Newt is NOT going to run... give it up.
Posted on 01/12/2005 5:45:02 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
Edited on 01/12/2005 7:09:10 AM PST by Lead Moderator. [history]
Quick: think back to the days that Newt Gingrich was fighting and winning a revolution in Congress, turfing out a Dem Speaker of the House and ultimately winning an astounding victory in 1994 that brought Republicans to the majority and himself to the speakership.
At the time, Newt was treated as a villian and a pariah by the MSM, capped by his depiction on the cover of one of the main news magazines as "The Gingrich Who Stole Christmas." He was reviled, despised and lampooned.
But there was Gingrich on the Today Show this morning, with a Katie Couric giggling over whether it was OK to call him "Newt" rather than "Mr. Speaker." It wasn't quite the fawning treatment reserved for a Hillary Clinton, but it was altogether friendly and respectful.
Why the big change? Why, moreover, was Newt given the invite to come on, tout his new book, and by extension tease his possible candidacy for President in 2008?
Well, of course Newt is out of power and not the same threat to the now-non-existent Dem majority in Congress. But beyond that, in the not-so-humble opinion of your intrepid FR reporter, I believe Newt has struck something of a deal with the devil. He will be welcome on MSM shows to advance his political ambitions . . . at the price of taking heavy shots at Pres. Bush over the biggest issue of the day - the war in Iraq.
So there was Newt, coyly disclaiming any particular interest in the presidency (despite his impending visits to Iowa and New Hampshire). Katie admitted that she was in a rush to get through Newt's recitation of the major ideas in his book "because she had other things to get to."
As for the book, the ideas do sound interesting. There are five main themes, which are: winning the war on terror; saving Social Security through privatization; getting back to a constitutional view of inalienable rights coming from God and dealing with judges who don't understand that; patriotic education and immigration; and winning the jobs war with India and China.
Said Newt: "Washington a hard city to discuss ideas. If you talk about ideas people assume it's linked to political ambition. My career is one of looking at ideas. We did it 10 years ago with Contract with America, and I want to do it again."
Asked whether he was a candidate or just wants to shape the debate, Newt responded "primarily I want to shape the debate. The minute anyone says they want to be candidate, you get involved in 30-second ads, negativity, consultants, etc. There are a lot of good people who could run and carry the issues other than me." He then ticked off the names of the obvious front runners.
"But who better than you to advocate your own ideas," asked Katie logically. Of course Newt revels in this kind of speculation, but he wouldn't bite on announcing his candidacy.
Then it was on to what Katie really had in mind all along, Newt singing for his supper, so to speak.
Couric: "You're critical of US actions in Iraq." She then popped the question that this interview was really all about: "Who do you hold responsible?"
Newt: "As Commander in Chief I'm sure the President would agree that he is ultimately responsible. But the important question is how to you solve the problem? We have underestimated difficulty of job. There is noo evidence we can beat insurgents. We don't have the intelligence or the necessary Iraqi forces."
If Newt offered any practical recommendations to solve the problems he described, they were lost in the wrapping up shuffle.
So, a nice little bargain: Newt got his face time to pump his political ambitions, and Katie got a leading Republican light on the record effectively saying the war in Iraq is unwinnable and it's all W's fault.
Look for this formula to repeat itself frequently over the next few years. I believe it represents a calculated strategy on Newt's part in answer to the question "what can I do to make myself acceptable to the MSM and get my face out there, since I'm no longer a major office holder."
A deal with the MSM devil.
Today Show pact-with-the-MSM-devil ping.
Interesting. Thanks for the briefing.
In order to get MSM face time a Rep must attack W or the Party.
John McCampaign does it all the time!
Nice job and thanks.
The seduction of the press. I'll never understand the need for approval.
Good point, and the perfect example. Chuck Hagel, an otherwise obscure Senator from Nebraska, also gets inordinate MSM face time by pulling the same stunt.
The people of America will NEVER elect a first lady named Callista..
Except Newt needs Republican support to go anywhere, which he won't get by becoming McCain-lite.
Here, the need is very understandable. As I suggested, Newt figured out early that the only way he could get significant MSM play to tout his presidential candidacy was to be willing to attack W over Iraq.
True. Newt must walk a fine line. He must be just critical enough of W to appease the MSM gods, while not so critical as to anger conservative Republican primary voters. I think he handled the situation rather artfully this morning. Clearly he doesn't have the visceral dislike of W that McCain does.
Mr. Newt is really off the mark here.
So now I know why Brit Hume said yesterday on his show that "Washington is buzzing with words that we cannot win the war in Iraq". Is Mr. Newt creating some trouble here?
Anyway Brit had General Scales on his show yesterday to rebut this lie that we are losing the war in Iraq. General Sacles made a very compelling and very strong case that this insurgency is doomed to lose because it has a support of a small minority of the Iraqi population (a minority among the Arab Sunni who are minority to start with). He said that the urgency does not have the geographical depth, they do not have the leadership, they do not have a defined plan and cause. He said that their is a lot of over exaggeration of the power of the Sunni insurgency, that many people are using the word of insurgency very loosely when it realy does not aply in Iraq, and that things in Iraq are no way as bad as the media is portraying.
This is the same as saying we cannot win the war on terror so we should appease them so they won't hit us again.
Newt will go over very big in France!
It wasn't just yesterday that Newt pretty much wiped out any good he might have done. This is icing on the cake.
Exactly. Sort of like prostitution though.
Don't know if your "give it up" was directed at me or Newt, but Gingrich is obviously doing all the things a would-be candidate does: writes a book and visiting IA and NH, and letting the tenor of the entire interview be "gee are you gonna run?"
The old media would LOVE to see Newt run for the GOP nomination -- and win the nomination. They know he can't win in a general election. The old media would sing Newt's praises up through his nomination, then they would turn on him and tear him apart.
Somebody needs to sit down and tell Newt that although his ideas and input are welcome, he doesn't have the "right stuff" to win the presidency and that his criticism of Bush will alienate him from the base.
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.