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 is a bit irrational. Jeb Bush is head and shoulders over his dad and brother.
I have seen Jeb in Florida, he has done a great job.
They've had a great week.
I guess you're right.
The thing to do now is pul together and plan how to fight the fiends who have stolen Congress.
btt 4 l8r
The ex wives club is out with a fury this morning.
Newt has the best mind on the polotical map. He was exterminated by the Rats and many of the good guys are still duped into believing the drivel.
Thank you for pointing out American History as it REALLY happened.
LLS
I was not bashing my side. I believe in open dialog, not in how the dialog looks.
The point was we do not need to worry about what liberal, socialists, democrats think about the whole thing (you seem to have left that part of my answer out to score your own point).
We should work through this the best we know how and to heck with how it looks to democrats, dummycrats..any rat.
Gingrich should be taking note that there are already a couple free-floating mines in the way of the D ship.
Agree or disagree, Newt is not afraid to tell it "as it is." Pesonally, I would have preferred to have Rumsfeld kept on if we as a nation wanted to respond intelligently to the challenges we must confront in the ever-changing GWOT.
He didn't wait until after the loss. He has been giving a little dig here and a little dig there for quite some time now. Tuesdays loss now gives him the forum to stop beating around the bush and openly attack in prep for '08.
He was hired specifically to clean up the Pentagon, make the defense appropriations process more efficient, and run the Defense Department more like a business than an ATM machine. He was the perfect guy for the job because he possessed the three attributes absolutely critical for it --- 1) his no-nonsense approach, 2) his lack of political ambition, and 3) his personal wealth.
The combination of Items 2 and 3 was critical because it meant he could tell individual members of Congress to go f#%& themselves -- and stick their pet pork appropriations up their @sses -- without worrying about the long-term fallout for him. These attributes also served him -- and this country -- well in the immediate aftermath of 9/11, but they were completely incompatible with managing the kind of debacle that has unfolded in Iraq.
You're welcome. {Newt? Is that you? -G-}
My blood pressure's just now returning to a safe level. ;^)
"Newt is right, as usual..."
Yea.
So what is it about the truth that scares people so much?
I don't get it.
Do those who're (so easily) scared think for one instant the Rights going to go anywhere if we cannot listen to constructive criticism of our side, by those of our side?
I mean we're not talking about a[nother] smear by the putrid likes of quislings staffing The Associated Press and/or Reuters, are we?
...and is an intellectual and visionary giant when compared to the current GOP leadership."
Or anyone else, for that matter.
"This election was a repudiation of the President, plain and simple, and while much of the criticism is malicious and undeserved, the White House seems unwilling or unable to respond in any meaningful way."
Look we as conservatives MUST support this POTUS until the end of his term.
Hopefully he'll support us in kind.
If the past counts for anything, [that] prospect isn't very encouraging.
Yet he *must* be gracious (in defeat) so I temper whatever he says with a grain of salt.
For my part I'll be watching -- like a hawk -- what he does and not necessarily what he says.
Beyond that it doesn't matter who's responsible at this stage anymore, not at this moment.
Tomorrow's all that counts.
If the right learned nothing else surely they remember how the Liberal-Socialists rallied around Clintigula, who was directly responsible for the disaster they weathered in '94.
Different times today, granted.
While because of [that] difference we may never have another chance regardless of WHO leads us, one thing that must never change, must remain the same.
...our loyalty.
I have to agree with him that if they were planning for Rumsfeld to retire it should have been done before the election. If this could have saved even 1 or 2 Senate seats and a handful of House seats, it could have been worth it as long as Rumsfeld was going to leave anyway. If they had to wait until after the election they should have given it a few weeks. Now it looks like capitulation.
He's a very smart man and he is very worth listening to. He is the only politician/commentator that if he is on TV, I stop doing something else to hear what he is saying.
But he will not be a force in 2008. He is unelectable.
And if he believes he is, and runs, then it will be another instance of a smart man allowing hubris to overcome reason. He will get his ass handed to him.
Republicans would be wise to recognize that immediately or if they nominate him, he will drive the party over a cliff.
Newt is a statesman and a good thinker. He could lead if he stays on course. I also remember the thrill of 1994 and I wrote him thanks.
When I heard rumors about his personal life, I was disappointed but hopeful that they were wrong. The last thing I remember Newt doing while in office was appearing with Bill Clinton (or was it Hillary) all smiles and hand shaking in some public appearance and my stomach turned. Maybe his "power" and "self-importance" went to his head at the time. Is he still a mega-lomaniac?
Newt's words are inspirational. He is smart and thoughtful and strong but I view him a little differently than before that public appearance. But then as Rush said, there are no spotless conservatives because the democrats won't let there be. But I wonder if Newt is too polka dotted for me to fully trust him. Maybe he can prove he has turned a new leaf.
I do agree with his assessment but his comments may be self-serving.
What is occurring in Iraq is not the military's fault. And therefore not Rumsfeld's fault.
It is the fault of political/deplomatic decisions.
Rumsfeld should not have been the one to go.
No one here trusts the Democrats or the MSM so why do you trust that the fault is due to the person they despise.
Maybe the fault is with the person they never blame.
I getting closer and closer to accepting that conclusion. Sad.
Do you think that you are the only person that was paying attention to politics? I have been since kennedy. Reagan pounded Bush's policies but NEVER the man! He also nominated him as his VP.
LLS
Newt realizes that he can't win the Presidential nomincation, but he enjoys being in the public eye, and influencing the debate.
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.