Newt and the Closet Kenyan
Tuesday 14 September 2010
by: Eugene Robinson, Op-Ed
Washington - Is Newt Gingrich just pretending to have lost his mind, or has he actually gone around the bend?
His lunacy certainly seems genuine enough. It's one thing to be a rhetorical bomb-thrower, as Gingrich has long fancied himself, and another to lob damp squibs of pure nonsense into the fray. The man's contributions to the public discourse have become increasingly unhinged.
The latest example comes in an interview with the conservative website National Review Online. Unsurprisingly, he was criticizing President Obama. Bizarrely, according to the website, he said the following: "What if (Obama) is so outside our comprehension, that only if you understand Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior, can you begin to piece together (his actions)?" According to Newt, this is "the most accurate, predictive model" for the president's actions, or policies, or something.
What in the world is "Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior" supposed to mean? That Obama is waging a secret campaign to free us from the yoke of British oppression?
In fairness to Gingrich, he wasn't being original. He was speaking in praise of a big gob of gibberish written in Forbes by conservative "intellectual" Dinesh D'Souza. In the piece -- much of it strikingly lazy -- D'Souza argues that Obama somehow absorbed a fully elaborated, frozen-in-time, anti-colonial worldview from his Kenyan father. Who left the family when the future president was 2.
Well, we knew Obama was precocious. But if he was so absorbed with the study of colonialism, neocolonialism, imperialism and all the other isms, when did he have time to learn to go potty?
D'Souza goes on to froth and foam like one of those conspiracy theorists who believe the CIA is controlling our brain waves. Suffice it to say that the author believes it remarkable that there has been "virtually no reporting" on an article that Obama's father -- who saw his son once more in his life, when "Barry" was 10 -- wrote in an obscure journal in 1965. I'm thinking that the Da Vinci Code might be in there somewhere, too.
Yet Gingrich finds this claptrap a "stunning insight" -- or pretends that he does.
The rational explanation is that Gingrich seized on the "programmed by his absent father" thesis as a way of furthering the "birther" narrative -- the paranoid fantasy that Obama is foreign, exotic, alien, somehow not American. So what if D'Souza's piece makes assertion after assertion that is plainly, demonstrably unsupported? Just throw it out there, and maybe a few gullible souls will believe it.
But this was just the latest offering from Gingrich that vaulted the barrier between provocative and crazy. It started last year during the confirmation hearings for Justice Sonia Sotomayor, when he said that her innocuous "wise Latina" remark proved she was a "racist." He made the same lightning-quick allegation of racism against Shirley Sherrod -- before a full hearing of her remarks showed that she was actually speaking against racism. And then Gingrich's rhetorical insanity reached a new high, or a new low, last month when he accused supporters of the Lower Manhattan mosque of "triumphalism" and compared them to the Nazis.
It has been suggested that perhaps Gingrich, who is thinking of running for president, is trying to lure attention away from a recent unflattering profile in Esquire -- the one that charts his three marriages in excruciating, and embarrassing, detail. But it hardly furthers his ambitions to pretend to be so nuts.
And there's a thread that connects his outbursts: They all fit into the idea that American democracy -- indeed, the whole Anglo-American-Judeo-Christian enterprise -- is under attack in a titanic clash of civilizations. In this view, we are threatened most acutely by the Islamic civilization. But we must also be on guard against the "Sinic" civilization of China, the "Hindu" civilization of India, and assorted others. This analysis was developed by Samuel P. Huntington, a Harvard professor who died in 2008 -- and who said he never intended his work to be read as a battle plan.
Gingrich seems to believe that our culture and values are also threatened from within -- by black and brown people who demand that they, too, be given a voice in defining that culture and those values. He really needs to get out more. But, hey, it's a free country. If he wants, Gingrich can imagine himself a retired British colonel in 1963, harrumphing in his armchair about who lost Kenya. A diverse and multicultural America has long since moved on.
Eugene Robinson's e-mail address is eugenerobinson(at)washpost.com.
(c) 2010, Washington Post Writers Group
All republished content that appears on Truthout has been obtained by permission or license.



Comments
This forum is moderated by software. Please allow up to 15 minutes for your comments to go live and avoid posting the same comment multiple times.
And this is the BEST the
Tue, 09/14/2010 - 10:45 — Ann Murdock (not verified)And this is the BEST the Republicans can put forth with our multitude of devastating problems bearing down on most of us?
Sometimes I think it would be best if we cleared the slate of all of them! What I used to consider wise all seem to be more on the crackpot side these days. Wise are bought off, power hungry and I guess delusional.
None are the recipe for what is ailing our country... Sadly.
Gingrich attributable
Tue, 09/14/2010 - 16:57 — Anonymous (not verified)Gingrich attributable “anti-colonial behavior” to somebody who is re-colonizing the world is definitely “so outside our comprehension”. Talk about this “anti-colonial behavior” to the Latin Americans who feel that they were better with the former administration than with the present one. In less than one year they have seen enough to disagree with Gingrich’s perception and silly interpretations of events. I am sure he does not even know what is going on in his own country. And he thinks he is presidential material. Well there many like him. From past events we have learned that he has chance.
Obama returned the bust of
Tue, 09/14/2010 - 17:43 — Anonymous (not verified)Obama returned the bust of Churchill to Britain at the beginning of his term, which was taken as quite an insult by the British. He wasn't even nice about it. At the time, it was speculated that Obama may have resented Churchill, who is a hero to us in the West, because Churchill was a resented part of the Kenya's colonial past. It's a possibility. Hard to say why else he would piss off the British, our number one ally, for no apparent gain.
For heaven's sake, liberals love Obama because he is so international and cosmopolitan. Hello! It's no surprise, then, that his attitudes are not always pro-Western attitudes. It's also no surprise that some people think a president's attitudes should be sympathetic to his own country and his own country's important allies.
@22:43... obviously you're
Tue, 09/14/2010 - 19:08 — Anonymous (not verified)@22:43... obviously you're about as clueless and around the bend as Gingrich. so whats a 'pro-western' attitude?....acting like you own the whole world?
00:08 Here is an
Tue, 09/14/2010 - 22:19 — Anonymous (not verified)00:08 Here is an example:
Last year in Iran, an election was brazenly stolen by the theocracy. Iranians who were mostly peaceful and also, reportedly very pro-American were beaten down by government thugs. This would have been a good time for Obama to show some support for the protesters. That would have been a "pro-western" attitude. Instead, he said little, and finally offered a very mild rebuke while emphasizing "We respect Iranian sovereignty."
Interestingly, Imam Rauf (of ground zero mosque fame) thought Obama's support of the Iranian theocracy was the correct response. They seem to have a lot in common.
A pro-Western response would have nothing to do with "owning the whole world"; it would be standing up for Western values of free elections, secular government, free speech and peaceful assembly at a time when people braver than Obama are risking their lives (and some losing their lives) in the hopes of living in a country that is a little more like ours.
It is always worth
Wed, 09/15/2010 - 10:33 — Anonymous (not verified)It is always worth remembering that it was Newt Gingrich who said that the GOP can never expect to win elections if they debate the democrats on the issues. So here we go again - creating phony issues to get people to ignore the real issues. In this case - Obama is an anti colonialist. Well so am I. Which explains my desire to close all the overseas US military bases, stop massive arms shipments, withdraw support from right wing dictators, request the US stop fiddling int he internal affairs of other nations, and absolutely close our terrorist training center so aptly called the Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation - aka the School for the Americas.