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."
You do it how Reagan did it!
LLS
I only disagree with Newt's criticisms and I gave him his due. I agree with you.
LLS
I remember playing for a really good football team. We beat every team that came up against us. Then one game, we lost by 2 points.
For the next two days, there was a lot of griping, complaining, blaming, hysteria, etc.
The team that beat us thought they had achieved the pinnacle of success. They were jazzed. They were so happy and excited.
We thought we were doomed.
Somewhere during the week, after a few days of whining, the coach pulled us together and said... "HEY GUYS!!!! Lets' knock off the whining and start winning!"
We shook it off and went to the next game and won 42-6 against the toughest team in our league (other than us).
I am really looking forward to the third day....
Understood. But explain Reagan's 11th commandment.
Did you consider he was not concerned with what the rats think either?
And let me assure you he wasn't.
When you figure out what audience Reagan was considering when he made his 11th commandment, then you will be on th road to setting things right.
Until then you are part of the problem instead of being part of the soloution.
I guess you'll just have to think harder. It may come to you.
Although, with Islamic fundamentalist targeting us, it could be a different world then.
In any event we have to get conservatives elected. Unfortunately having an (R) after your name does not guarantee that. - tom
Reagan was, uh, "courting" Wyman while Wyman was still married to her previous husband.
Mayhe Condoleeza Rice -- and that's my final answer, Regis. LOL.
"I don't think it would have made a hill of beans worth of difference."
I agree. For those who are complaining now, there would have been an equal amount mad then. The result would still be that out of spite, conservatives stayed home. Out of their individual grievances they refused to go to the polls and support what is good and right about the republican party...taxes, economy, military, wot, judges.
This collective temper tantrum just lost us control.
This why I will never vote for Newt in a primary.
The same with me. I think the people had it in their heads for change.
I see now, it's like that old 1970's commercial "never let them see you sweat". Understood. The first time I ever voted it was for Reagan. I should know better.
Clinton's 6th year election was 1998, Dems gained 5 house seats no change in the Senate. Real History using Real Numbers Kinda blows your theory away.
Newt's right.
And yes, even if you've divorced someone, you still can be right.
The lesson there was that Impeachment backfired, just as it would backfire on the Rats if they tried to impeach President Bush. They aren't stupid, although I wish they were.
I strongly disagree.
I agree.
You have it backwards. The movement began failing when he left and Delay et al went for entrenched power instead of continued reform. In 1993-94 Newt and the "movement" complained about 1,500 "earmarks" in House legislation. This year alone, the GOP led House passed along 15,000 "earmarks" worth $10 billion dollars, while Tom Delay said there was no meat to cut from the budget and Senator Stevens praised his multi-million dollar bridge to nowhere, as his right. I am not sure the politically motivated "ethics" charges against Newt even begin to approach the super-expansion of the vote-buying of Congressional earmarks. There are no "ethics" charges available for such outrageous behavior, simply because the Dims want the "earmarks" system, not because it is any less politically corrupt.
Yes the 11th commandment was "for the people" not for the Democrats.
Project calm and command and a positive message and when you disagree do it with a smile on your face, especially with those on your team.
Reagan was the master at this. It is why he was able to convince my Grandfather who had voted a straight Democrat ticket his entire life, to vote for Reagan.
Newt is not acting like Reagan, he is acting like an idiot, even though just about every word he said was true.
Politically he would be excellent leading a Reagan Conservative renewal of the Republican party.
He does have some baggage, after this election I don't think we will find a politican that doesn't have baggage of sort or another.
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.