Posted on 06/16/2006 3:09:55 PM PDT by RWR8189
The Hon. Newt Gingrich's recent oracular rumble to a luncheon audience at the Brookings Institution, during which he threatened to seek the Republican presidential nomination if a "vacuum" remains in the Republican field, reminded me of an inescapable insight I suffered sometime in 1998. Mr. Gingrich is the Republicans' Bill Clinton. Being a Republican, Mr. Gingrich is not as hollow as the Arkansas huckster, nor as amusing. In fact, he can be boring.
Springing from the same late 1960s jugendkultur as the Boy President, Mr. Gingrich is the career pol, the hustling, self-promoting narcissist, the sempiternal fantasist. When he was Speaker of the House I should have called him the Boy Speaker. He made his exit from politics like a troubled adolescent: whining, blustering, and guilty as charged.
Had Mr. Gingrich measured himself scrupulously against those Republicans now mentioned as presidential contenders, he never could have spoken of a "vacuum." George Allen, Rudy Giuliani, John McCain, and Mitt Romney are all sturdier candidates than the Boy Speaker whose House colleagues politely put a banana peel under his well-worn wingtips in 1998.
Doubtless there are many other Republicans who would be preferable to Mr. Gingrich. How about Tom Tancredo? What is it that makes Mr. Gingrich think he is a fit candidate to lead the nation? He prides himself on being an intellectual, by which he means being a policy wonk. This is another of his fantasies; he confuses wonkiness with learnedness and wisdom. This is a fantasy he shares with Clinton.
I once heard an English gentleman, fresh from bathing in Mr. Clinton's radiance, confide to the great British historian Paul Johnson that Clinton is "so intelligent." "Not intelligent," Mr. Johnson responded, "cunning." The word encapsulates Mr. Gingrich's thought process perfectly. Yet again, Mr. Gingrich is a Republican. He is
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Dittoes to your reply!
Watch Newt run..Watch Newt win a few..Watch Newt get killed in the November
Newt at best would be in a draw with Hillary for likeability, and I don't think he could necessarily win that contest.
Just because someone says something that you like or agree with does NOT mean that they are a good candidate. He has already been on the cover of Time as The Grinch. Imagine what the media could do with him in a presidential campaign.
I also don't think he has the temperament to be president. That requires someone with an even temper, a desire to do what is right even if it's not politically wise, and an ability to gain and keep the confidence of the people.
He just doesn't have it.
Miss Marple, I agree with your assessment... You also need an optimist. Ronald Reagan taught us that. Whatever good traits Newt has, optimism is not one of them. And that speaks to his temperament, as you noted.
I expect Freepers will slam me for this, but right now, the best person in the field is, in my opinion, The Mayor: Rudy Guilliani. Proven leader; terrific administrator; great at taking on huge challenges and bringing focused attention to those challenges. I suspect he would appoint Judicial Conservatives despite his liberal orientation on many social issues. I also suspect he will be an economic conservative (reform tax law via fair or flat tax, and control discretionary spending while reforming social security and medicare which will have to be addressed in the next two administration). But most importantly, Rudy would be a terrific leader in the war on terror and I'm sure he would surround himself with outstanding administrators. JMHO... I'm ready for the flaming.
save
If Newt doesn't have enough sense to know that Hillary got his FBI file too, he's unfit for ANY office. Wasn't he kissing up to her awhile back?
Exactly. He's the Republican version of Gore.
Ditto!
I voted for him multiple times and could have forgiven him his peccadillos. It should have had nothing to do with the job I depended on him to do in Washington.
Then he ran off like an embarrassed nancy boy. The effect was to help fix in the sheeples minds that Clintoon's situation was just Moral Majority harassment. For Newt to be so smart, that was pretty dumb.
I also always thought Mary Anne was a very nice lady and I can't help thinking that Newt is a sullen and moody person in private which isn't a good character trait for the loneliest job in the world. [Proper deference to Kim Jong-Il.]
