The fatal flaw in your respondent's critique comes early:

"the country can be liberated and experience growth in prosperity and freedom through the dimishment of federal largesse."

Austerity is always a last-on first-off proposition, hurting the poorest the most. Until I see convincing evidence otherwise, I believe it appeals to the most crabbed part of our country, which gets more out of hurting those a few rungs lower down the ladder than working to make everybody better off.

Newt himself repudiated this recently:

"..the United States is actually caught between three possible futures:
1. Fantasy and collapse (the Greek model)
2. Pain and Austerity (the Washington establishment model)
3. Innovation and Growth (the Hamilton-Lincoln-Reagan-Thatcher-Gingrich model).

...The Washington establishment’s reaction to the runaway spending is a policy of austerity and pain.
Democrats would cause austerity and pain on the individual by raising taxes, thereby shrinking family and business purchasing power.

Republicans would cause austerity and pain to government by cutting spending and thereby shrinking the services and income transfers government provides.

Clearly, shrinking government is preferable to overtaxing the American people but we must remember that there is a third alternative to pain. It is the path of innovation and growth. Historically, this has always been the American solution."