Posted on 11/15/2011 6:31:37 AM PST by St. Louis Conservative
The thought startles.
Is Newt Gingrich America's Winston Churchill?
The former Speaker has repeatedly dazzled in the ongoing series of GOP presidential debates. He is "the adult in the room," the man Republicans keep saying they would like to see on the debate stage with Barack Obama.
The latest polls (Wall Street Journal, CBS, and Marist) have him vaulting into a tie with Mitt Romney behind Herman Cain or leapfrogging Cain to barely trail Romney. This video of a Frank Luntz focus group that appeared on Sean Hannity's TV show following a recent GOP debate is typical of the changing reaction to the Georgian. Gingrich is a long way from the low single digits he registered at the beginning of the campaign.
But Churchill? America's Churchill?
There are all manner of people -- including some conservatives -- who would faint dead away at the comparison.
They shouldn't.
First, Mr. Churchill.
One of the ironies of history that is that those figures who have morphed from flesh-and-blood reality to marbleized icons always seem to lose their humanity. This is true, in fact, of most people. Great-Aunt Sally whose habits or manner or outrageous behavior here and there proved so infuriating in life becomes the iconic family elder after passing into eternity, her descendants fondly telling Great-Aunt Sally stories and holding her up to the youngest generation as a family role model.
So it is with public figures, and so it was with Winston Churchill.
In his childhood his father thought him a major disappointment, the father himself a star -- an infuriating star -- to his colleagues in British politics.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Thanks for posting that, xzins. Wish I had time to sink my teeth into this topic, but other concerns are pressing today :(
The American Spectator is really scraping the bottom of the barrel these days.
Now, that's humor in a jugular vein.......
Could be. Churchill got his head handed to him in an election against Socialists too.
These guys are just making it too obvious.
Churchill??? Gag!
The famous myth of the first Gingrich divorce is discussed here by Gingrich's daughter Jackie Gingrich Cushman, who was present at the time. Surprise, surprise -- fact, says Ms. Cushman, is different than left-wing fiction. The first Mrs. Gingrich, a private person, is very much still alive, present and accounted for and not deceased as in the tale.The story runs roughly that the dastardly Newt took divorce papers to his dying wife's bedside when she had no idea a divorce was in the offing, shocking her as she lay dying. In fact Mrs. Gingrich, says her daughter, had herself requested the divorce long before Gingrich entered her hospital room. The story, says Cushman, is fiction from start to finish.
Gingrich's political mistake was not understanding that such a personal moment would be distorted and used by liberal opponents. Out of such a moment perhaps comes the Newtonian understanding of the need for a political rapid response team whose sole purpose is to flag political untruths on the spot. Be that as it may, this tale shows the endurance of a political Bigfoot tale, the political equivalent of the fictional monster repeatedly spotted but mysteriously never actually captured because, of course, in fact it doesn't exist.
The interesting irony of what is shaping up as political reality in the 2012 Republican campaign is that those who may well be troubled by Gingrich's personal life are more troubled by Romney's flip-flopping political life and apparent dedication to management over principle.
Undiplomatically put, if front-runner Romney is a man without personal blemish and all manner of political warts, conservatives may prefer the man with the consistent political life and the long-known once thoroughly inconsistent personal life. A personal life that now in fact seems what it is, that of a securely married 68-year old grandfather. Indeed, this story from the Washington Times says this Romney/Gingrich personal versus political phenomenon is already in play in Iowa, with evangelicals tilting to Gingrich for just this reason
Add to this that Newt was a 16 year old minor when his 1st wife, his high school geometry teacher began an affair with him. That same act just put a woman in prison for 4 years in our town of Mason, here in the greater Cincinnati area.
FREEREPUBLIC NEEDS TO POST THE NEAREST BARF BAG LOCATIONS FOR MEMBERS ALONG WITH SUCH POSTS.
Hope you have a great day.
Bookmark this article. It is excellent.
The famous myth of the first Gingrich divorce is discussed here by Gingrich's daughter Jackie Gingrich Cushman, who was present at the time. Surprise, surprise -- fact, says Ms. Cushman, is different than left-wing fiction. The first Mrs. Gingrich, a private person, is very much still alive, present and accounted for and not deceased as in the tale.The story runs roughly that the dastardly Newt took divorce papers to his dying wife's bedside when she had no idea a divorce was in the offing, shocking her as she lay dying. In fact Mrs. Gingrich, says her daughter, had herself requested the divorce long before Gingrich entered her hospital room. The story, says Cushman, is fiction from start to finish.
