Newt’s Narcissism Problem (and Ours)

Posted on | February 5, 2012 | 91 Comments

“Gingrich should carefully play a tape of his post-Nevada caucus performance, and then he would quickly grasp that it was little more than a litany of excuses, whining, and accusations — characterized by stream-of-conscious confessionals and rambling repetitions. And, I think, will hurt him more than anything yet in the campaign.”
— Victor Davis Hanson, National Review

Some commenters have been dogging me out over my negativity toward Newt’s campaign, but I insist that this is Newt’s fault, not mine — and I also say in my defense that Newt’s stunning meltdown in the past two weeks has vindicated my repeated warnings against climbing aboard the Gingrich bandwagon.

Let’s pause, my friends, to recognize that what I write on this blog, and what you reply in the comments, will never change anything about the Republican presidential primary campaign. And we would be guilty of exaggerating our own influence if we thought otherwise.

Narcissism is a phenomenon I’ve written about at length, in regard to the madness of Pentagon shooter J. Patrick Bedell: “Paranoia is rooted in the narcissist’s need to rationalize failure, to find scapegoats for his own shortcomings.”

The characteristic trait of the narcissist is his inability to accept responsibility for his own failures. Everybody likes to believe that they deserve credit for their successes, but no one wants to believe that they are at fault when they screw up. This is normal. Yet the damaged ego of the narcissist makes it impossible for him to acknowledge his own contribution to his failures. He cannot even admit to himself that he is at fault, which is why he attempts to focus blame on scapegoats.

And so when Newt starts pointing the finger, blaming others for his failures, portraying himself as the victim — of Goldman Sachs, “money power,” George Soros, “the elite media,” Mormons (!) and a “blatantly dishonest” opponent — even his supporters ought to recognize these unseemly eruptions as symptomatic of Gingrich’s narcissistic tendencies.

Why do you think I warned you against jumping onto his bandwagon?

For all his excellent qualities — abilities that no one can deny — Newt also has this personality defect, a tendency to think of himself as a person so transcendently important that the rules which govern the behavior of normal people don’t apply to him. And when those insignificant Lilliputians (as he regards them) insist that the Great Man must account for his transgressions, Newt angrily lashes out at the scapegoats he blames for his failures, because he is incapable of accepting the blame himself.

One might have thought that his experience as Speaker of the House, of being tossed aside by his own Republican caucus and forced into more than a decade of political exile, would have taught Gingrich a lesson about the need to rein in his ego. But his resort to scapegoating (see my Tuesday column, “Fear and Loathing in the Sunshine State“) would seem to indicate that he has learned nothing, and Ed Morrissey comments on Newt’s Nevada tantrum:

If people thought that the lack of graciousness after Gingrich’s loss in Florida was a careless mistake, this press conference dispelled that notion and made Gingrich’s speech in Florida look courtly by comparison.

Indeed. And there is a danger that those who believe so fervently in Gingrich’s conservative message that they are willing to overlook the flaws of the messenger will be sucked into the vortex of Newt’s narcissistic meltdown.

This was what disturbed me about his speech to that rally in Fort Myers: Gingrich was inviting his supporters to share his paranoid conception of himself as the innocent victim of a malign conspiracy. If you RSVP to that invitation, accepting Newt’s own self-justifying rationalization of his failures, then you will be consigned to the same kind of impotent rage that Gingrich is himself now acting out.

Look, I’m not exempting myself from the criticism I apply to Newt, because I have at times struggled against the temptation to blame others for my shortcomings. But I recognize this urge as a weaknesss.

If Tabitha Hale thinks of me as “Not Good Enough for BlogCon,” for example, I confess that I alone am at fault. Either my blog sucks, or else recognition as BlogCon-worthy requires more than merely having a good blog. What made me angry at Tabitha, however, is that she publicly claimed to admire my work while simultaneously excluding me from the BlogCon agenda, and then publicly denounced me as a “liar” for being offended by the exclusion.

