In bizarre, confused attack, Sununu calls Gingrich 'anti-conservative'

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich addressed the GOP Jewish Coalation Candidate Forum. (Screen snip from newt.org)Most supporters of former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich expected attacks to come as Gingrich inched his way up in the polls—all the way up as it now stands, for the candidate who in November described his campaign as the “tortoise.” At that point, another frontrunner was described by Gingrich as “the hare.”

In recent weeks, attacks on Gingrich, who has thus far refused to attack anyone even when the candidate deserved it, have escalated. One of the most bizarre, in my opinion, came from former New Hampshire Gov. John H. Sununu.

Sununu, a fan of Romney, called Gingrich “anti-conservative.” The Union Leader (N.H.), the Granite State’s leading daily newspaper that has endorsed Gingrich, reported the remarks.

That Sununu would hurl such an insult to the former speaker is puzzling. I found it absolutely ridiculous.

Erick Erickson at Red State had a similar reaction to my own about Sununu's insult.

For one thing, much of Sununu’s ire stems from Gingrich’s ‘nay’ vote on President George H. W. Bush’s tax increase.  That tax increase derailed Bush’s second term. I know because I lived through those times and despite a constricted news flow mainly from what we now call legacy media, I paid more attention to politics than the average Main Streeter.

I will say this again for the thousandth millionth time.

You cannot call yourself a conservative and advocate for a tax increase. Why? Taxes are the crack cocaine of government. The more you give, the more the politicos spend, mostly to expand government. As government expands, personal liberties decline. That, in a nutshell, is a key plank in conservatism. Aside from Bush 41’s tax increase, it represented a broken promise, a big fat broken promise, because—“Read my lips”—Bush 41 had promised, repeatedly and emphatically, not to increase taxes.

Aside from taxes, we can thank Sununu for being a key actor in former Associate Justice David Souter’s position on the US Supreme Court. Next time you hear about someone’s private property being legally stolen by a government so someone can build a parking lot for a big corporation, Souter is one of the guys you can thank.  There goes another conservative pillar—Amendment V to the US Constitution, the one about private property being taken for public use. How a corporate parking lot benefits the public is a matter only Souter can rationalize.

Souter had numerous other shortcomings—hostile to the Tenth Amendment, he was another blight on the Republic we can thank Bush 41 for besides siding with Democrats in the majority who lusted for and levied that tax increase.

Erickson, who has not endorsed any candidate in the GOP Primary,  summed things up tidily in his editorial:

“It says something rather pitiful about the state of the Romney campaign that they have decided to attack Newt Gingrich for opposing a tax increase that wiped out the presidency of George H. W. Bush. Oh, by the way, it would have also taken out a lot of House Republicans except Ed Rollins was in charge of the NRCC and insisted they all run against George H. W. Bush and squishy Republicans. That move saved a lot of them.”

Here’s what The Washington Post said about that famous tax debacle and Bush 41 on Oct. 20, 1990:

“In the memoirs of [Harry S Truman] and [Hubert Humphrey], our gentlemanly president would discover why he has just been taken to the cleaners by the Democrats …

Sununu’s attack on Gingrich on behalf of Romney could be explained in a commonality between Romney and Bush 41. The Club for Growth said in a white paper on Romney—I have added boldface:

“Governor Romney’s history on tax policy is also scattered with inconsistencies.  He opposed Ballot Question 1 to eliminate the state income tax and proposed an auto excise tax on SUVs and a greenfields tax on the development of ocean space.   In 2003, the Governor refused to endorse the Bush tax cuts, earning the praise of Massachusetts liberal congressman Barney Frank, and was even open to a federal gas tax hike.   His strident opposition to the flat tax is most curious and difficult to explain since Romney wasn’t a political candidate at the time. In 1996, he ran a series of newspaper ads in Boston, New Hampshire, and Iowa denouncing the 17% flat tax proposed by then presidential candidate Steve Forbes as a ‘tax cut for fat cats.’   In 2007, Romney continued to oppose the flat tax with harsh language, calling the tax ‘unfair.’”

Squish.

(Op-Ed by Kay B. Day/Dec. 9,, 2011)

Please share this article by using the 'Share' links below.