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."
Amen to that,and oh so much more. I think dems will rue the day. Meanwhile the repubs need to learn from this election and if they are sincere in what they say they stand for come up with some leaders of integrity to get us there next election. It's a daunting challenge but it must be done.(IMO)
Will do, and paddle like hell underneath!
"Precious from a guy who cut tail and run when his backside was under fire after giving his opponents ammunition."
The history of events does not agree with your "cut tail and run" characterization. A House group within the GOP forced him to resign because they felt they needed to "cut tail and run" from the media.
Not quite, message is correct, but he delivered it in the wrong manner. Thus he is wrong for the big chair, and should not get the chance.
Newt has his place, as an attack dog.
But he should not be the voice of the Conservatives.
And so far I see none that should be.
It is so obvious. Anybody so angry now would have been incredibly angry if Bush had let Rummy announce his resignation before the election. There is no way to calculate the damage to the election that would have done. Incalculable.
Newt is way too smart to believe the twaddle about how much it would have saved us in the election. Now as to FReepers claiming it, I pass. But I don't pass on the brilliant Newt.
BTW, the House outcome was worse than Newt predicted. By a 2 or 3 fold factor, as Newt gave a range of numbers all the way from barely hanging on to barely losing control.
I'm not faulting whoever missed it, but President Bush and Karl Rove and Newt Gingrich all missed it. The first two just missed it a little worse. No perfection here, by anybody.
Heheh Same here!
That's not fair...you never know what goes on in a marriage.
Correct -- the year WAS 1998 vs 1996 (which I indicated in a previous post); however, my commentary stands. NEWT was responsible for the HOUSE and rather than GAINING seats he actually LOST seats.
Are you actually arguing that he did NOT resign in response to this political FAILURE? . . . which by the way happened a mere 4 years after 'the revolution' of 1994.
I sure miss the Gipper (sigh).
Newt and 80-90% of the rest of the republicans.
I think more than anything Bush is hurt rather than angry that the turnout was so low. I never dreamed only 20% of our party would get out and do their civic duty. It truly was a shock and a slap in his face.
I do rather like Newt but I hate to see him go this route of trashing Bush. I imagine tho a lot of us are scrambling to blame someone.
I am so very sad at that pathetic turnout. I've said it a million times, we should have won.
I agree, remove the thin layers of most single issues and the heart is going to be Iraq, and the middle-of-the-road voter.
This administration more or less allowed the leftist dems and media to define the war. It was an uphill battle, I realise that, but most people, especially the squishy middle voter, only wants to know how it helps them. It was a wrong tack to take by trying to excite people by telling them of the great things that were being done for Iraqis. The fence-sitters don't care that Iraqis had a new power plant come on-line, or got a new water treatment facility.
This loss was due to bad communication, the bad decision to run away from conservative values, and a squishy middle voter who needs to be told that they will get something out of voting for the Republicans.
What about Rudy?
McClintock lost. The only true California Republican lost.
Twice!!
That was the saddest loss to me in this entire election. Having McClintock lose was bad.
If Republicans had won big in this election, who do you suppose would be taking a big share of the credit? President Bush. He's probably not the type to boast personally, but Republicans everywhere, including Freepers, would be talking about his long coattails and the effectiveness of his campaigning, blah, blah, blah. I've been a huge Bush fan, but his decisions, and indecisions, directly affected this election.
5 seats, kept the majority hardly a terrible loss. Newt was ousted becuase the Rats targeted him and threw everything but the kitchen sink at him. And as usual, the GOP decided to toss him to the wolves as damnaged goods, rather then defend him. Rats by the way tend to strongly defend thier own, GOP doesn't. Newts mistakes were book deal, back of the plane comments LOL, and caving to Clinton on shutting down the government. Nothing illegal or corrupt just bad judgement calls, and nobody calls every play right.
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.