(Aside: Which is more insulting, to be deliberately excluded or to be overlooked as too insignificant to deserve consideration?)

No one, however, can be expected to feel my wounds as personally as I do, and when people accused me of indulging in “self-pity” for having transparently exposed my own humiliation — an accusation that added insult to the original injury — I accepted that this, too, was my own damned fault. If I had so obviously deserved to be included as a BlogCon participant, my complaint would have elicited sympathy, rather than contempt. Thus when my friends told me I was wrong to feel that Tabitha had purposefully humiliated me, the only possible conclusion was that I was not only unworthy of recognition, but was furthermore guilty of an unjust vanity in imagining myself to be so worthy.

“Not Good Enough for BlogCon,” therefore, is a judgment I have somehow deserved, a permanent stain I can never hope to expunge.

Mea culpa. Mea magna culpa.

OK, so where is the similar confession of fault by Newt Gingrich? And where, for that matter, is the admission by his supporters that Newt is now auto-destructing just as I warned weeks ago he would?

But of course, this is not about me, and it’s not about you, either. So you can rage at me in the comments all you like, but don’t imagine that you’ll thereby prevent Newt Gingrich from being Newt Gingrich. He will lose, and he will embarrass himself and his supporters in the process of losing, and nothing you or I say about it can change the outcome.

Lashing out at scapegoats is as futile as it is foolish. None of my friends who attended BlogCon complained of my absence. Most didn’t even notice. I’m simply too insignificant — “A Venn Diagram Might Be Helpful” — and this is nobody’s fault but mine.

Category: Newt Gingrich

Comments

91 Responses to “Newt’s Narcissism Problem (and Ours)”

Quartermaster
February 5th, 2012 @ 6:32 pm

I see no scapegoats here, so there is nothing to rage at.

The Newt will be the Newt, no matter what you do. It’s simply time for him to go home. Whether he does it this week, or right after Tampa makes no difference. He will go home no matter what, because he will certainly not be the nominee now.

I think Santorum is the better choice. Ed Morrisey has said the same now and is wishing he could be home to Caucus for him. But he’ll be at CPAC instead.
rosalie
February 5th, 2012 @ 6:47 pm

We don’t need another narcissistic, paranoid president.
Pete
February 5th, 2012 @ 6:47 pm

Stacy – your Georgia roots help explain Newt. Thanks for your focused analysis…right on! See you @CPAC.
MrPaulRevere
February 5th, 2012 @ 6:55 pm

Another outstanding post Stacy. Newt really got on my nerves with his shameless pandering, his tendency to throw out big chunks of red meat out there like he was Professor Pavlov ringing a bell. Now I love a politician who sings my song if you will and Reagan was like Pavorotti in that regard. But there is a fine line between that and cheap pandering that insults the intelligence. I suspect others were turned off by it as well.
Donald Douglas
February 5th, 2012 @ 7:15 pm

Aren’t you watching football, McCain??
tranquil.night
February 5th, 2012 @ 7:21 pm

RSM – You’re right, but what I’m hoping you might someday consider is the possibility that at least some of Newt’s supporters understood the danger of his ego problem (and even said so in their own writings when they first declared their support for him) but saw qualities in him they weren’t seeing but wanted to see from everybody else – qualities Newt was attacked for which brought people to his defense: because they supported those ideas and qualities in a president.

I did not support Herman Cain as my first choice in the primary, but by the end of his bad rap, I was trying to defend him as passionately as anyone else, and still would have voted for him over many others.

Newt is unhinged to the point of self-destructing at this point. It is very disappointing to see, but I still believe his participation has made the others better candidates, especially Santorum.

So I apologize again for any vitriol over the past couple of weeks. I’m getting on board the Santorum express finally.

Give Rick a Chance! GRAC at CPAC!

And cheers to Vanuatu.
Bob Belvedere
February 5th, 2012 @ 7:23 pm

Bravo.

