Why not Newt?

American Thinker ^ | August 18, 2007 | Bob Weir

[neverdem]

Newt Gingrich is a possible late entrant into the 2008 presidential race. Recently, at a National Press Club appearance, the former Speaker spoke critically about the process that ultimately chooses a candidate.

"We've invented a system where we've replaced big city machine bosses with consultant bosses. Read the newspaper coverage: ‘who's your pollster? What advertising firm did you hire? Who did you hire in Iowa? Who did you hire in South Carolina?' This is the new boss system. The job of the candidate is to raise the money to hire the consultants to do the focus groups to figure out the 30 second answers to be memorized by the candidates. This is stunningly dangerous."

Mr. Gingrich went on to talk about the debate system (which he refers to as auditions) that supposedly helps the voters to select the best person for the job.

"Then you combine the stultifying, exhausting, shrinking process with the way these auditions have occurred. These aren't debates! These are a cross between 'The Batchelor,' 'American Idol' and who's smarter than a fifth-grader."

Talking about "gotcha" politics, Gingrich said:

"Candidates are held to a rigidity standard, while their answers are held to a 30 second sound bite standard that is frankly absurd. ‘What's your answer on Iraq in 30 seconds? What's your answer on health care in 30 seconds.'"

The former Speaker was talking about the ludicrous and demeaning process by which we select the person that we hope will lead us into the future. The question is, if we make a circus out of the process and the candidates submit like trained seals, how can we respect their leadership abilities? If the best they can do is follow the lead of paid consultants, how in the world can they be qualified to lead America? Perhaps we should elect their consultants.

Gingrich proposes a solution:

"I believe that every candidate should be challenged to commit that if they are their party's nominee, that they would agree to meet once a week with their main opponent and the two of them would have a dialogue. There are 2 core premises: The first is that it has to be open ended; you should give the answer the length your answer should be; the second is, it should be focused on a series of large questions around which people would be expected to bring solutions. I think two things would happen. First, an amazing percentage of the American people would watch and in the age of the Internet, all the dialogue would be cached and people could go back to it, people would analyze it and take it apart and I think the candidates would grow and change. The American people would have a remarkable sense after nine, ninety minute conversations in their living rooms about the two personalities and which person they thought had the right ideas, the right character and the right capacity to be a leader."

Mr. Gingrich was saying what many Americans are probably thinking: that the current electoral system has become overly dependent on money and the ability of highly paid consultants to groom candidates and market them to the voters like breakfast cereal.

"The Founding Fathers did not invent this process for the enrichment of consultants or for the cynical maneuvering of those who seek power. They invented this process to enable the American people to determine who they would lend power to. And the process should start with; what is the kind of campaign the American people need in order to have the kind of country they deserve?"

Like Rush Limbaugh in his first best-seller, Mr. Gingrich was talking about the way things ought to be.  Sadly, with his impeccable conservative credentials and proven leadership ability, the former mastermind of the "Contract with America," is currently but  a blip on the presidential radar screen.

Bob Weir is a former detective sergeant in the New York City Police Department. He is the executive editor of The News Connection in Highland Village, Texas.  Email Bob

[Auntie Toots]

You said, “Why not Newt?
Too much baggage.”

I totally agree with you!

[NonValueAdded]

Waaaaaaaay too much baggage. Idea man? great; leadership skills? he already crashed and burned.

[LibLieSlayer]

You forgot to mention takes gloBull warming cruises to Alaska... the snuggle up lovey kind... with hildebeast and a cast of his liberal brothers and sisters... and admonishes the BASE (us) because we dare complain that he hangs out with evil. newt has made himself a pariah and destroyed ALL of his credibility... and he is and has done everything you have listed!

LLS

[wgflyer]

I don’t think Newt is presidential material. He performed badly as speaker, given the momentum he came in with. He has great wisdom, but was unable to lead. It would be better to have him as an adviser.

[wgflyer]

Why not HUNTER?

Eactly!

[Stars&StripesNE]

Newt's half sister Candace is a lesbian; neither of his daughters are.

Newt didn't serve his ex-wife divorce papers while she was ill. They had discussed divorce prior to her hospitalization and he remained with her until she was healthy again.

He is brilliant and his ability to articulate his ideas is demonstrated in every speech, lecture or appearance on television.

His negatives began after his Contract With America was a success and the Republicans regained control of Congress for the first time in 40 years. The press began its relentless attacks and have never stopped.

Newt probably doesn't have a chance because he has been pounded relentlessly by the press and the Democrats since 1994. That tells me he would be a good choice.

[jer33 3]

I’ll agree with another poster that Newt would better serve as an adviser than as President. If the man could not honor his vows to his wife before the Lord, then why would be believe that he would act honorably as President. On the other hand... Go Hunter:-)

[\/\/ayne]

Because I never heard Gingrich explain if he was or was not being blackmailed to keep evidence out of the Judiciary Committee hearings during the impeachment beginning.

He stonewalled everything except the Monica stuff nobody cared about and we all wondered why? Why wasn't Billy Dale subpeonad for Travelgate and Filegate? What about John Huang? Juanita Broaddrick?

Pornographer Larry Flynt bragged he had information on Congressmen having affairs and they better not impeach Clinton or he'd use it. Later Gingrich suddenly resigned and it turned out he was one of those having an affair with a staffer while concentrating on Clinton's minor Monica related crimes.

Every time I see him on a TV show I change the channel. I really don't care what he says anymore. Perhaps he does have some good ideas, but it's too late for that in my mind.

[Non-Sequitur]

Has lesbian daughter--check

I believe you're thinking about his sister. And regardless of which it is, what the hell did Gingrich have to do with it anyway?

[R.W.Ratikal]

Newt Gingrich would have no chance of being elected president. America has moved too far into socialism. Gingrich believes in Constitutional rule of law, the free enterprise economic system, private property, personal freedoms and liberty and that the U. S. should maintain a strong national defense. Furthermore he believes we should protect our national sovereignty and preserve and protect traditional American values.

[ArkansasBushfan]

Why not Newt, because he is a jerk. Let him go teach history.

[GBA]

I was a Newt fan until he had his global warming coming out “debating” with John F’in’ Kerry.

[politeia]

He stonewalled everything except the Monica stuff nobody cared about and we all wondered why?

Yes, he cratered on leading the impeachment fight and instead of explaining to the American people why we can not maintain in office a President who would lie in a citizen's case and therby violate his oath of office and his most sacred duty to pursue justice he focused on the Monica sex stuff and downplayed the constitutional issues. I don't know whether his failure to lead on impeachment was because he was being blackmailed but he lost my support then forever. When "we the people" needed his leadership, he failed us.

Also, he is a political opportunist. His anti-illegal immigration talk is all recent stuff. He is merely climbing on the bandwagon. While he was in office he was a globalist through and through. As speaker he could have brought the illegal immigration issue the attention it deserved, but he was pretty much silent. He didn't care then and I really don't believe he cares now.

[ex-snook]

" Why not Newt? "

He's a neocon empire builder.