Columns and OpEds

[Print]  [Email]        

Newt Gingrich: The Great Communicator and the Great Obfuscator

By: Newt Gingrich
Examiner Columnist
August 14, 2009

Republicans are sometimes criticized for focusing too much on President Ronald Reagan, so here's an idea: It's Democrats - specifically President Obama - who need to learn more from the Gipper.

It was 28 years ago this week - August 13, 1981 - that Reagan signed his signature tax cuts into law. Reagan's historic 25 percent rate cuts were the first tax relief Americans had had in 20 years. They kicked off an unprecedented period of economic growth and came to define Reagan's domestic policy.

In the 2008 campaign, Obama caught some heat from his liberal friends when he expressed admiration for Reagan, but Obama was on to something.

Like Reagan, Obama came into office during a period of major economic recession.

Like Reagan, Obama has proposed a transformational program of economic change to combat the recession.

But unlike Reagan, seven months into his presidency, Obama's program for change is foundering, while Reagan's was triumphant. 

Obama would be wise to ask himself, why? 

The answer boils down to one word: Trust. 

Ronald Reagan trusted the American people. He used to say that "trust the people" was the "one irrefutable lesson" of the 20th century's disastrous experiments with government control of the economy. 

And even though Reagan - unlike Obama - faced a House of Representatives controlled by the opposition party in 1981, it was his faith in the American people that allowed his change-agenda to prevail. 

The differences in how the two presidents communicate with the American people are striking. 

Reagan communicated to illuminate. He patiently and methodically explained to Americans the benefits to freedom and prosperity that would be won by tax cuts. 

The more Reagan talked, the more the American people supported him, proving that if you lead with the values and principles Americans share, they will rally to you. 

Obama, in contrast, too often communicates to obfuscate. Because his energy and health plans are premised on a faith in government that Americans don't share, he's forced to talk about these issues in ways that obscure and confuse more than they reveal. 

Such as when he promises that the so-called public option will provide "competition" in the health care marketplace. 

Or his assurance that his budget-busting proposals won't lead to new taxes on the middle class. 

Unlike Reagan, the more Obama talks, the less Americans support him. 

Even more troubling than the way Obama has talked to the American people is the way he has tried to limit the way we can talk back. 

On the eve of the House vote on his historic tax cuts, Reagan made a nationally televised appeal to the American people. 

Again he made his case for tax cuts. Then he called on Americans to contact their senators and representatives to express their opinions. 

"I've not taken your time this evening merely to ask you to trust me," Reagan said. "Instead, I ask you to trust yourselves." 

After 48 House Democrats crossed the isle to join Republicans in passing the tax cuts, a defeated Speaker Tip O'Neill (D-MA) credited Reagan's appeal for the victory. Reagan's speech, O'Neill said, touched off "a telephone blitz like this nation has never seen." 

Contrast the faith in Americans shown by Reagan with the distrust shown by the Obama Administration. 

While Reagan had enough confidence in his ideas to leave their fate to the American people, Obama has time and again tried to cut the people out of the democratic process. 

Instead of having the confidence to defend its ideas, Obama has tried to rush his agenda through Congress with little or no debate, attempted to demonize those who disagree with it, and even asked Americans to inform on their fellow Americans who disagree. 

Reagan is often damned with feint praise as "the great communicator" - as if his speaking style, not his ideas, was responsible for his success. 

Obama first seven months is turning into proof that the gift of oratory isn't enough. 

The lesson Reagan understood so well in 1981 is still true today. 

Trust the people.

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich has published 19 books, including 10 fiction and nonfiction best-sellers. He is the founder of the Center for Health Transformation and chairman of American Solutions for Winning the Future. For more information, see newt.org. His exclusive column for The Examiner appears Fridays.




To view this site, you need to have Flash Player 8.0 or later installed. Click here to get the latest Flash player.


Most Popular Headlines





 


 



 

Reader Comments

All comments on this page are subject to our Terms of Use and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Examiner or its staff. Comment box is limited to 250 words.