The man likes to hear the sound of his own ideas.
PhilipJames
February 5th, 2012 @ 7:42 pm

Oh… and I guess your favorite, Santorum isn’t narcissistic? You have got to be kidding me. They are all narcissists.
All big friggin narcissists… every single one.
As for the crap about Newt and what he said in Las Vegas, I watched that and I did not think he was “in the weeds” or “rambling” or “flailing”.
That wording is the crap from Mitt or Santorum supporters and the mindless media talking heads.
A Stephens
February 5th, 2012 @ 8:04 pm

At some point reality has to set in. Nothing against Newt, he does bring some gravitas to the table but at the end of the day, it ain’t happening.

I’m a Palin guy from Day 1. I waited, and waited, and waited. She had/has other plans. So I really took my time and studied the rest of the field and decided Santorum was my choice. Thought I was alone for a while. I now honestly, sincerely believe, he will persevere and prevail.

Santorum is the only one left who can possibly beat Obama. He can do so decisively. Anyone believing Romney can win lives in a deluded fantasy land. I would have been happy to vote Gingrich, but he’s taken on so much water I don’t think he can right his ship anymore.
Anonymous
February 5th, 2012 @ 8:06 pm

Lash out at me, lash out at Santorum, pretend that Victor Davis Hanson, Ed Morrissey and others are making up stuff about Newt. But denial is not the name of a river in Egypt.
Anonymous
February 5th, 2012 @ 8:07 pm

Newt’s actually from Pennyslvania. Look it up.
Bob Belvedere
February 5th, 2012 @ 8:19 pm

Wikipedia:
Newton Leroy “Newt” Gingrich born Newton Leroy McPherson; June 17, 1943) is an American politician, author….

Born in south central Pennsylvania to a teenage mother, Gingrich was adopted in infancy by his stepfather, a career soldier.
DaveO
February 5th, 2012 @ 8:36 pm

One point to consider, in regards to Newt’s ego, is that he was forced from office for political reasons. The subsequent investigations exonerated him; and Congress’s own Ethics Rules set the bar so low that Barney Frank is considered the epitome of a good-behaving congresscritter.

Nothing swells an ego as much as the justifiable perception of persecution. In this mindset, failing to win these primary contests is just more of the same: political persecution.

What is missing the ability, found in true leaders, to suborn ego to the goal/vision. Newt is not a true leader yet. He can’t get beyond his own mirror.
tranquil.night
February 5th, 2012 @ 8:52 pm

Well put, but Newt isn’t without his grave mistakes either, and in some cases he is complaining about things his campaign is participating in, which starts to undermine the credibility behind the indignation. It all combines to make that ego even less palatable. Plus, as Stacy keeps saying, it’s not helping anything politically. Wish he could’ve gotten over himself and risen to the moment.
PolitiJim
February 5th, 2012 @ 9:20 pm

Yeah. Those damn narcissists. They think they can do anything. They don’t take the wisdom of their peers when they try to accomplish the impossible. I mean, who the hell does Newt Gingrich think he is thinking he can orchestrate a take over of power that hadn’t been seen since 1871. …Oh yeah. I forgot. He actually did that once. And Heritage Foundation founder admitted – even he thought Newt was crazy (http://www.politijim.com/2012/01/paul-weyrich-warns-conservatives-on.html)

And GOPAC founder Pete DuPont admitted that Gingrich’s self esteem allowed him to be fearless and take on challenges no one else could (http://www.politijim.com/2012/01/what-did-gopac-founder-think-of-newt.html)

It’s just like those people like Steve Jobs who didn’t learn his lesson when the “real experts” took over Apple and he decided to found a company that his old company couldn’t wait to buy and ask him back to fulfill the vision THEY thought they knew better how to run.

The people who make things happen are rarely those who feel content to sit back and criticize the risks taken by others. No. These people are usually unaware their repulsion comes from the realization that the success of the dreamer and dare’r is an indictment of their own limited ability or courage.
Dianna Deeley
February 5th, 2012 @ 9:20 pm

I’m not certain I entirely agree, but this is well-written and finely argued.

