It was a good Congress. Unfortunately, it fizzled. And, fizzled due to poor leadership. And, lack of a good standard bearer in the 1996 election cycle.
Newt was definitely good - momentarily.
What about his whole record of 40 years? Not just those 4 years.
****** “ What about his whole record of 40 years? Not just those 4 years. “ *****
I’ll take “4 years” for $1,000 Alex
TT
Go Perry!
Leadership? What you don’t like old what’s his face that followed Newt?
indianrightwinger: “Unfortunately, it fizzled. And, fizzled due to poor leadership.”
I believe that’s an entirely accurate assessment. That begs the question, who was responsible? Newt Gingrich.
It fizzled for the same reason you see arguements here on FR today about the candidates. Leading conservatives is like herding cats. People get insane ideas regarding ideological purity tests, and absolutely will not accept anything less than 100% (even though no candidate actually scores 100%). Once a candidate fails once, they are never willing to forgive them, even if they later recant.
The real insanity comes when you see how convoluted they get to try to justify thier own candidate/position while excoriating another for the exact same thing. Case in point, most on FR love Sarah, and a big thing they criticize Newt for is backing Scozzafava instead of the conservative. They forget that Sarah backed McCain instead of the conservative the same year ... buy you never hear one of them saying that would have made Sarah unfit to be the R nominee do you?
The core advantage the D’s have on us is that they NEVER impose ideological purity tests on thier candidates. Why? Simple ... they know that rather than going for the big win, they can win by going for death by a thousand cuts. They can live with loosing a battle here and there, because in the long run, their agenda moves forward. If the R’s ever want to win and STAY in power, we have to learn to adopt thier tactics and stop destroying our own candidates.
Now you get to the real reason Gingrich is surging. R’s want to win in 2012, and Newt is the most articulate. Newt has gone out of his way to avoid attacking the other R’s, and people notice that. Now, when they attack him, it is easy to come to his defense, because he did nothing to bring the attack on.
Furthermore, the 2%’ers are 2%’ers because they cannot speak well. When you listen to them, you hear a monotony in thier voices that puts you to sleep, because they are saying the exact same thing they say every day. Newt comes along, and he is smart, and instead of giving a stump speech as an answer, he gives a little history lesson on the issue then proclaims his stance, which is justified by the history he just gave. It is refreshing.
Newt is going to win because the rest of the field is weak. I may not agree with 100% of what he has ever said or done, but you know what, I could not support ANY candidate had I put that test up, including Sarah. I am supporting the candidate that can sell the message to the American people, and right now, there is only one of those ... Newt. I am supporting the candidate that is not trying to destroy any of the other candidates ... and again, that is Newt. I am supporting the candidate that has ACCOMPLISHED more as a conservative than all the other candidates combined, and that again, is NEWT.
I pray that Newt will give us a strong VP ... personally I hope it is Sarah on the other half of the ticket again. I do believe he will put conservatives in key positions, like when he talks about Bolton for SoS. I do believe that with him at the helm, even if we do not take back the Senate, he will turn the country around. I cannot say that about any other candidate.