Posted on 01/22/2012 6:53:54 PM PST by Steelfish
Not that Newt is a Winston Churchill, but Churchill was a “failed leader” until he came back to lead Great Britain during WW II.
No one considers Churchill to have been a failed leader.
Sununu is the reason Reagan nominated David Souter to the U.S. Supreme Court. Elect Romney and we’ll get more Souters. That’s all I need to know. Elect Gingrich and we’ll get more Alitos, Roberts, Thomases and Scalias.
Great point!
The Romney Super PAC is hitting Newt hard on these very topics. Coincidence, not coordination. /s
As pointed out in earlier replies, Romney was a failed leader. He couldn't run for reelection (or try again for the Senate). He was and is despised by Massachusetts.
Santorum's out there suggesting Newt is unstable and shouldn't be trusted with "the button." He tried a version of that on at the debate. It was silly... Newt has too many ideas! (Oh no!) Newt thinks BIG! (Oh no!)
Alright, let us accept for the sake of discussion the article’s premise: Newt Gingrich is a “failed leader.”
In a certain sense this is true. After the mid-90’s Newt dropped out of sight, having been targeted by the vengeful Clintonites and the ever obsequious GOP residents of D.C. This was quite a fall from grace for a Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. Newt at the time chose a path to lead others that failed. But who does that reflect on? The leader/teacher only? Or does it reflect somewhat also on the lead/taught?
Newt can be a jerk. OK. I have had many a professor in college and grad school who were jerks, perhaps the majority. But I did not fail to learn from all of them. I figured, if Balaam could accept and learn a lesson from his ass (Numbers 22:22ff.), I could do so from those who held the title of professor. Their problem usually was not intelligence; many were more intelligent than I. Their problem was their faulty foundation, their false definition of reality and of the problem or their unwillingness to see their own weaknesses. But what they knew they knew. That was useful.
Newt knows American history and the institutions and personalities of its governance over the past 200 plus years. He knows it both objectively, as an academician, and subjectively, because he was part of it. He made his mistakes. As a leader (speaker) he proved as fallible as the subjects of his own academic studies years before. As a man he proved as fallible, perhaps even more fallible, as anyone else. But something within me tells me that Newt has learned, that he has seen both the greatness and the weakness of America that the founders themselves saw. He has seen it in himself. And he has learned.
By comparison Mitt is a cardboard cut-out placed in the entrance of the retail store we call America. He is not a “failed leader.” He is worse. He is a wannabe leader, who is not a leader. He has not paid the price. He is not worthy of the title. Mitt may even be a rather good man. But he is not made of presidential timber, certainly not of the timber needed in this dire time in which we live.
So, Mitt, you are not the answer. Be wise. Love your country. Know that this is true. And operate accordingly.
And, Newt, if you prevail, remember who you are and what you are made of. The greatness of America exists outside of you. You can - perhaps - embody it, but you are not it. And remember also to continue respecting the people enough to discuss seriously with them the problems and future of this nation.
That goal is to rid this nation of that which will destroy it as the last best hope of humanity. Be a helper in that cause, not a hindrance.
Sununu not only recommended that Bush appoint Souter to the Supreme Court, but he was the one who convinced Bush to break his pledge and raise taxes, costing Republicans the White House. Now he is one of if not the top surrogate for Romney. Newt needs to ask Romney if he is going to have Sununu in his cabinet and remind people what Sununu did under Bush and to the party.
Gingrich achieved something else that Mitt never will...
Nice read.
Thank you for your kind reply.
Cheers!
Even worse. Newt had much more success as a leader than Mitt ever dreamed of. Newt's "failure" was that the RINOs that benefitted from Newt's leadership decided it was time to return to the status quo and Newt thought they were nuts so they stabbed him in the back.
Mitt's barking up the wrong tree again.
All I can say is FAIL. I've gone from not wanting to see Mitt get the nomination because he's too liberal to detesting him. Someone needs to tell Mitt that no matter how much cash he spends or how dirty his PAC gets, nothing is going to change the fact that when asked the simplest of questions, Mitt looks like a clueless moron just before they say, "I know you are, but what am I?"
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.