If I were sure I am going to have a hot water tank in the morning (and I’m not, not at all), I’d drop something in the tip jar.
Dianna Deeley
February 5th, 2012 @ 9:22 pm

Jim Butcher had this lovely moment in one of the Dresden novels: “Harry! Are your legs wet? Can you see the pyramids? Because you’re knee-deep in de-Nile!”

I have adapted this as “wet to the knees and viewing the pyramids”, and it works wonders.
Thomas L. Knapp
February 5th, 2012 @ 9:58 pm

Another one would make what, 45?
richard mcenroe
February 5th, 2012 @ 9:59 pm

Newt was not forced from office. He was forced from the Speakership but he had just won his Congressional district in fair election. He could have stayed as a committee chair, with his seniority, or even as a simple backbench representative. It worked for Churchill and led him to greatness.

But Newt just couldn’t stand looking up at the throne from below…
Thomas L. Knapp
February 5th, 2012 @ 10:00 pm

Santorum has less of a chance of beating Obama than Roseanne Barr does.
Pathfinder's wife
February 5th, 2012 @ 10:07 pm

And of those ideas at least half of them are out in left field.

This election season does indeed seem to be catching people up in a most remarkable way, doesn’t it seem?
Hubris is really leading to a total smack bottom — one can only hope that the head narcissist gets his at some point.
Maybe karma (or the mysterious hand of the Almighty) is in the air after all.
Finrod Felagund
February 5th, 2012 @ 10:34 pm

Enh.

If Newt’s electoral performance is being described as a ‘meltdown’, what do you call the performance of the candidate who’s getting half the vote that Newt is?

And as far as narcissism goes, Newt is the second-most humble major-party candidate for President. Mitt Romney believes in Mitt Romney and whatever will help him first and foremost, and Barack Obama is worse than that; Ron Paul is, well, Ron Paul.
ThePaganTemple
February 5th, 2012 @ 10:43 pm

But-but-but-Finrod you just don’t get it. When its your candidate, its not narcissism or lack of character, its bad luck, or unfair press, or negative campaigning that is the reason for his downfall. It’s only the candidates you are against who has those old bad qualities.

Ask Adjoran, he’ll probably be able to explain the process much better than I could ever hope. He’ll illuminate how Mitt is our bright and shining star, if only we would just believe and stop our stubborn clinging to these unrealistic hopes that our eventual nominee should actually run as a-gasp-REPUBLICAN!

In the meantime, let’s try to be fair to our kind host, RSM, and make note of how he is trying to be fair and impartial towards Newt. For example, just look at the flattering picture of Newt he used in this post, and how it brings forth his most flattering physical characteristics and positive demeanor.
Rob Birch
February 5th, 2012 @ 10:53 pm

There will always be ‘the Little Engine That Could’ Ron Paul Express.

People please vote for princple and not just the candidate that is winning the polls in your state.
richard mcenroe
February 5th, 2012 @ 11:24 pm

The New England Patriots LOST! But I thought they were supposed to be INEVITABLE!

Here endeth the parable.
That’s Why | Daily Pundit
February 5th, 2012 @ 11:27 pm

[…] That’s Why Posted on February 5, 2012 8:27 pm by Bill Quick Newt’s Narcissism Problem (and Ours) : The Other McCain […]
Does This Ass Make My Truck Look Big? - The POH Diaries
February 5th, 2012 @ 11:34 pm

[…] McCain: Newt’s a narcissist. I think we’ve had quite enough of that, thank […]
Adjoran
February 5th, 2012 @ 11:42 pm

Also Tom Coburn, Elliot Abrams, Pat Buchanan, Dick Armey – but the startling thing isn’t the number of former colleagues and friends who openly criticize Gingrich’s record, even though to listen to him, in his brief time as Speaker he single-handedly balanced the budget, passed welfare reform, created 16 million jobs, struck a uniquely and fundamentally transformative Reaganesque figure, and saved the sun from being eaten by a dragon.

