« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

EDITOR OF REDSTATE

Romney Camp Attacks Newt Gingrich For Opposing George H. W. Bush’s Tax Increase

But don't worry. By tonight the Romney campaign will pretend they never went there.

Let’s step into the Way Back Machine and go all the way back to 1990.

That year, George H. W. Bush decided to break his “no new taxes” pledge. You remember, “Read my lips,” don’t you?

Well, at the time Newt Gingrich was the Minority Whip of the United States House of Representatives. He was not the leader of the Republicans. He was the number two guy. And he initially said he’d support the deal, but twelve hours later, no doubt after consulting his colleagues, he decided to oppose the deal.

The deal, by the way, was made between George H. W. Bush and the Democrats. Newt was not exactly a consequential figure in the dealings largely because he was the number two man in a small minority, all of whom could have voted against the deal and it still would have passed.

Oh — and I dare you Romney guys to say anything about Gingrich changing his mind twelve hours later considering how Romney tends to change his mind twelve hours before entering a new election when a new position is to his advantage.

Here’s Sununu still upset Gingrich fought raising taxes:

Sununu charged that 21 years ago, Gingrich “reneged” on his approval of the now-infamous (to Republicans) 1990 budget agreement with Democrats that included tax increases. Many believe Bush’s reversal of his famous “Read my lips. No new taxes” pledge of 1988 cost him a second term.

Sununu said that as an agreement with the Democratic majority was being reached, “I specifically asked Newt Gingrich if he would support it, and he said, ‘yes.’

“We then went to the President and told him we had” the support of both Gingrich and the chief Senate GOP negotiator Phil Gramm, “and then the White House put out a statement saying that there was an agreement.”

But, Sununu said, “The next day, for whatever reason, and nobody has ever been able to explain it to us, Gingrich decided that he was going to oppose it.

“Twelve hours later, he decided it was to his own benefit to oppose the agreement.”

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.

COMMENTS

  • Common_Cents

    Romney=Pawlenty=McCain in that regard. They come across as phony when acting mad and attacking. Romney is not used to having to attack from a position of weakness, he is not good at it.

    Romney said he’d attack gingrich on child labor laws? really?

    now this one?

    How stupid. Romney will pay for it.

    Supporters of all the other Anti romney candidates should be supporting Gingrich, why? He’s the only one who has succeeded in taking down Romney.

    If gingrich can continue to take down romney, there will be an opening for other candidates to make it a more conservative primary.

  • Crash71234

    It appears that Mitt always considered the nomination his. Never had a contingency plan. Now he’s in full panic mode.

  • dajeeps

    What an idiot. Maybe Gingrich should have just gone along with HW and been voted out for it. Or maybe Romney believes good Republicans go along with their president regardless of what he wants. No thanks, and I really enjoy watching Romney take a wiss into the wind.

  • carolina

    That’s the part I like best! :-)

  • seanl

    Why people still support this guy is beyond me.

  • sethellis

    Sununu’s point was not to highlight whether or not Gingrich supported a tax increase, but was instead trying to show an instance where Newt’s poor leadership cost us dearly. If Newt had opposed the deal from the start it probably would have never happened. By the time he had come around it was too late.

    This instance shows exactly what I hate about Gingrich. He shows poor leadership when it counts. His first instinct was to cut a political deal instead of leading on conservative principles. Last week Newt said that we must be willing to make our friends uncomfortable. In other words, he is warning us that he’ll sell us down the river the instant it is politically expedient.

    But don’t worry Newt is a genius that knows better than we do what is right for the country.

  • center77

    and Romney has been on the down hill ever since. Now on Fox opinion page there is a article that states Romney will be done after four states, then its predicted the whole party will turn in Gingrich because he is a horrible choice for the leader of the Republican party. I don’t agree Newt has done anything to take Romney down, he refuses to attack him. I think Newt is going to lead the Republicans to go to Romney in mass because with Newt we lost already, and everybody knows it. This is not over yet.

  • Common_Cents

    Poor babies in congress got their feelers hurt?

    By The Associated Press

    “Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s stunning surge toward the top of the Republican presidential field has unnerved some Republicans in Congress who remember too well the tumult of nearly two decades ago.

    “I’d rather have steady,” said Rep. Steve LaTourette of Ohio, who just this week made it known that he was backing former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney instead of the resurgent Gingrich, the man who led the 1994 “revolution” in which LaTourette was first elected.

    Personally, LaTourette said, he has a “hangover” from the days of Gingrich’s speakership, when “everything always seemed to be on fire.”

    the establishment “elites” in DC don’t want Gingrich to make them work. They want the comfort of no change, business as usual in DC w/ the cocktail parties.

  • Common_Cents

    was the first sign Romney is a house of cards. Untested.

    Gingrich is taking down Romney by effectively instilling confidence by consistent debates and messaging while focusing on Obama. That is a take down.

    Gingrich will counter punch and take down romney directly when attacked. Dec 10 debate will be fascinating.

