A headline on on the Washington Post' Politics page read "
Gingrich: Send U. S. Marshals to arrest uncooperative judges." Earlier this weekend, headlines read that Gingrich stated he would ignore court rulings he didn't agree with.
These statements are forming a disturbing pattern that concerns to me. Over the years, I've heard Newt Gingrich speak several times. I've even had my picture taken with him. He's a nice person and a tremendous speaker. However, I now understand why diverse people such as Robert Novak, Glenn Beck and editors at the National Review all have (or had, in the case of Novak) concerns about Newt Gingrich.
Gingrich has stated on more than one occasion that he considers himself a Teddy Roosevelt president, and he has made admiring remarks about the effectiveness of FDR as a president.
Teddy Roosevelt believed that the federal government shouldn't begrudge a person making a lot of money
so long as he/she earned the money in a manner that the government approved of and then spent it in a way that the government approved. This guy was the forefather of political correctness and big government control. Why should the government at any level have any say as to how much money I earn so long as I've earned it legally? Teddy Roosevelt clearly didn't understand or respect individual liberty.....and Newt picks this guy to be his favorite?
Now to FDR, who accomplished a lot of what he did ( or inflicted all the damage he did, depending on you perspective) by trampling on the civil liberties of the individual. The rule of law was often an inconvenience that he ignored when it suited him. By 1939, many Americans believed we were on the brink of being a dictatorship. What saved FDR's reelection was WWII. Newt has indicated he admired FDR's ability to get things done. However, FDR did so by ignoring the rule of law. Newt's a student of history. He would know this.
Now, back to the headlines regarding ignoring court rulings and hauling judges in front of Congress when he doesn't like their rulings. Again, the rule of law appears to be for the other guy. I'm troubled by this.
A society's economy flourishes as a free society when two things are present-- (1) the preservation of private property rights, which has been eroded a great deal in recent years, and (2) a rule of law consistently applied. Taking Newt at his word, he would dispense with this second pillar of freedom if he felt it was appropriate. That kind of thinking scares me. You either respect liberty or you don't. Understanding and respecting these rights is paramount to American citizens keeping their freedom and flourishing as a free society.
__________________________