Report: Gingrich privately worked against bailout

This is interesting. Apparently (per NBC as quoted by Sam Stein), Newt Gingrich -- remember him? -- was organizing in Congress against the Paulson "bailout" plan even as he publicly supported it. Shows you how internally freaked out the GOP was.

On the other hand (from the same link):

Mike Barnicle offered his own bit of reportorial insight: "Andrea, I could hug you for saying that, because I was told last night by two or they (sic) members of Congress that this was the opening salvo of Newt Gingrich's presidential campaign four years hence."

Oh god. Exactly one year ago I wrote a horrified post about Gingrich presidential rumors -- at the time calling him an "annoying little pseudointellectual troll" -- and my opinions have not changed. THIS MAN NEEDS TO GO AWAY

UPDATE (Thursday) -- Ambinder writes:

And what about Newt Gingrich? He wants it, clearly, and is already planting some seeds in Iowa and New Hampshire. Though he is deeply polarizing within the country and within his party, he'll be instantly credible as a candidate because of his stature and his financial backing, and you can't say the guy lacks ideas.

Yes you can. Here: NEWT GINGRICH LACKS IDEAS. Whee!

Not Gingrich. Oh please, not Gingrich.

Via the American Scene we read that:

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich is examining whether or not to enter a "testing the waters" campaign phase beginning the first week of October. According to Gingrich associates, he is mulling an announcement tour that would include appearances on one major Sunday morning show next weekend, along with several Fox News shows on Monday, as well as an appearance on Dr. James Dobson's radio show...

Fuck. Just when I was starting to enjoy writing about this campaign.

Newt Gingrich is the most annoying little pseudointellectual troll in our public discourse today; he has said nothing of value in his entire career and is of no actual consequence to anything, yet Republicans hold him up like some brilliant futurist guru whose insights will transform conservative thought. (One assumes this is because no-one else in that camp is even trying anymore, and ideological beggars can't be choosers.) They have this fetishistic attachment to Gingrich that, natch, spills over into the media -- so if he does run prepare yourselves for a mess of magazine cover stories about "The Thinking Man's Conservative" and such garbage...

...and my God, think of Harvard. This place would cream itself over someone like Gingrich running for president. He's got just that combination of big words and small ideas that suits the Ivy League mentality so well; after all, being a Gingrich supporter gives you intellectual-maverick cred and distances you from the unwashed Midwestern rabble (which of course is required at these Elite Institutions), without having to bother with all those awkward liberal tropes like "caring about other people". It's the new libertarianism!

Don't get me wrong -- I'm not worried about Gingrich winning anything. Dude has the charisma of a lawn chair. (And as we all know, the appeal of a political candidate here at Harvard is exactly inverse to their appeal in the real world.) I'm just angry that, in the event he does run (or even if he just publicly dithers about it for a while, Bloomberg-style), we'll be obligated to listen to him and then write about the crap he says. Gems of wisdom like this, which he has employed multiple times:

He still describes himself as a radical and said this should be his slogan: “Real change requires real change.”

Very radical, that. I can see the protest now. "What do we want?" "TAUTOLOGIES!" "When do we want them?" "AS SOON AS WE WANT THEM!"

This is fluff. Gingrich offers nothing more than platitudes and the occasional insanely stupid policy idea; but his personality and cult-following threatens to eat the entire campaign for, I'd say, up to a month, to the obvious detriment of the real issues at play. Besides, it's just sad; between Newt Gingrich, Hillary Clinton, and Al frickin' Gore, I feel like we're having some horrible flashback to 1997 -- a year I had really hoped we were done with. Next thing you know there'll be another Spice Girls movie. (Item: Did you hear the Spice Girls are reuniting and going on tour? I am not fucking kidding.)

All I'm saying is, if Gingrich does run, prepare yourselves for some truly stupid and infuriating discussions on- and off-campus. This campaign might not be as much fun as I'd thought...

Speaking of God

I might be alone in thinking that the coin-printing error Raul pointed out below is, however accidental, a definite step in the right direction. (Seriously, guys. Separation of church and state. This one is pretty fucking obvious.)

But regardless of your opinion on government-mandated monetary theism, this
is big news:

On Monday, March 12, the Secular Coalition for America will make history by announcing the name of the first openly nontheistic member of Congress.

Per their press release, this seems to be the result of a contest they held last year, with a $1000 reward, to effectively "out" an atheist/agnostic member of Congress (such as gay rights activists have been doing, with mixed success, for the past few decades) -- although this release also describes their Mystery Congressman as "openly" nontheistic, so hopefully it's a mutual rather than a malicious thing.

Anyway, I'm very excited about this, both as an atheist and as a lover of religious freedom -- in an era where a majority of Americans would refuse to vote for an atheist president, and public school teachers are being fired for "enticing children into witchcraft," anything that hints at acceptance of nonbelief in the public sphere is laudable. Hopefully this Secular Coalition thing is legit and will be able to garner real publicity (i.e., not just unhinged bloggers).

Meanwhile, political junkies get to play the predictions game: who is it? The libertarian blog I found this on suggests, without any corroboration whatever, that it might be Massachusetts' own Barney Frank... as cool as that would be, I'd rather it was not the case. Why? Because Barney Frank is already the most awesome congressman ever, and we need to spread the love around a bit.

Anyway, it seems to be a big day for atheists and a bad day for God. Personally I hope these trends continue. After all, what's the worst that could happen? ...

Update (3/12/07): It's Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA), who is 75 years old and has been in Congress (representing part of the San Francisco Bay Area) since 1973, consistently ranked among the body's most liberal members. He's apparently a "nontheistic Unitarian". Bravo, Rep. Stark!