  • Mensch

    Glad someone here actually understands what this issue was all about. Nominating Gingrich would be an act of self-immolation by the GOP.

  • Spartan4Life

    All cut from the same Washington cloth, no?

    Country Club types with no feel for the grass roots. Newt may be an insider, too, but I think he does at least “get” where us tea party types are coming from. The rest of these squishes, well, not so much.

  • andystone

    Gingrich was the #2 of the minority. There was no way he would have stopped the deal, had he been against it 12 hours earlier. Do you think negotiations on the most significant fiscal bill of GHW’s presidency took less than 12 hours?

    In any case, we only have Sununu’s version of events, who is not exactly an impartial witness. It’s hard to tell what exactly Sununu told Gingrich in the evening and maybe got a “yes” on, and what Gingrich found overnight that caused him to oppose it the next morning.

  • myoda176

    After reading about this my first thought was, “this is the best Romney can come up with to attack Gingrich?” I thought Republicans didn’t want tax increases…..

  • http://thecorruptworld.blogspot.com/ wayneinnh

    ’nuff said.

  • ericksontales

    Erick, lets not over complicate that which is simple. When you are looking for an explanation the most simple answer is usually right. Newt has always been a dirty politician. He changed his mind because he was bought. Newt has sold himself out for money on so many occasions its pathetic.

    You can argue that Romney has sold him self out for political expediency. Firstly, I disagree with this argument but even it it were true. I’d still rather take Romney over a guy that goes to the highest bidder. Romney is beholden to nobody when it comes to money. He has plenty of his own. Newt has to keep a steady cash flow of crony capitalism streaming in to pay for lavish vacations and jewelry at tiffanys. Now there is nothing wrong with spending money on lavish things. The difference is that Romney EARNED his money while Newt steals, cheats, manipulates, and lies to support him,self, his wife, and whatever mistresses he is courting at the time.

  • ericksontales

    “It says something rather pitiful about the state of the Romney campaign”

    At some point your going to have to support Romney or Obama. Your constant attacks are hurting your own party and this country. If you really cared about turning this country around and getting a Republican in the white house you would stop these ridiculous attacks on Romney. I’m not saying you have to fall in love with him but I think deep down you know he is the only candidate that can beat Obama in the general.

    BTW – isn’t calling your own party pitiful a little disrespectful? Just curious.

  • tomatin

    Undeniably one of the good things Newt was against.

  • tomatin

    Please earned is obviously a loose term for you.

    You are being self contradictory because obviously Romney and Newt care about money just the same which is not a bad thing.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    Did you get this post from an Occupy sign, tomatin?

  • tomatin

    to say the least.

  • tomatin

    I guess you like crony capitalism which is just as bad as socialism.

    I said I don’t mind that both care about money but don’t tell me Romney is a self made man.

  • AceInTX

    It is not enough that he flip flops…it’s that he attacks people for holding the exact same views he himself once held…

    How many times has he opened up an attack on a fellow Republican no less, (Reagan’s 11th commandment anyone?)…only to end up standing chest deep in the very mud he and his establishment acolytes just threw?

  • tomatin

    It’s like two mirrors facing each other going off into an infinity of images. He’s all image and zero substance.

  • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

    You show those evil Baaaaaaaaaaankers, tomatin.

    Fight the power!

    Stick it to the man!

  • AceInTX

    Just mouthing platitudes about how someone is the most electable or the only one who can beat Obama doesn’t make it so…

    and please spare me the, “He can win Moderates and Independents” Pap…we heard that with John Sydney McCain/Dole/Ford….ditto the “Democrats are afraid of him” bull shinola.

    And I call Straw Man…No one called the whole party pitiful…just the usual keystone cops moderate faction.

    I could spend the next three weeks documenting the incompitent, embarassing and …yes…pitifull nature of the ass clowns who are leading this Party into ever increasing levels of absurdity!

  • acat

    Romney is still polling well *against Obama* simply because he’s still the presumptive nominee to the folks who haven’t started paying attention yet.

    His cloak of inevitability is worn threadbare, but only those who are paying attention seem to have noticed…

    Mew

  • AceInTX

    I?m not saying you have to fall in love with him but I think deep down you know he is the only candidate that can beat Obama in the general.

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • ericksontales

    Firstly, there are only 3 candidates that we can even talk serious about. Romney, Newt, and Perry.

    Perry – While I like him… has been abandon for his wreckless Texas talk. Even his most recent commercial gives us a reminder of why Perry can’t win in a general.

    Newt – You honestly believe that America will elect a man who was driven out of speakership by his own party, cheated on two of his wives, and has been a lobbyist (sorry I mean consultant) for companies like Fredie Mac. Newt has no chance of winning in a general. His own party doesn’t trust him enough.

    Romney – Definitely has his work cut out for him however once he wins the nomination the Republican party will rally around him. Mitt does have the ability to win over independent and disenfranchised democrat voters.

