Posted on 11/10/2006 6:59:08 AM PST by Pokey78
After having watched the majority he engineered in 1994 crumble in this week's elections, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich laid into President Bush and congressional Republicans in an Atlanta appearance Thursday.
Taking questions after a medical forum, the former GOP congressman from Cobb County said four c's — an absence of competence in Republican performance, an absence of candor, corruption and the bad advice of consultants — led to Tuesday's defeat.
But Gingrich saved his strongest words for President Bush's performance at the Wednesday press conference announcing Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld's resignation. Bush told reporters that he had planned to replace Rumsfeld since before the election, despite praising the unpopular defense secretary a week ago and saying he would remain for the duration of his presidency.
"If the president had decided to replace Secretary Rumsfeld he should have told us two weeks ago," Gingrich said. "I think that we would today control the Senate and probably have 10 to15 more House seats. And I found it very disturbing yesterday in the press conference, the explanation that the President gave.
"We need candor, we need directness," said Gingrich, a potential 2008 presidential candidate."We need to understand the threats we faced with are so frightening and so real, the danger that we'll lose two to three American cities so great, that we cannot play games with each other, cannot manipulate each other, we have to have an open and honest dialogue, and I found yesterday's staments at the press conference frankly very disturbing."
He condemned Bush's admission that in making last week's statement about Rumsfeld, he had known he was being misleading.
"It's inappropriate to cleverly come out the day after an election to do something we were told before the election would not be done," Gingrich said. "I think the timing was exactly backwards and I hope the President will rethink how he engages the American people and how he communicates with candor."
He contrasted the euphoria of 1994, when his Contract with America agenda helped ended decades of Democratic rule in the House, with the bitterness of Tuesday night's Democratic sweep.
"I remember what it felt like the night we were at the Cobb Galleria and for the first time in 40 years we won control of the House and (there was) the Contract with America and people were very exicted about welfare reform and cutting taxes and balancing the budget and all those things, and I have to say 12 years later that I'm very disappointed, but if you look at what I've said all year, I'm not surprised."
As for whatRepublicans should do now, he said, "I believe the House and Senate Republicans and the White House need to take a deep breath and think very seriously about this election result, because I think we're at a very important turning point this is either a temporary interruption of what has been a gradually consolidating center-right majority, or this is a breakdown of that center-right majority leading to a significant effort to establish a center-left government majority."
This statement demonstrates Gingrich's extreme lack of insight.
Such a statement would only have allowed Dems to trumpet, "See? Pres. Bush is admitting he has failed" and even more seats would have been lost.
The problem is that it is impossible to claim to represent a higher personal moral standard and escape being held to that standard. We set ourselves up.
I love Newt's honesty regarding GWB. Since Bush is now a lame duck, he needs to get used to this sort of thing.
Medved didn't say Republicans aren't responsible for anything that happened. He did say the Republicans would still have the Senate today if not for a couple of third party candidates. Not exactly the same statement.
Maybe you should visit St. Lucie county, florida someday.
There are more republicans than that here. Way more.
Hell, there are double that amount.
Dick Armey said the exact opposite. You weren't listening.
He said the GOP had better cut back its spending and become conservative again.
Newt is spot on but I think he shouldn't run for President. He has too many enemies.
Romney/Giuliani for president.
Should we just shut-up? Should we fear that we look like them, act like them? They will laugh no matter how we act and still think themselves superior.
Any dummy reading this should know that I could not possibly care less about how they see me, I care for this COUNTRY, which makes me better than the best Dummycrat.
See you have based your argument on ALL of the wrong questions.
Reagan knew who the audience was. You and the bashers do not know or have forgotten.
You do not win by trying to score points from bashing your own side.
I don't believe he "fired" him. He announced it, which saddens me too, but I have no doubt Rummy knew he could never work with this crowd. I wouldn't. They smeared a good man.
You weren't listening listening to Laura Ingraham when he was on then. Yes, he did say that about spending but that was not all he said
Newt is right on this one. Regardless of who the messenger is, after hearing Bush's press conference I was fed up and done with the man.
At least, I hope after this election the Bush political family is done for. I do not want to see another Bush in the White House after this. The conservative movement has been back stabbed by two of them to date.
As much as I adore Reagan, I never believed in the 11th Commandment. If all Republicans are above criticism you end up with the RINO situation we have.
This is not the first time a President has lied to us, and it won't be the last.
Get over it and accept him for what he is.
It's also important to remember that 1998 was not the "sixth year" of Clinton's presidency. Rather, it was actually the second year of "Part II" of the administration of that disordered freak. By 1998, Bill Clinton was basically functioning as a Republican president entering the second half of his term -- having already signed most of the Contract with America into law.
.
I invite you to read my comments at post #200.
I am, however, deeply concerned with ethical standards, and in that the dems are bankrupt.
It is a classic move by the MSM to blend the two together as if there is no difference, when, in fact, the differences are huge.
Newt's private moral behavior with his private life are one thing that doesn't automatically disqualify a fine politician from participating in the GOP, and helping America by so doing.
And, thank you. I do see your point.
Thank you for correcting my typo . . . You are correct, the date was 1998 NOT 1996!
Ping
Halls:
because i believe if you have a failed marriage than it shows you will likely fail in other areas in your life
What??????
What kind of convoluted thinking lead you to that conclusion?
There are many of us out here who are divorced who lead very succesful lives.
Newt certainly has a pattern of failed marriages. It may reflect poorly on him, but it reflects equally poorly on the women who followed wife #1.
Heh. Which is?
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.