Nick Beddoes

Aug 14, 2009

Newt Gingrich is the guy who doesn't trust the people. President Obama's health insurance public option is precisely the way to trust the people. Reagan may have been a "great communicator" but he was an even greater obfuscator. He choked off Jimmy Carter's modest efforts to deal with oil depletion and his tax cuts benefitted the rich over the rest of us.
Americans elected Obama and a Democratic Congress to bring positive change. Naysayers like Newt should let the people's elected representatives do there thing. Newt's agenda is laughable.

 

JAY

Aug 15, 2009

Cutting taxes is the ultimate demonstration of 'putting your faith in the people".

 

shawnflanagan

Aug 15, 2009

This is very well thought out and written. The contrast between Obama and Reagan is all about trusting the people. Reagan did and Obama does not.

 

EddieD_Boston

Aug 16, 2009

To me, the big difference in how the two presidents communicate is that Reagan thought of himself as one of us. Obama seems to think he's above us and it shows. I had high hopes for Obama but he has shown since day one that he really is a far-left democrat, even after being given the benefit of the doubt by most independent voters. I think his comments concerning the Cambridge Police really woke people up as to where his core beliefs are. Now average America doesn't trust him to have their best interests in mind.

 

Joan

Aug 17, 2009

Obama forgets his job is to do the will of the people, not to try to talk them in to his point of view. He is stumbling and tripping the whole way through his term - one big, big mistake after another. How can massive spending and debt solve the problem of massive spending and debt? He isn't black - he's green.

 

Chris

Aug 17, 2009

President Obama is trying to advance the moral principles of most Americans. The rights of millions of people have been squashed by the insurance companies, under the guise of capitalism. When care is denied, people are dropped from coverage or can no longer afford the high premiums, it is the duty of government to protect the people from unfair, immoral practises.
If you can't don't think that this can happen to you, you are mistaken.The knowledge that our government sponsored programs,ie. Medicare/Medicaid/VA will run out of funds soon, demands reform.
If you care about your children, grandchildren, friends,etc. you will demand reform.

 

chris

Aug 17, 2009

Oh, and Joan. The President is bi-racial, black and white. I am white. We are both green.
What is your point?

 

mcg20002

Aug 17, 2009

It's highly probable that Mr. Gingrich has not read "The Man Who Sold the World: Ronald Reagan and the Betrayal of Main Street America (Hardcover)
by William Kleinknecht. Even if he has, old boy Newt is still hell-bent on perpetuating the myth of Reagan as a great communicator.

If you believe this, you also believe Dacy Crockett was oh so brave in spite of the fact that he paid a songster to follow him around during a senate campaign and sing about how brave he really was.

Mr. Gingrinch's fatal flaw in still trying to convince anyone listening of Reagan's would be amazing presidency comes when he describes the politican as the "Gipper." The Gipper was a famous football player and Reagan played the athlete in a film. Perhaps the president and the former speaker of the house together believe the actor was really the athlete.

We can all get so carried away with falsehoods that we begin to believe them. Poor Newt! Perhaps his life is too empty for the truth.

 

Dave

Aug 17, 2009

Right on! I use to be a liberal, but have switched over. I only hope that others wake up and see how Obama is full of his own s*it

 

tgr

Aug 17, 2009

When is someone with intelligence going to challenge the Constitutional violations going on in this Country? And Chris, don't talk about morals, decency or dignity in America, that was taken away in the sixties.

 

iwannadomel.com

Aug 17, 2009

I actually think Obama is a great communicator and his ideas on how to improve and change America are very crystal clear to me. His agenda becomes confusing and overwhelming when people turn on the FOX News, MSNBC, or any biased news stations that twist his words to make him look like either Satan or God. That's when we need to educate our fellow Americans who disagree by saying, "Obama is going to pull the plug on granny." It's one thing to disagree with him and another to disagree with him based on false accusations. What have the Republicans offered except promoting these types of behaviors in Americans?

