Posted on 07/21/2006 4:35:35 AM PDT by IrishMike
The casual TV viewer has probably noticed two things during the past few days — there’s a war in the Middle East, and Newt Gingrich is commenting on it. Gingrich has been a ubiquitous analyst on the war — ubiquity being one of the tireless, outsized former House speaker’s favorite qualities. In between appearances in his role as a commentator for the Fox News Channel, Gingrich announced on Meet the Press that we are in the midst of World War III. A few days later, Hezbollah declared that it welcomed World War III, nicely capturing the moment: Simultaneous with its shooting war with Israel, Hezbollah is in a war of words with Newt Gingrich.
The old conventional wisdom about Gingrich was that we wouldn’t have him to kick around anymore. The new conventional wisdom is that he’s back, and he’s doing the kicking. Ousted by his own party after its losses in the 1998 midterm elections, Gingrich has reestablished himself as a party leader through sheer intellectual energy. He has had something intelligent to say about literally every issue of the hour, from health care to Katrina to the war on terror. “He has helped himself immensely — he’s all over the place,” says former Republican National Committee Chairman Ed Gillespie.
Newt knows this. That's why he can get rid of this issue now. You know come right out and say "I've made mistakes in my life". Remember Bush got rid of the DUI issue by making a general statement without going into details. Americans can respect and relate to that type of honesty without having to know all of the details. Such an announcement would disarm the press as they'd seem petty to keep digging once the man says that like all of us he has sinned. The stakes are too high this time to let the debate focus on marital woes. Who would you rather have in the oval office, a man who has been divorced like millions of other Americans or a man who has publicly dressed as a drag queen? You decide.
Newt should do us all a favor: stay off Fox News and return to a mid-level college teaching post where his ego can be sublimated in the interests of doing good. Fat chance.
Then the other day, I heard him ranting about the amount of money wasted in the Katrina aftermath. It amazed me that he didn't understand that the large amounts of money thrown away on Katrina were a direct result of comments in the media from people like him.
In addition, I did not appreciate him saying that "George Bush needs to decide that we are in a real war, and whether or not he wants to win."
Pfui. He says what will get him on TV, and believe me, I know at least one Iowa Republican who is armed with a lot of pointed questions and will not let him get away with his grandstanding.
He will never make it out of the Iowa caucuses.
I liked his contract for America.
Besides, how wrong is it to have a good Conservative leader for a change?
Besides, he's my uncle.
Bingo!!!!!
Well said.
The reason Newt vanished was that the left made that their top priority precisely BECAUSE he was an articulate, effective leader--and, as is their habit, the Republicans threw him to the dogs as soon as they came after him.
I hate to say it but I like Newt better as a candidate than Mcpain,guiliani,frist but that isnt saying much
When Newt was Speaker, he never ceased to amaze me at how, as a professional politician, he managed to put his foot in his mouth so consistently. I liked him, but I knew he was headed for a fall. You can bet that if he ran for President, the left would start slinging mud from day one! He would be their worst nightmare.
I agree with you...Personally I miss Newt. He was a reliable and strong minded...not to mention effective conservative when he was in office (it why the democrats went after him)He is also a hawk and no nonsense about North Korea and Iran. If he runs I will vote for him in the primaries.
I agree with the first part of your assessment. Newt is clearly a better candidate than any of the others.
I'd vote for him and even support his campaign without hesitation.
What about personal morals? I believe that must be taken into consideration. I would pass on Newt, but I am a conservative. If you are a Republican than I could see voting for him. I just can't bring myself pushing that button because of his personal life. It is just too much to ignore.
Like the old E.F. Hutton commercials, when Newt speaks, people listen. Without a doubt, he's the savviest mondern day politician in existance and has the intellect and communication ability that soars above all others.
He scares the cr@p out of the left and in order to destroy him, they will do everything possible to discredit him. This is the beginning of many attacks Newt will be getting. I'm just surprised its taken so long.
Bernie Kerik was far and away the best candidate to head up Homeland Security but was derailed personal issues, which obviously play a much greater role for conservatives than for liberals (ex: Clinton), since the Democratic Party is essentially the party of the media and they determine peoples' priorities for them.
"I just can't bring myself pushing that button because of his personal life."
I afraid that you know nothing about his personal life, beyond what you've heard from the MSM.
One could reasonably argue that Newt is more conservative than President Bush. As for personal morals, we aren't electing a pope. We all have sinned.
So what in the world is a gecko? Is it a young frog with a tail and british accent?
Not sure what you mean by no core principles. His personal life may resemble that of Bill Clinton's but Newt has always been full of ideas. That is unusual in a business where pols just keep saying the saying thing all over again. One can protest that it is full of 'it." but never forget he led the revolution of'94. I would not vote for him if I had a choice but I want him out there pushing the debate along. Who else? Rudy and McCain? I will say that in case of war I would buy Rudy. Churchill was less than a perfect candidate either.
I agree with you on Newt. I would not vote for him.
Conservatives need to be practical and focus on the bigger issues. The biggest being who do you think will serve the nation better.
I'd support Newt also. He is extremely intelligent, has the all important grasp of historical perspective, and is a man of action. He has made personal mistakes, and I would want to know he has learned his lesson. But that does not disqualify him for me.
I agree that he is not as "warm and fuzzy" as is usually required to win the presidency.
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.