Posted on 12/07/2011 7:45:51 AM PST by xzins
General Ulysses S. Grant was denounced by rivals as a man who drank far too much. Many called him a drunk. They insinuated he really shouldn't be in command.
In response to that, one source says:
With Halleck out of the way, Grant gained command of the Union Army in the West. Grant had valuable support from several members of Congress and, more importantly, from President Abraham Lincoln. When Lincoln was urged to fire US Grant due to charges of Grant’s drunkeness, careless and bold style or typically large casualty figures, Lincoln said of Grant, “I can’t spare this man. He fights.”
Lincoln had had his taste of generals who had trouble fighting and winning. He'd endured the huge problem of General George McClellan who never had enough troops, never had the right edge, and, therefore, seldom found a good time to actually get to the fight.
Grant, on the other hand, would take the fight to the enemy. When finally given the leadership of the union army, Grant determined that Lee was the tipping point of the South. His plan was to hound Lee until Lee could fight no more. Grant's plan succeeded, but only because Grant was a man, as President Lincoln said, who actually could and would fight.
That is Newt Gingrich. Newt has the tools to fight, he has a very keen-edged ability to fight, and most importantly, he has a burning desire to get into the fight.
Does Gingrich have weaknesses? Sure. Everyone acknowledges that. At the same time, they watched as candidate after candidate went down in flames because of their basic inability or unwillingness to defend themselves. The line of easy or self-inflicted casualties: Pawlenty, Perry, Bachmann, Cain, Paul and....Romney. (Does anyone really want quiet, don't-rock-the-boat, metro-Romney, even if they could tolerate a liberal masquerading as a Republican? Wouldn't that just be the "Second Coming of John McCain"?)
Conservatives aren't saying these were bad people. They are saying they now realize these other candidates had too much Dole/McCain in them: when the fight came to them they proved they either couldn't or wouldn't fight.
So, why Gingrich despite his flaws?
Because he is a bulldog. Because "We can't spare this man. He fights."
Excellent !
Newt would be my choice for President, IF I thought I could trust him. I still cannot.
Comparing Newt to Grant may not win you that many votes down here in the South. Just sayin’. :)
(At least you didn’t compare him to Bill “The Arsonist” Sherman, though...)
}:-)4
Can your choice beat Obama?
Newt is as morally vacuous as he is intellectually superior. Unfortunately, he may well be the last best hope for democracy.
BINGO. Exactly. Newt is the one in the pack that you can COUNT on to kick Zero and the liberal media RIGHT in the teeth if they get in his face. And he will EAT Zero in debates and have that little Kenyan wishing he’d never been whelped.
Trust me, if Romney does get the nod, all the duffus press will talk about is: ‘Well, you know, Mitt belongs to a religion where he thinks he can eventually achieve godhead.’ that’s ALL it will be about. And Mitt wouldn’t kick them in the teeth the way Newt would. Mitt would NEVER have the balls to say: ‘Me? Zero thinks he IS God already!’
Grant was one of the worst Presidents in history.
Great analogy, perfect infact.
"""""That is Newt Gingrich. Newt has the tools to fight, he has a very keen-edged ability to fight, and most importantly, he has a burning desire to get into the fight."""""
And I have the burning desire for NEWT to get in there and get it done. GO BULLDOG NEWT. love it.
Hooah chaplain
ping
I don’t see this as a positive comparison. While Grant was a successful general for the North in the War Between the States, his presidency was a disaster and one that is still remembered for its corruption.
See excerpt from http://qconline.com/archives/qco/display.php?id=429335
A new book by presidential scholar Alvin S. Felzenberg, The Leaders We Deserved (and a Few We Didn"t): Rethinking the Presidential Rating Game places Grant in a tie for seventh place among Presidents Zachary Taylor, William McKinley, Harry Truman and John F. Kennedy. Felzenberg argues that Grant "was the last president before Dwight D. Eisenhower to send federal troops to the South to protect the right of blacks to vote." He also destroyed the earliest version of the Ku Klux Klan, Felzenberg says, and signed the Civil Rights Act of 1875.Although Grant"s administration was plagued by scandals, "when compared to scandals of more recent vintage, those that transpired under Grant were of short duration, inflicted no long-term damage on governmental institutions, did not involve Grant personally, and did not encroach upon the civil liberties of other Americans," writes Felzenberg.
A recent C-SPAN poll of 65 historians moved Grant up from 33rd place to 23rd. And although few would place Grant in the top ten, the 150th anniversary of the Civil War in 2011 is certain to focus more attention on the Galena, Illinois leather merchant who led the Union Army to victory and was twice elected our Chief Executive.
see post #14 for the counter-view
I do not see any of the current crop of candidates beating Obama. Newt is may come the closest. But I cannot vote for a man I do not trust because of what he says.
“Grant was one of the worst Presidents in history.”
And what is your basis for making that claim, esp with Jimmy Carter and, hopefully, Barak Obama in our rear view mirrors?
See post #14
“I don’t see this as a positive comparison. While Grant was a successful general for the North in the War Between the States, his presidency was a disaster and one that is still remembered for its corruption.”
So we’ve been told by the New Deal/Southern agrarian coalition that ran our country and its education in the 1930’s. Prior to that, Grant was admired just about everywhere, except for the South.
Fine. Don’t vote.
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.