It would vote for him again but only to keep a Socialist out of the WH.
I've had enough of likeable candidates. I want someone who will actually do something.
You left off an adjective from your list describing Giuliani: liberal.
Gingrich is a strategist, not a tactical politician. He gets into petty fights (recall his silly complaining about sitting in the back of the plane when he accompanied Clinton somewhere), can't make decisions, and can't control his libido, even when he's leading the prosecution of a President who couldn't control his libido.
Tyrell is right: Gingrich is a boy, just as Clinton was a boy.
Newt is a visionary, but he is no longer electable.
The "boy Clinton" did get elected, and I don't think he was a visionary.
Who do you think is electable? From our side?
Guliani is electable, McCain is electable, Allen might be electable.
Getting past the gauntlet of the GOP primaries is the big question.
Allen might, only because he's virtually unknown.
Either McCain or Guiliani could win the general election, but neither can win the GOP primaries to get that chance.
He's not a 'turncoat' Republican, like so many here. He was bashed by the MSM, and like so often happens, do gooders lacking backbone threw in the towel.
Newt conservative record and speaking clarity on the issues will make him hard to beat. Good chance he'll get my vote.
I don't agree with that. Presidential primaries are far more than just about ideology. They are about a perception as to who has the right stuff to be president, and who can win. Plus, the GOP electorate is not remotely reproduced on this site, as an accurate template.
I make my tentative predictions based more on who I think will be the long distance runner, who has the moxie and the smarts, who will resonant, and who will show up well in the polls down the line, than anything happening now.
As a sidebar, I thought Carter and Dukakis would win the nomination long before most did, just by watching them on the tube. I never was right about Reagan however, and found the Dem field in 2004 so flawed, that I had trouble being objective.
First off, I have to admit to abject ignorance of who R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. was, prior to reading the article.
As I read the article, it seemed like this "R." guy was beating up on Newt pretty good. ("Mungo no like")
I did take into account that the paper was the Times, not the Post, which relaxed me a bit, but still wondered if "R." wasn't some kind of liberal sleeper, the way he professed a dislike of Clinton, yet kept hitting Newt in the soft underbelly, if not kidneys.
I was both embarrassed (can you be embarrassed if no one knows?) and confused when I checked "R.'s" Conservative credentials after finishing the article.
Anyway, I'm glad someone else thinks a Conservative like "R." is borderline Non compos mentis with this article.
On the potential candidates issue, it's a little early for a dilettante like me to be paying rapt attention. I promise I'll do my homework, study up, and cram just before the primaries. Then I'll vote with my gut feeling, LOL.
As far as Newt goes, I like what I've seen of him on the toob, and I will stop flicking through the channels if he's on. He usually has something interesting to say, and I usually agree with him. Whether he'd make a good President, I don't know.
McCain, I thank him for his service to the country, but it's time to go away already. Take some time to enjoy a retirement, you've earned it.
Rudy, the gut likes him, but I have an series issue with him on the whole gay thing. Enough not to vote for him.
Romney, nope. He might look and act like like a Hollywood President, but I can't name a single accomplishment since he's been Gov. up here. Plus, I have a, perhaps irrational, fear of Mormons (almost black helicopter level), akin to the Protestant's fear of JFK being a Catholic. Maybe I need to "up the voltage" on the electroshock treatments.
Oh, and I almost forgot. Allen. Who? Not on my radar yet.
Finally, back to the author: You might have noticed, and I don't know why, but people whose first name is an initial either put me on guard or annoy me.
An eternal graduate student at a mediocre state university has been playing with bits and pieces of the large ideas of Milton Friedman and like-minded political scientists, for instance, Edward Banfield.
Down the hall is Mr. Clinton. The bits and pieces that he plays with are those of Ira Magaziner or Robert B. Reich. Mr. Gingrich is a more adventuresome graduate student.
Clever analogy.
Tyrrell wrote 2 excellent books in the 80's: Liberal Crack-up and Conservative Crack-up.
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.