
This, via Daily Kos: Newt Gingrich was on Sean Hannity last night to talk about Senate Democrats considering passing health care reform via filibuster-proof reconciliation. If they used reconciliation, a budget process that would require only 51 votes instead of 60, Gingrich said it would be akin to the rule of Venezuela's socialist president, Hugo Chavez.
"I think that what you're seeing is a Chicago machine politics approach that basically says, if we can run over you and mug you, then we're going to get away with it," Gingrich said. "And I think what they don't understand is that this is not Chicago. That the United States is not going to tolerate a group of people trying apply kind of a Hugo Chavez majoritarian rule in the Senate. I don't it'll happen."
Watch:
slb
February 25, 2010 3:21 PM
So--Newt is saying that democracy = socialism? I think we're getting into serious Newspeak territory here!
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
TJ1
February 25, 2010 5:02 PM in reply to slb
Is majoritarian rule anything like majority rule? I thing Newt owes an explanation.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Majorajam
February 25, 2010 6:54 PM in reply to TJ1
Not exactly- it refers to tyrannical majority rule, whereby minority rights are not respected. Of course, this country has several protections, mostly committed to its constitution whereby minority rights are not subject to majority opinion/votes, (this essentially describes the case the gay rights community filed subsequent to prop 8). Not that your typical Hannity watcher would have the first clue about any of that- but he did say Hugo Chavez. Yeah! The socialist terrorist anti-american god hater!
Of course, Newt is drinkin drano as usual. For starters, the Dems didn't create reconciliation, and wouldn't be the first to use it by any stretch as has been well documented, including for health policy, and including numerous times by Republicans back when they were in the majority. They are not talking about changing the Senate rules. That would be the Republicans back when they were in the majority (including threatening to fire the parliamentarian unless he agreed with their take on how things should go). And they are obviously not the ones currently pulling unprecedented procedural moves out of thin air- that would be Republicans on everything from blanket holds to making a procedural vote before someone can tie their shoes, to voting against funding for the troops to slow down the legislative process, etc. etc. ad nauseum. Rank hypocrisy doesn't come close to covering it.
Back to Newt's analogy though, Venezuela is an interesting case. It probably is fair to call the government of Hugo Chavez majoritarian, though that's a bit easier to understand when the opposition is attempting to overthrow the government extra-legally, etc. Which points up the fact that in most countries that suffer from this kind of thing, there are very much two sides to the divide (at least). It is the mutual and mutually reinforcing hate and distrust that fosters such things.
What a surreal world we live in now, where one of the two major parties in this country no longer have any facts, cogent argument or consistent principles to call on, on virtually any single area of policy (education may be the sole exception). We have arrived at the point where virtually all of their arguments, and all of their policies rely on distortion, misinformation, fallacy and visceral pleas to the ignorance of the populace. All they have now is tribalism, fear and cronyism. It's truly remarkable, and truly scary.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
FDRdog
February 25, 2010 5:14 PM in reply to slb
Nah - it's just newtspeak.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Ann Arbor
February 25, 2010 3:32 PM
Is it too late to go back and rescind all the simple-majority votes during Gingrich's time as speaker?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
johnnyba
February 25, 2010 3:33 PM
Welcomes to yet another exciting round of "They'll say anything". This one is particularly ironic after the way they ran things.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
saywhat???
February 25, 2010 3:38 PM
Oh, Newt, you're already done. Whatever you mutter doesn't matter anymore. We have a president who thinks big and not what you're trying to imply.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
MCHowdy
February 25, 2010 3:41 PM
That's helpful, Newt. You're a real American.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
whitenoise100
February 25, 2010 3:45 PM
War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength. Majority rule is socialism.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
jsdc007
February 25, 2010 3:48 PM
And this guy was a "history professor" at one time? I guess only the morons who watch Hannity think that a democracy isn't predicated on the rule by majority. What next? John McCain ought to be President with only 46% of the vote? What a two-faced liar.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Matt Jones
February 25, 2010 3:51 PM
Nonsense like this *almost* makes me wish the Rupukes would take back the House and the Senate, just to watch them all get dizzy from completely reversing their positions at the drop of a hat. :)
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Schmed
February 25, 2010 3:53 PM
And this guy was a "history professor" at one time?
A Republican::history = a kindergartener::Play-Doh
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
eve cairo
February 25, 2010 4:04 PM
Oh go back to "teaching" at West Georgia "College" in Carrollton.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
slb
February 25, 2010 4:28 PM
This may be a moot point anyway. I'm not sure there is enough support for reconciliation among Senate Democrats to get to 50 votes.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
drkwanda
February 25, 2010 4:36 PM
Four legs good, two legs better! George Orwell.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Armageddon T. Thunderbird
February 25, 2010 5:02 PM
To a shill for insane billionaires - majority rule is to be feared.
Fox + Saudi Billionaires - happy together....
Drill Baby Drill......
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Sailormarlowe
February 25, 2010 5:39 PM
Better Hugo Chavez rule than Newt Gingrich rule, any day. Does idiot Newt think Chicago is in Venezuela?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
MarinCat
February 25, 2010 6:06 PM
Newt ging-Reich is America's very best political liar alive. With is Mr Wizard Professor of History mojo, there is no lie he will not bank shoot off the boundless backboard of general human ignorance.
TAKE IT TO THE BANK, and buy new shoes Virginia.
Nixonian, Machiavellian, Orwellian: all these adjectives apply. The man is a world class liar and clown.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Texas Aggie
February 25, 2010 8:25 PM
Newt isn't much of a student of history. If he had been paying attention from 2000 to 2008 he would have seen that "running over people and mugging them" was SOP for the regime in power at the time. If you need evidence, read the Patriot Act, the various laws that removed Constitutionally guaranteed legal rights, the various signing statements and executive orders (some secret), the illegal surveillance, obliviousness to the existence of regulations ...
How can the man live with himself? More to the point, how can a respectable woman live with him?
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?