I like Newt. However, "Newt Gingrich For President" is a really dumb idea, sort of like Heinrich Himmler running for President of the United Jewish Appeal, or opening up a kosher deli in Mecca. That dumb.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
Posted on 04/30/2005 5:42:58 AM PDT by Nasty McPhilthy
It appears to this writer that former Speaker of the House of Representatives Newt Gingrich is preparing to run for the Presidency in '08.
The big question: is his personal baggage too much to over-come for him to succeed? I'm talking about the alleged marital infidelity, the alleged hospital break-up with his first wife, his second divorce and third marriage after an extended affair while still married-quite a load to explain to a conservative public; quite a load to explain to people who rated moral issues as the biggest single deciding factor in the last election. There's also the matter of the $300,000 penalty assessed against him for alleged questionable activities involving GOPAC and his book deal. I recall that entire circus, and spent a fair amount of time listening to the testimony before the Ethics Committee on C-Span. I personally never was convinced that GOPAC was anything more than what Gingrich represented it to be, nor that any real wrong doing occurred.
Once again it was the appearance of wrong doing (a favorite tool of the Democrats-appearance is sufficient grounds to convict) more than anything else that caused his demise and early retirement from the House Speakership. Certainly there was some questionable decision making (the exact phrase was "intentional or reckless" disregard for house rules), but no crimes were committed, and the ethics committee's fines were disproportionate for the transgressions. The combination of a few shaky Republicans and the vindictive Democrats, still smarting from Gingrich's successful pursuit of Democrat Speaker Jim Wright, as well as their outrage at the Republicans having the nerve to wrest control of the House from them (didn’t we know that it was their divine right?) proved to be enough to get him reprimanded and fined. Note the term, “reprimanded,” not as is generally stated by Liberals, “censured,” which would have been an entirely different and far more serious matter.
As to his personal peccadilloes, I must admit I am uncomfortable with that sort of reckless behavior. It echoes too closely, the behavior of Bill “Bubba one” Clinton. I do believe that it shows a certain lack of self-control. I also believe that is demonstrates a rather cavalier attitude towards keeping ones word (marriage is a vow, a lifetime commitment). I realize that this kind of attitude may seem antiquated in this society of quickie marriage and quickie divorce, but I still believe in a man keeping his word. Is this issue sufficient to disqualify him from being President? I’m not certain, but I don’t think so. My revulsion of Bubba was an aggregate of his lascivious behavior and his Liberal agenda. That and the multiplicity of scandals surrounding his administration (White Water, File-gate, Pardon-gate, etc.) conflated to rise to the level of a grotesque mockery of the prestige and honor of the Whitehouse and the Presidency.
The question remains however. Can the Newtster surmount the heat he is sure to receive from his competition? The answer depends entirely upon his ability to bypass the MSM and get his message directly to the voters. Newt has a lot of people out here who think very highly of him. Be that as it may, he is certain to face a very tough primary campaign from Senators Frist, McCain, and Hagel. He is equally assured of being subjected to hate mongering at least equal to that we witnessed against President Bush during the last election from the Left. Creepy-crawlies like George Soros and Michael Moore (ugh! I can hardly stand to type his name), in concert with their hatchet groups like MoveON.org, Communist Cause, and People for the Highly Questionable Elitist Way will certainly mount a full court press. We can expect a rousing shout of outrage from DNC commissar Howard Dean and his hit-team (AARRGGHH!).
The reason I am asking these questions, is that I believe Newt Gingrich to be the single most qualified candidate for the office of the President in recent memory. He ought to be ideal for the Liberals who showered President Bush with unjust labels like "Dumbya" and "stupid." There could be no such assault on Mr. Gingrich's intellect. His knowledge of how the system works, or is supposed to work, is equal to that of anyone in government. His familiarity with our historical provenance as a professor of American History and Government gives him a perspective unique among the likely candidates. And since we already know that immoral behavior is “no big deal” for the Left, Gingrich’s morally questionable behavior should actually be a big plus for them. Of course Liberals won't embrace him because Newt believes in limited government, not the Socialist Paternalistic State of the early 20th century of which they dream.
