter than everybody — like Herbert Hoover and Woodrow Wilson — Progressives. I don’t trust Gingrich, but I hope he’d be better than Obama. I know George Will is “Paleo” but part of being conservative is conserving traditions — not revolutionary ideals.