That’s not the same. I give Gingrich a lot of credit for successfully wresting control of the House from that other party.
I think, though, that one should pause and consider why his former colleagues in the House are not exactly effusive in their support of his candidacy for president.
I am not arguing in favor of any candidate, but Gingrich is about as erratic was one person can be. His lack of focus would be absolutely disastrous in the White House.
See Servant of the Cross' Post 142
As a matter of fact, for the record, Newt was kicked out by the Moderates(!) ....
"There is no doubt in my mind he had the votes to win the Speakership, but I'm not sure he had the votes to govern," said Kenneth M. Duberstein, a former White House chief of staff ... .... from the article (drum roll please) .....
"What I believe desperately needs to take place is to heal the alienation that currently exists," said Representative Steve Largent of Oklahoma, a ‘conservative’ football Hall of Famer who announced his own challenge today to Mr. Gingrich's second-in-command, Representative Dick Armey of Texas.
The heart of the Speaker's problems, many Republicans said, is that he had never made an adequate adjustment from being the minority to being the majority, from intense backbench opposition to governing.
The hard-edged partisan bite that worked for Mr. Gingrich in the minority came across as stridency in power, Republicans said. ''Whenever we try to go on the offensive, the White House tries to make Newt the issue and whenever that happens we lose,'' said Peter T. King, a Republican from Long Island.
...... AND the "piste de résistance" ...
When Mr. Gingrich allowed Representative John R. Kasich of Ohio, the budget committee chairman, to try to rally House Republicans around a conservative blueprint for more than $100 billion in new savings, the moderates refused to back it.
I have wondered why some of his former colleagues aren’t very supportive,and it could be that he was erratic. But I don’t remember it at the time. It’s what they say now, but consider that they are all protecting their own interests. Maybe they fear Newt because they weren’t loyal to the speaker at the time. I tend to put more weight behind what Dick Cheney says as compared to Jim Talent or Susan Mollinari.
I’m not saying that he wasn’t erratic (unstable or even zany), but I don’t necessarily trust what some former colleageus say. I don’t know what their motive is and I haven’t heard any outrageous examples of his so called erratic behavior.