    No matter how you slice or dice polling numbers or other facts about these candidates the fact remains… Romney is the ONLY one that has a chance to beat Obama in the general.

  • AceInTX

    Firstly, there are only 3 candidates that we can even talk serious about.

    Simply because you say so?

    I’m not sying you are wrong…I simply want to see these statements backed up…what criterion did you use to come to your conclusion…

    second…none of what you just wrote daels with my critisism. You can not credibly make the claim “Romney is the ONLY candidate who can beat Obama when there are any number of polls showing other Republican candidates or potential candidate beating Obama…

    It’s like saying EVERYONE likes iced Tea when I hate it…it in this case that doesn’nt apply since most people like Iced tea…but it is not at all clear Rmney can beat Obama since 1) he is not the nominee and 2) we can’t possibly know how he would perform against Obama as the niminee were he nominated…Perry has already knocked Romney off his game in debates and Newt has sent Romney’s campaign into full fledged panic these last couple weeks by simply being an alternative to Romney who a majority of Republicans have expressed doubt in polls and debate.

  • acat

    is being discounted because of a poor performance – admittedly very poor – in an artificial environment where the candidates are supposed to give sound bite answers to gotcha questions.. and nothing else!

    Even with his poor performances, he still managed to knock Romney off his game, point out some of the hypocrisy of the supposed “inevitable Willard”.

    So. We have Wafflin’ Willard, Newt (with his baggage) Huntsman (who decided to run as a moderate for some reason) Ron Paul (who’s bats) and of course, Bachmann… all of whom have serious problems .. and Perry, who didn’t place in a dog show.

    I have to laugh, otherwise I’d be wringing necks!

    Mew

  • http://www.erickerickson.org Erick Erickson

    I’m calling a campaign pitiful, not a party. Are you presuming the GOP is the Romney Party? 75% of us think otherwise.

    Next you think I’m going to have to support Romney, and if he is the nominee I’ll vote for him. But that doesn’t mean I have to sit passively by and not try to stop a disaster from unfolding.

  • Common_Cents

    No wonder the guy is against Newt.

    Coburn is too busy praising PeLIEsi as a nice lady and appearing on MSNBC shows. I’m sure Coburn is a nice well intentioned man, but I’m glad he term limited himself out. His true colors are starting to show, he’s been broken by the DC machine.

  • AceInTX

    especially about laughing lest I end up wringing necks

  • 1rationalmind

    Gingrich has been in the lead for about 3 weeks, Cain was in the lead much longer. Perry also lead. Yes it’s getting close to Iowa (there are 50 states), but to say Romney has been taken down is not just an over statement, but silly.

  • Common_Cents

  • 1rationalmind

    SymNarcissistic personality disorder (NPD) is a personality disorder[1] in which the individual is described as being excessively preoccupied with issues of power, prestige and vanity.[2] Narcissistic personality disorder is closely linked to egocentrism.ptoms of this disorder include, but are not limited to:
    May take advantage of others to reach his or her own goal
    Tend to exaggerate their own importance, achievements, and talents
    Imagines unrealistic fantasies of success, power, intelligence, or romance
    Requires constant attention and positive reinforcement from others
    Easily becomes jealous
    Obsessed with oneself
    Mainly pursues selfish goals
    Trouble keeping healthy relationships
    Are easily hurt and rejected
    set unreal goals
    want “the best” of everything
    Appear as tough-minded

    Egocentrism is a personality trait which has the characteristic of regarding oneself and one’s own opinions or interests as most important or valid. It also generates the inability to fully understand or to cope with other people’s opinions and the fact that reality can be different from what they are ready to accept despite any change in their personal belief

  • steveinfl

    Funny. That’s a good one. Margaret Thatcher once said, “first you win the argument, then you win the votes”. Newt is the best communicator for conservative philosophy since Reagan. It’s no accident that he is destroying Mitt. Conservatism always defeats moderates. That’s how Reagan defeated GH Bush.

  • williamjameson

    and who will be the apologist’s for Romney?

    Senator Tom Coburn is backing Romney and we all know Coburn called for new taxes which will lead to new spending which solves nothing.

    http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Economist-Mom/2011/0616/A-first-crack-in-the-GOP-s-no-new-taxes-armor

  • conservativeparrothead

    We are the 75%

    No Mitt in 2012…

  • chasvoice

    When a candidate’s morals & character don’t matter to you:

    Newt Gingrich’s Skeleton Closet
    http://members.beforeitsnews.com/story/1438/969/Gingrichs_Skeleton_Closet.html

    Anne Manning claims she performed a sex act on Gingrich in his Washington D.C. hotel room while he was still married to his first wife Jackie in 1977.
    http://members.beforeitsnews.com/story/1481/688/Newt_Gingrich_is_a_hypocrite,_claims_ex-staffer_who_had_affair_with_thrice-married_GOP_candidate.html

    Romney?s Advisors Are Leftist Elites
    http://chasvoice.blogspot.com/2011/10/romneys-advisors-are-leftist-elites.html