Which is precisely why he has no business going up against an ideologue who does "have the capacity to explain with some color and sort of force" the ideas of redistribution.
Krauthammer has been slow to come to admitting the obvious fact that Romney doesn't "explain" conservative ideas because they are not part of his intellectual DNA, as they are with someone who has immersed himself/herself in the ideas of America's founding history.
Gingrich's quick analysis of opposing ideas, combined with an ability to put them in historical context, didn't just come about by osmosis. They came about through a lifelong study of history. In recent decades, Ronald Reagan is the only American president who was so familiar with our founding ideas that he could weave them into discussions on "issues" of the day; thereby giving clarity to threats to liberty.
By the same token, the Fall 2012 opponent has studied, been mentored in, and well understands the ideology and strategies for presenting his case for redistribution, government planning, and control--all the while masking them in benevolence and "taking care" of those to whom he appeals, even as his policies are enslaving future generations.
His Republican opponent needs to be able to rebut, rebuke, and reveal the cloaked tyranny encased in his appealing message to those who see him as a benevolent leader, not a threat to their posterity's Creator-endowed right to be free.
Gingrich is right.
The goal of the primaries is to determine a candidate who can bring such clarity to the ideas of conservatism that Obama's counterfeit ideas will be defeated. Romney, in the words of Krauthammer, "simply doesn't have the capacity" to do it. At least, he has not shown it to this point; and that "capacity" cannot be coached. It must be a natural outgrowth of understanding.
Kraut man (and about half of Fox News) is on my doo doo list.
They all have a blind eye for the liberal guy .
Until, and unless, they see the light I will not be paying much attention to anything they have to say.
Except to consider the oposite of what they suggest.
Rant over.