Oh, and by the way, Ronald Reagan was an actor. I'd schmooze all over whatever George Clooney had to say if he were President.

 

Chris

Aug 17, 2009

TGR,
Give me break. Nothing good,decent or moral has happened since the sixties?
You lead a sad life.
What about medical adavnces that keep miserable people like you going on and on and on.........

 

Joan

Aug 17, 2009

Chris, government programs like Medicaid and Medicare certainly will run out of money soon - because they are government run just like the post office - just like government run Obamacare would. He has no idea how much money his reform will expand in to so how can he truthfully tell the people what it would cost. Neutral decifit? Please!! Does he show us specific numbers? No! Government programs always turn out to cost 1000% more than they predict! Joan

 

Eric Robinson

Aug 17, 2009

Ronald Reagan believed in the American people, and in the American nation. Barack Obama believes in neither, and everything he has done, so far, has been aimed at undermining, or "re-making" America.

 

Chris

Aug 17, 2009

Joan,
I have worked in healthcare as a nurse in many capacities for over 20 years.
The waste that I have seen is monumental and I have no doubt that the cost savings we would attain by improving this antiquated system would greatly reduce, over time, the debt incurred by reform. Politicians are so afraid of losing the seniors vote that they always back down. So we continue with subpar care, and for many none at all.
Someday I hope to tell my grandkids about the old days, when people were left to die of treatable illnesses, and tell them how lucky they are to live in a country where everyone is important and healthcare is a right, not a privilege.

 

Brian

Aug 17, 2009

I find it incredibly frustrating when supporters of socialized medicine claim that health care is a right, not a privilege, yet the very system they are supporting denies many, many people health care. If you believe health care is a right, then why would you support a system that ultimately treats the elderly as impersonal objects based on a subjective analysis of whether or not their life is worth saving? If health care is a basic right, then why are you in favor of a system that denies people that basic right?

 

chris

Aug 17, 2009

Tell me how affordable healthcare and the "system that I support' denies coverage. I currently work with seniors and would never deny them anything. Every person is treated as an individual and I can give you hundreds of examples of how they are poked prodded and tested, spend most of their limited social life in waiting rooms or waiting on a test that is not going to change the outcome of their life and very often causes discomfort and another visit. The is only a problem if you are the one going through it- and your doctor does not have the courage and moral fortitude to explain the options. No one should or would tell you what to do. But it doesn't take a crystal ball for doctors and nurses to see what is on the horizon. And they should tell you.
The paranoid fanatsies of people who fear "death panels" only hurt those who need honesty and support. We can all have and deserve death with dignity- if we choose.

 

iwannadomel.com

Aug 17, 2009

Why is it so hard to grasp a public option?  Would we get rid of public schools and only have those who can afford it attend private schools?  Why is education a right, but healthcare not?  It's so easy to be against it when you or someone you know hasn't been affected by the immoral causes of expensive, private insurance companies.

 

G

Aug 18, 2009

Has anyone here read 1984 by George Orwell? It was fiction when he wrote it but it is becoming our future if we continue to give gov't control of our lives. Technology has allowed the gov't to come into our homes and monitor what we do, what we watch, and how we act. Not to mention the fact that everything the gov't does is over budget and poorly run. The examples are endless: the post office, DMV, Medicare/Medicaid, this "stimulus", etc. When are Americans going to learn that gov't is NOT the best option?

 

Floyd

Aug 18, 2009

Newt's right: liberals don't trust people to make their own decisions. They raise our taxes because they think they know best how to spend our money. The oppose school vouchers because they know that people would abandon the liberal-controlled public schools. And now they're pushing for a total gov't takeover of health care because, as always, they think they know best. Obama thinks HE should be running the banks, car companies, hospitals & insurance companies... even though he has no experience running anything but his mouth! Of course, reform is needed, but that doesn't mean we need to give our rights (and our money) away to politicians & bureaucrats in Washington. The best reforms are the ones that allow people to keep their own money & make their own decisions. In other words, trust the people.

