Gingrich’s Virtues

National Review ^ | 12/17/2011 | Andrew C. McCarthy

[Servant of the Cross]

The Editors shortchanged them.

I respectfully dissent from National Review’s Wednesday-evening editorial, which derided Newt Gingrich as not merely flawed but unfit for consideration as the GOP presidential nominee. The Editors further gave the back of the hand to the bids of two other prominent conservatives, Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann — a judgment that is simply inexplicable in light of the frivolousness of its reasoning and of the Editors’ embrace of Jon Huntsman, a moderate former Obama-administration official, as a serious contender.

The editorial surprised me, as it did many readers. I am now advised that the timing was driven by the editorial’s inclusion in the last edition of the magazine to be published this year, which went to press on Wednesday. The Editors believe, unwisely in my view, that before the first caucuses and primaries begin in early January, it is important to make known their insights — not merely views about the relative merits of the candidates but conclusions that some candidates are no longer worthy of having their merits considered. Like many other voters, I haven’t settled on a candidate. What I want at this very early stage is information about the candidates so I can consider them, not a presumptuous and premature pronouncement that good conservatives do not even rate consideration.

Regarding former Speaker Gingrich, I have no objection to the cataloguing of any candidate’s failings, and Newt has certainly made his share of mistakes. But there ought to be balance — balance between a candidate’s failings and his strengths, balance between the treatment of that candidate and of his rivals. The editorial fails on both scores.

Gingrich’s virtues are shortchanged-his great accomplishment in balancing the federal budget is not even mentioned, an odd omission in an election that is primarily about astronomical spending.

[Servant of the Cross]

The best conservative at NR weighs in.

[yldstrk]

Most sociopaths are intelligent and persuasive.

[Jukeman]

It is confirmed: NR has gone completely to the dark side. Huntsman? HUNTSMAN?

[risen_feenix]

NRO are the epitome of the John McCain faux-maverick (i.e., urbane liberal Republican) wing of the GOP. Glad to see one of them has an ounce of sense. Goldberg and crew are pathetic, by and large.

[USS Alaska]

But to declare, as the Editors do, that Gingrich should be “exclude[d] from consideration” is an unfair evaluation of his candidacy; more significantly, it is a disservice to conservatives and other Republicans, who are more than capable of assessing his worthiness vel non.

Andrew McCarthy is smart and fair.

The pompous ass, richie lowrey, hates the Newtster and wants to give more than verbal lewinskys to mittens.

The little twerp couldn't wait to pummel Newt and lump in Santorum and Bachmann.

I'll not pay those bums another dime, ever again.

[mrreaganaut]

I’m fairly sure that Buckley would have voted for Santorum, the Catholic candidate. This whole ‘Mormons are like Catholics because Protestants hate them both’ notion is just a way for Romney to siphon off Catholic support. Sadly, it seems to have worked over at NR.

Lowry seems to have lived on the federal reservation too long and gone native.

[sheikdetailfeather]

Wow! I just read this whole article and he is very fair to Newt as well as our other candidates running. Although the article is lengthy at least it is written fairly and takes a swipe of those who only focus on the flaws of our candidates without giving them a chance. Well worth the read.

[hinckley buzzard]

Andrew McCarthy is probably the leading true conservative commentator around today. What he's doing at NR idk.

[Tex-Con-Man]

A sober and reasoned analysis by Mr. McCarthy. And something I agree with wholeheartedly.

Don't settle for the excerpt...read the entire article.

[Matchett-PI]

bttt

[PALIN SMITH]

The Tea Party won a landslide for the GOP in 2010.

If the GOP doesn't repay it's efforts in 2012, but rather nominates a Rino establishment candidate, the GOP is finished as a major political party.

I will personally start a Tea Party 3rd party......and I'm successful at finishing what I begin!

[redfog]

I strongly agree with you - excellent rebuttle by Mr. McCarthy.

[Steelfish]

McCarthy also writes:

“...it is certainly defensible to argue that beating Obama is so vital that nominating a surer winner trumps nominating a potentially better president.”

This is really the crucial point of the article. Newt’s un-electability.

Even before Obama unleashes his $1B war chest, Rasmussen has Newt trailing Obama by double digits. McCarthy quarrels with NRO’s rejection of Newt, Bachman, and Perry. Perry however has less baggage than Newt, has a good record, will secure the Evangelical and independent vote, and yes, he is less un-telegenic than Newt, a quality that matters in today’s visual dominated media.

[marron]

Good article; worth reading all the way through.

My top three are Bachmann, Santorum, and Gingrich. Huntsman, Romney, and Paul aren’t even on my list.

I find myself way out of step with the boys over at NR (McCarthy excepted).