Gingrich's political mistake was not understanding that such a personal moment would be distorted and used by liberal opponents. Out of such a moment perhaps comes the Newtonian understanding of the need for a political rapid response team whose sole purpose is to flag political untruths on the spot. Be that as it may, this tale shows the endurance of a political Bigfoot tale, the political equivalent of the fictional monster repeatedly spotted but mysteriously never actually captured because, of course, in fact it doesn't exist.
The interesting irony of what is shaping up as political reality in the 2012 Republican campaign is that those who may well be troubled by Gingrich's personal life are more troubled by Romney's flip-flopping political life and apparent dedication to management over principle.
Undiplomatically put, if front-runner Romney is a man without personal blemish and all manner of political warts, conservatives may prefer the man with the consistent political life and the long-known once thoroughly inconsistent personal life. A personal life that now in fact seems what it is, that of a securely married 68-year old grandfather. Indeed, this story from the Washington Times says this Romney/Gingrich personal versus political phenomenon is already in play in Iowa, with evangelicals tilting to Gingrich for just this reason
Add to this that Newt was a 16 year old minor when his 1st wife, his high school geometry teacher, began an affair with him. That same act just put a woman in prison for 4 years in our town of Mason, here in the greater Cincinnati area.
The Newt vs. Winston comparison is, right now anyway, way over the top. Despite the relatively easy comparisons between the two in their earlier years, the era that Churchill lived in provided an opportunity for his character to surface. Character that was not always evident in his younger days.
But if the struggles of an era reveal the bedrock character of a man thrust into leadership for the time, I would certainly prefer to place my bet on someone who has failed and admitted it and had the courage to get back in the arena rather than someone who has failed and refuses to admit it (Obama) or someone who appears to have never “failed” and whose biggest struggle seems to have been to stand up to withering media scrutiny over letting his dog ride on the roof of his car (Romney).
Whoever said that the American electorate can be very forgiving certainly has not met the anti-Newt contingent at Free Republic. How they could prefer four more years of Obama to casting a vote for Gingrich (or even Romney for that matter) strikes me as a childish temper tantrum, a matter of arrested development. As Rumsfeld noted, you go to war with the army you have. And right now, Gingrich is, perhaps, the most powerful part of that army. If he gains the nomination and Republicans and conservatives choose not to rally around him (or yes, even Mitt if that should be the unfortunate case), they will most certainly wind up with the government they deserve.
Well, I’ve read a few biographies of him, and his passions seemed limited to booze and politics.
Excellent point. The desire on the part of the electorate to choose only those with no clay is frightening because there are no candidates like that. But when the people choose to be in denial about it, it gives the victor license to believe that he really does have no faults. The longing for the rescuer on the white horse is the reason that Hitler was elected (and I mean no direct comparison here) it is also the reason that Obama was elected.
We don't need someone on a white horse. we need someone who will never, never, never, never, give up. (As the Churchill authority I am certain you can set us straight as to how may 'nevers' he used.) ;-)
He’s no Churchill, but he’s definitely not a Chamberlain.
I seem to remember a guy who balanced the budget, got Clinton to sign welfare reform, and organized the first GOP takeover of both houses of Congress in 40 years.
Nope, no conservative leader here, nothing to see, move along...
Interesting way to look at it.
While the men have far different lives, the way they are percieved in their time may be an apt comparison.
Excellent points.
During the 2008 campaign I distinctly remember multitudes of posters stating they would abstain or vote 3rd party rather than for McCain.
An understandable position, but one that may have played at least some part in getting Obama elected. If so, I hope those who jumped ship are proud of what they accomplished.
It is just a fact of life that serious people, when faced with a binary choice, neither of which they are happy with, choose the lesser of two weevils.
Does someone need to put down the crack pipe?
No. Churchill could keep his pants zipped.
If Newt was a true believer, he would have stayed in Congress, even after losing his job as Speaker, and would have continued to fight there for what he believed in.
Churchill in 1934, was ostracized by his own party, but continued to speak out against Hitler, in an atmosphere where the British people, still stinging from WWI, didn’t want to hear it. But Winnie never gave up, and eventually events proved him right.
It’s an insult to Churchill’s memory to even put the two in the same sentence.
And since those high flying days he has folded to liberalism many times. I don’t trust him as far as I can throw him, and any conservative who does is blind as a bat. He is better than Romney and that is about it. If he had a backbone to match his intellect, and a strong foundation of conservative principles, he would be a great force to be reckoned with.....oh well.
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.