I have been a fan of Newt Gingrich for nearly a quarter-century. I first heard him speak in the summer of 1982 at the College Republicans’ 90th anniversary and was impressed with his energy and his vision. At the time, he seemed a younger version of Ronald Reagan. He could well and succinctly promote conservative ideas, using terms and anecdotes to which ordinary people — as well as idealistic college students — could relate.
I applied to intern with him and worked in his office the following summer. I had hoped that this smart, principled man could serve as a mentor to me. Instead, I saw a human dynamo, a man always moving. He didn’t even have a desk in his office.
So focused was Newt on the big picture that he rarely attended committee meetings and did not seem much interested in the details of legislation. (The latter quality not too different from Ronald Reagan.) He had countless ideas for how to build the GOP nationally, such that I predicted he would neglect the Georgia district he represented and lose his seat in 1990. (That year, he barely held onto his seat, winning reelection by only 974 votes.)
Despite my appreciation for the former House Speaker’s commitment to conservative principles, I think he would make a lousy president. He is more a philosopher than a statesman. Whereas former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has distinguished himself as a leader, Gingrich has distinguished himself as an idealistic pugilist, more eager to put forward his ideas, engage his intellectual adversaries than to take decisive action.
Powerline‘s Paul Mirengoff agrees. To be sure, he did appreciate Newt’s presentation last night at Cooper Union with former New York Governor Mario Cuomo. But, he finds the former House Speaker “more valuable doing what he is doing at present.” (Over at National Review Online, Stephen Spruiell offers a good summary of the event.)
Paul’s got that one right. Newt is more valuable doing what he’s doing at present. We need outspoken men of ideas like Gingrich on our side. Removed from elective office, he can serve his party better since he no longer has to mince his words. He can tell the truth about the state of his party. And he has, having become an excellent critic of the GOP, attempting to keep his fellow Republicans “honest,” that is, true to our principles.
And that’s why he should continue to speak out in fora like that at Cooper Union — and on TV talk shows. But, he should not throw his hat into the presidential ring unless his purpose is to remind his fellow Republicans that they are seeking the mantle of Ronald Reagan — and taking on that mantle means articulating and defending conservative ideas.
Outside of politics, the former House Speaker has dedicated himself to promoting to those ideas. It would nice if more Republicans who are in the arena showed a similar commitment.
Good piece, Dan. I would like to see Newt either as Giuliani’s veep or as GOP chair instead of Mel Martinez. Just my $0.02 for the record.
Regards,
Peter H.
I’m with Peter.
No one (well, no one of any import) disagrees that Newt is very bright and a very effective communicator. The crucial role of the VP nominee is that of Pit Bull — attack the opposition and draw their fire while deflecting and protecting the Presidential candidate. And most understand that the role of Vice President is worth about this much. Perhaps there is no one better for this than the architect of the Contract With America to articulate the philosophical underpinnings of the GOP (he’s a bit conservative for my taste, although as a libertarian/moderate Republican I’m willing to sacrifice Purity for the greater good — God forbid I should suggest a conservative do the same), someone who can keep the political discourse focused on the big ideas rather than on the petty personal distractions. Newt has enough of them of his own, I suppose. However, making the argument that he is perhaps best in a supporting role would ignore his eventual virtual incumbency as Vice President — one can hardly argue that he isn’t Presidential material while forgetting that a Presidential candidate must be fashioned from that very material as a political necessity. At this point, he is likely best suited as Court Jester and Fool, except one very much aware of his own profundity.
In the end, the protestations re. Giuliani’s personal life may be moot in that if Hillary is the Democratic nominee, there can’t very well be a high moral imperative. In this same vein, it may nonethelss be that in the minds of some independent voters, a nostalgic though misguided look back to the Clinton years might compare favorably for Rudy — that connecting the messy personal lives of Bill Clinton and Rudy Giuliani might ring true in the subconscious of the independent vote, even if a conscious comparison of the two proves its falsity. Maybe all those years of Clinton-bashing were worth it after all. Ironic, no?
Does the military allow men and women to bunk or shower together? Why should they let a gay men bunk and shower with straight men or lesbians with straight women!
The homosexuals would sure feel like they were being harassed if they put the gay guys and gals with the OPPOSITE sex wouldn’t they!
A Head on a US Navy ship:
“Damit Harry! You forgot to put down the seat again!”
“Sorry Maxine, my boyfriend has been telling me to act more manly for him.”
“That’s okay, at least you don’t clog the toilets with tampons.”
OR
“Pick all this makeup off the sink Mona, I need to shave!”
“Oops, I have been trying to make it look like I have acne for a young girlfriend of mine.”
*The guy just shakes his head and leaves without shaving*
Newt Gingrich does bring something to the table that is sadly missing from the current GOP … ideas and vision.
The crucial role of the VP nominee is that of Pit Bull — attack the opposition and draw their fire while deflecting and protecting the Presidential candidate.
Except now a-days you get an al Qaeda hit out on you. Pelosi doesn’t get through to the president to whine about what Cheney says. Few days later, AQ tries to take him out. Coincidence? Maybe, but in a world where a guy can commit suicide by shooting himself through a closed car window, I doubt it.
Newt Gingrich does bring something to the table that is sadly missing from the current GOP … ideas and vision.
Comment by V the K — March 1, 2007 @ 6:57 pm – March 1, 2007
++++++++++
how true…….
I have voted for nearly forty years and for Republicans for the Dems did not have what it takes.
this past election, I voted for a Dem for Senator for my Texas Senator has lost touch with the real world and how to take care of America and Americans…..lack of protecting our borders and addressing the growing muslim terrorism in America……among many other problems…….the Republicans have become mirrors of the Democrats………how sad……..
Rudy might make a great President, but his stance on gun control will defeat him…………..the NRA and its members will see to this…………I am also an NRA member.
years ago, i read a bumper sticker that still applies:
“Fear your government that fears your arms.”
what does our government have to fear from its armed citizens, unless our government wishes to subjugate its citizens.
The Texican.
#6 – Exactly – which is why the Clinton regime instituted The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Included in this “gem” of a bill was the seizure of unregistered handguns (later ruled unconstitutional).
Incidentally, Algore’s contribution to this disaster was his remedy for inner-city crime reduction: Midnight Basketball. This insult speaks volumes of his inherent prejudices of what population constitutes the inner-city and what their primary motivation would be.
And just for giggles – wouldn’t Midnight Basketball be a global warming nightmare with all that power used to light up inner-city b-ball courts?
Hypocrisy, thy name is liberalism.
Regards,
Peter H.
Great post Dan. I have always felt that Newt’s personal traits and foibles are ill-suited to a politician. He would be better serving as a senior advisor or idea man. I don’t think he is electable at the national level, let alone the state level in Georgia. Things would have to be grim for the GOP next summer for his weaknesses to be something that could be overlooked.
Things would have to be grim for the GOP next summer for his weaknesses to be something that could be overlooked.
The way I see it, the GOP is gladly overlooking weaknesses of candidates and hoisting them up on pedestals. It seems that folks are way too willing to call some candidates “conservative” even though they aren’t. That, of course, is called “compromise” which is not what we need in 2008.