The Myth of 'Newt The Great Debater'By John Ziegler

American Thinker ^ | Jan. 20, 2012 | John Ziegler

[reformjoy]

There are a couple false "truths" which seem to be dictating much if not most of the Republican presidential race. One is that Newt Gingrich would be a great debater against President Obama. This accepted conventional wisdom is not only bogus; it is a myth of Herculean proportions.

It appears that Gingrich's entire argument for the nomination is that he is the guy we want in a nationally televised verbal brawl with the media's all-time favorite candidate. Nary has an opportunity passed when Newt fails to, in his typically egomaniacal style and with great bombast, assure us that all will be right with the world once Obama is forced to take him on in the ultimate battle of the brains.

(Read more at link)

[thatjoeguy]

Wow, the RINOs are coming out in droves..

JB

[danielmryan]

I contend Zero will be asking for the debates. The further the polls have him behind the more he’ll want to debate.

There's another reason. When he ran for state Senator, his opponent was Alan Keyes - another great debator. The people here who say that Obama isn't a good debater are right; Keyes was better. The trouble was, Obama just ignored him and kept plowing on. And Obama won.

I think Obama knows he isn't a good debater, but decided that it's okay as long as he remains unflappable. It might not work this time 'round, but that's what he'll do.

[Recon Dad]

I liked Alan Keyes, but towards the end of his election tries I thought he was getting kind of loopy, kind of strident and shrill.
Let's hope Newt corners the bastard and beats him senseless oratorically.

[danielmryan]

I liked Alan Keyes, but towards the end of his election tries I thought he was getting kind of loopy, kind of strident and shrill.

Thanks for the info. If things work out, Newt will guard against doing the same.