 

Bohemond

Aug 18, 2009

"Why is it so hard to grasp a public option? Would we get rid of public schools and only have those who can afford it attend private schools? Why is education a right, but healthcare not?"

Oh, that's good. Holding up *public schools* as an example to be emulated??? Can there be any comparison better calculated to point out why government-run anything is to be avoided like the plague?

Actually I agree: abolish all government schools. Provide every family with a tuition voucher or tax credit which they can spend at the private school of their choice, and stop pouring money into the failed NEA rathole.

BTW, education is not a right, no more than are medical services. Were you endowed by your creator with either?

 

iwannadomel.com

Aug 18, 2009

Bohemond, I went to private schools all my life, from kindergarten to grad, a tuition voucher/tax credit isn't gonna get you in. Some private schools require a test that, let's face it, some kids just can't pass. I went to Catholic school that accepted all kids of any religious background to enroll, but not every religious private school is that...liberal. Yes, let's deny our kid's education because gov't is rationing their education now? Give me a break.

 

Joan

Aug 18, 2009

Floyd is exactly right!! How dare the democrats talk down to consertatives with their "elitist" attitude!! What ever happened to "WE THE PEOPLE?" The majority of Americans do not want any healthcare reform so move on! Don't the democrats remember they work for the people? Why won't they LISTEN to the people? Joan

 

Joan

Aug 18, 2009

I meant to say the majority of Americans don't want any GOVERNMENT run healthcare. What fantasy do dems live in to think anything the government runs could be deficit neutral? Joan

 

michael

Aug 18, 2009

Well said, Bohemond, and one other thing, no person has a right to live at the expense of another person. So, you cannot claim something as a "right" if, the burden of which, is bore by another citizen.

 

iwannadomel.com

Aug 18, 2009

Classy. "No person has a right to live at the expense of another person." Move to a third world country then, where you're either wealthy or dirt poor. If you got yours, then who cares if tens of thousands of people are dying. Let's go ahead and put an end to Medicare then. Why are we spending on keeping the elderly alive, anyways, right?

 

Joan

Aug 18, 2009

I agree with Floyd. Government is so wrapped up in its own power, it forgets about WE THE PEOPLE. Now, indeed, the sleeping giant has been awakened and it is angry!

 

tgr

Aug 18, 2009

Chris, you spin much as the far left does. I see you as immoral, indecent, and undignified the same as our Country as become. And as far as you being in the health care profession, I was with this Country's defense for 40 years that gave you the opportunity to spin your poison. We as a Nation need desperately to get back to the principles used to create this Nation and away from the "Feel Good Do It" mentality that you seem to practice in your life.

 

Kathy

Aug 18, 2009

When "we the people" stoop down to the level of following media assholes, like Glenn Beck, no one's going to trust you or your judgment. Stop sounding like morons, you'll be properly heard.

 

kathy

Aug 18, 2009

We can all cry out, “we the people.” In reality, “we the people” stoop down to the level of media brainwashing. Who would trust anyone that literally thinks reform will kill their grandma? If you can’t trust Palin’s judgment, why would you trust someone that repeats what she says? Maybe if we stop the crazy, “we the people” would be heard properly.

 

JP

Aug 18, 2009

Chris, Obama has said that we will not treat patients as individuals, grandma gets a pain pill not a real treatment cause she's too old. How can you suggest that rationing won't happen when the people pushing this say flat out it will?

 

Rugbyman

Aug 18, 2009

It's funny to see proponents of the "public option" talk about how evil the private insurance companies. Private insurance companies are not saints but the main reason that they cause so many problems is that they are hugely bureaucratic. So what's the cure? Let's create a new bureaucracy that dwarfs the even the largest healthcare company. How much you want to bet that when they have to wait 6 months for an MRI, these die hards will be the first ones in line at the complaint desk. Oh wait, that's right. The government run plan won't have a complaint desk because they are accountable to no one. We don't need to blow up the whole system because 7% of the people have a problem. Address teh problems of the 7% That is unless you are a socialist.