Newt expresses a vision of the future possibilities for this nation that none have come close to matching. Having read his latest book, Winning the Future, I believe it to be a rarely seen example of farsighted and far-reaching policy goals designed to take this nation forward into this new century. Newt's thinking is clear, positive, and thoughtful. His ideas are practical, and achievable. Newt offers a vision of hope for the American people and this nation. As a student of government and of the presidency, he definitely has the "guns" to get the job done. He also has one other thing to offer us, a New Contract With America.
So I find myself back at my original question. Can Newt overcome his negative baggage? As a history professor, he has the oratory skills to convey his message in a clear and concise manner. His skill as a debater is great. He is a true conservative, and well liked by other conservatives who, like me can make allowances for his shortcomings. He would be a leader who, unlike any alternative the Democrats are likely to put up-say "Billary" for example-would not let this nation slip into the doldrums of a U.N. led "world government." His belief in the rightness of America, her place in history, and her future, would assure us that the evils espoused by the Left, such as the desirability of judges who believe themselves to be legislators, would not come to pass.
Only time will tell us the answer to this big question. Personally, I hope he can do it. It would be a shame to waste such a mind and talent.
Go Newt! Gingrich for President! Gingrich in 2008! Oh! Just Practicing.
Details, details. When the Mpls Red Star's headline after W's speech Thursday nite was "Bush Reveals Plans to Cut Benefits," we can't count on the media to get it right and the great unwashed still think Clinton was impeached because of oral sex.
Newt is a very knowledgable man. But I think his personal life disqualifies him, unless he is willing to come clean and apologize. Most people forget this, but his affair, I fear, played a major role in his refusal to address Bill Clinton's crimes during the long disastrous year of 1998.
Let's not forget that the Democrats gained five seats that year under a lame-duck President who had already been accussed of adultery, perjury and obstruction.
I really like Newt, but if he thinks he is a viable candidate for President, his ego has taken complete control of his brain.
I could vote for him too, however, what if former California Governor Pete Wilson was running? Who would you vote for?
I like Newt. However, "Newt Gingrich For President" is a really dumb idea, sort of like Heinrich Himmler running for President of the United Jewish Appeal, or opening up a kosher deli in Mecca. That dumb.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
Its still early Bump.
Newt just needs a good promo tag:
"Not perfect, but not as bad a Teddy Kennedy."
He would be a good candidate. Governor of California Senator, a little liberal for my taste, way-off the radar for years, pro-choice. Does he have the fire in his gut to smite the 'Rats? Hell, I'd vote for Susan Collins if she could carry the Republican Congress on her coat tails. Why did he quit the Senate? I'd probably still vote for Newt.
But, I agree with others that nobody has more negative baggage than Hillary and she's "supposedly" a contender.
Personally, I think Mr. Newt would be a terrific President.
He may run and not win and yes it may be a bad idea, but...
Look at Steve Forbes and his run, he did more for the party and advancement of his ideas. While the Flat Tax is not his exclusively, (Friedman, Glider, Reagan etc already where there) it is now the Tax System of New Zealand, Russian, Iraq, and most of the former Soviet Satellites.
With that in mind Newt's Secure Border Ideas, and advancing our education system to compete with China and India, could become the platform for 08', and that would be be great for us all. He is a Big Idea man, we need to be the party of big ideas, the DNC has baron any.
if he has ideas, then he needs to get out there. I just don't think he would be electable as President. VP, as I said, maybe.
At this point and time, he would make a kick@$$ advisor or something like that. Someone with ideas who can't quite get elected....
I feel sorry for that poor Donkey in so many ways...
Getting panned by Dick Morris is actually good news for Newt. For reasons I still fail to comprehend I followed Morris closely on O'reilly and Hannity leading up to the last election. I'm here to tell you that each and everyone of his dire doomsday predictions and polls were as wrong as they could be. He Had GW down at Abu Gr*, the stolen munitions, all the debates. But he had to choke on it. I think the next election will be about dirt and 'ethics' so we might as well have gunslinger like Newt on our side 'cuz it ain't gonna be pretty and nice and genteel-like like the last election.
Which is why he will never have my support. I heard him making disparaging remarks about PRESIDENT Bush several times on radio/tv even before the inauguration, IIRC. Turned me right off.
I saw that and didn't like it. GW is home free, he's not a candidate, only history can judge him. We gotta move on to Armageddon in '06 and '08.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.