See him on TV, read an article by or about him (such as economist Peter Ferrara's excellent online piece at American Spectator) or hear him speak, and one's respect for the mind and political imagination of Newt Gingrich is rekindled.
For example, the former Speaker--the man who forged a GOP House majority in 1994 that endured until 2006--has sage advice for today's Republican House Leaders: pass another jobs and growth bill now, and explain it to the public so that the strongest contrast can be drawn with the Obama Administration's cut and paste agenda of more spending, regulation and taxes. Show how past reforms--such as the welfare law passed when he was Speaker and that President Clinton signed--not only saved money, but also got poor people out of poverty and created jobs. Smart reform is the best "stimulus".
Newt, the public policy strategist, can't be beat. He is far ahead of any other candidate for President in this regard. Newt's problem, then, is not related to his ability to synthesize strategic themes; indeed, those are his greatest strengths. Unfortunately, you need more than bright ideas to get elected President.
Newt's problem, rather, is that his precise brilliance when a dispassionate critic begins to wobble and blur the closer he gets to his own ambition. A good example was his reckless suggestion a couple of months ago that Rep. Paul Ryan's reform plan was "radical". He angered so many friends and fellow conservatives that he had to apologize.
Newt doesn't say foolish things when the subject is not one way or another about Newt. So maybe he should figure out how to step away from the mic. Instead of running, maybe he should take a page out of the history of great kingmakers, from Talleyrand to Tom Dewey, and help someone else.
Some people become president. Some others help presidents get elected and help presidents become effective. Can Newt Gingrich apply himself in the latter task?
Leave a comment