 

kathy

Aug 18, 2009

"Real treatment?" What is that? Chemo? This is the problem--we spend so much money on the elderly already, but don't think the rest of Americans deserve the same single payer option, like Medicare? We live, we grow old, we die. How about we prevent the young from dying too?

 

Kathy

Aug 18, 2009

My family moved here from the Philippines. My dad died of cancer when I was 13 because it wasn't caught early. My mom was diagnosed with cancer twice, then her job filed bankrupcy; they switched insurance companies a million times. We're living in a developed world that can't even provide basic healthcare and won't even try.

 

Joan

Aug 19, 2009

I had to file bankruptcy because of medical costs 10 years ago. Now I'm blind. The 5 surgeries didn't stop the bleeding in my eyes from diabetes. Life is hard sometimes when you're poor, but I never blamed the government or even the healthcare system. I should have taken care of my disease better. Joan

 

Kathy

Aug 19, 2009

I don't think it's about blame as much as it's about opportunity. You had to file for bankruptcy because of medical costs, but why not prevent it from happening in the future? Sure, you could've done your part in taking care of yourself, but why not let gov't do it's part by giving Americans an affordable option, especially during an economic meltdown?

 

Aug 21, 2009

iwannadomel.com says: "I'd schmooze all over whatever George Clooney had to say if he were President."

Well, that kind of sycophantic mindlessness is what makes you a good liberal; and irrelevant. For me, I couldn't care less about what George Clooney says. That, for one, makes me relevant.



 

Tony G.

Aug 22, 2009

The Dem's are saying that there are 47 million, everyone with a half a brain knows that that figure is bogus. Included in that fugure are people who don't want insurance as well as illegal immigrants. Let's say that figure is 35 million, there are 350 million people in the US which means that 315 million have health insurance. So it is insane to change the whole health system for 10% of the people. Totally insane.

 

DH

Aug 31, 2009

Nick...you're comments reads like prezel logic. Did you get indoctrinated at one of our fine liberal college instituions? Critical thinking is absent in your post. Obama ran for office with slick rhetoric but the people now see he was simply an empty left wing suit with noooooooo experience for this position.

 

victimized

Sep 12, 2009

While you're e-mailing, and calling your reps to say NO to nationalized health care, you hopefully will want to say NO to cap and trade. CAP AND TRADE PASSED IN SENATE July 7, 2009 by 219 to 212 this bill will be almost as detrimental to the economy as nationalized health care. Also people may want to express that they support FOX TV and "conservative" radio. Without the help of people on the radio and TV describing the corruption in the present administration, people would not have anywhere to go to get information that is not reported on in non -"conservative" media; corrupt people are getting caught, and these corrupt organizations are fighting back - they post many articles and blogs suggesting that the "conservative" media be eliminated because they warp peoples minds. MANY PEOPLE ARE NOT WARPED - THEY ARE SCARED - AND THE ONLY THING THAT BRINGS SOME SOLICE IS LISTENING TO "CONSERVATIVE" MEDIA THAT GIVES FACTS - AND SUGGESTS PEOPLE DO RESEARCH TO VALIDATE WHAT THEY HEAR.

 


Post a comment


Email:
(This will not be displayed or shared. Privacy Policy)

Display Name:

Comment:




Economy

Investors seeking Stanford assets urge Antiguan court to remove British firm as liquidator

A group of investors is urging an Antiguan court to remove a British accounting firm appointed to collect assets of a Caribbean offshore bank at the center of an alleged Ponzi scheme by Texas financier R. Allen Stanford. Full story

Entertainment

Pedro Almodovar discusses his childhood, his influences and what he won't put on film

Sex. Drugs. Prostitution. Pedophilia. Rape. Pedro Almodovar has been able to translate some of the most delicate subjects to the big screen with grace and humor. Full story