The real eye-opener is how few of his former colleagues and friends support him now. If he was half as good as he claims, wouldn’t they be rallying behind him?

Truth is, Newt’s been even less faithful to conservatives and conservative causes over the years than he was to his wives.
Adjoran
February 5th, 2012 @ 11:44 pm

Actually, it’s even possible Ron Paul could beat Obama, depending upon what happens economically. This attack on religious freedom isn’t just angering unlapsed Catholics, either.

But Gingrich, with his huge negatives earned and held for nearly two decades, is the least likely to win against anyone.
Adjoran
February 5th, 2012 @ 11:52 pm

If by “exonerated” you mean dealing down to a plea bargain where you pay a $300,000 out of your own pocket in order to avoid possible criminal charges, and are reprimanded by the House with only 28 of your own majority voting against it, then he was. You should read the Ethics Committee report before you believe he’s some sort of victim (other than of the same degree of accountability he demanded of others).

The Ethics Committee is always balanced between the parties, and it takes a majority to proceed on almost anything beyond preliminary investigations. If it were political persecution, the Republicans could have stopped it. They didn’t, because it wasn’t. He has ALWAYS walked the ethical line like a tightrope, so he was inviting even the multiple charges from his former opponent which were adjudged not violations.

But he was thrown out of the Speaker’s chair for political reasons, all right – by the conservatives in the House Republican Caucus who refused to vote for him again after his incompetence, mismanagement, embarrassing behavior, and willingness to give back conservative gains to win Democratic allies.
Adjoran
February 5th, 2012 @ 11:54 pm

He was also piqued that conservatives would desert him after years of maltreatment and being ignored after he managed to slime his way out of more serious charges.

Newt may have been the best member of House Minority leadership ever, but was one of the weaker Speakers.
tranquil.night
February 5th, 2012 @ 11:54 pm

With respect, you have no idea what motivates my decision making, my commitment to principles (or what I judge to be the most pragmatically effective way to advance them) or how deep or shallow it is that I’ve weighed each these candidates. Also, you haven’t considered that I support more than one because I care more about the message and policies they’re advocating. I’ve donated to both Rick and Newt because I feel either would be better than Romney and because I live in California so the heavy chances are my primary vote isn’t going to matter by the time they get to us anyway.

Your Ru Paul suggestion is laughable, but I forgive you for everything because you must’ve thought I’m some ignorant rube.
Adjoran
February 5th, 2012 @ 11:56 pm

Hey, Santorum hasn’t really had his turn at the top yet, and Gingrich is on the way down, fast.
richard mcenroe
February 6th, 2012 @ 12:01 am

The Gingrinches over on Twitter are starting to yell about cheating and recounts. What happened?
Adjoran
February 6th, 2012 @ 12:09 am

If you can show me EVER claiming Mitt was “our bright and shining star,” I’ll kiss Michelle Obama’s rump on the White House lawn. Just because I never had the knee-jerk revulsion against him some of you do, or accept the stupid and baseless conspiracy theories tossed about, doesn’t mean he’s my favorite. I was ready to support Pawlenty when he fizzled, and wanted to support Perry but he was even faster. I do believe you need some management experience to be President – look at Harding, Kennedy, and Obama for why.

But then, I’m not some johnny-come-lately to the Party or the conservative movement who will desert our nominee like a spoiled brat who didn’t get his way, either.

As to Stacy, he has never hidden his feelings about Newt screwing over conservatives, although he tends to concentrate on the more recent years while I remember the old stuff more. Frankly, Gingrich has been stabbing us in the back so long and so often we could divvy up the outrage by three or four time periods and have plenty for each.
Adjoran
February 6th, 2012 @ 12:12 am

Heh, yeah. The crushed look on Michael Graham’s face alone is worth gold. I haven’t seen him after the game, but he’s an old acquaintance from his days in Charleston and I can count his tears with my mind’s eye.

And the little kid awaiting the transplant picked the Giants, so he gets the kidney after all! Everybody wins!
Newt’s journey down the whiny brick road. | Value Politics
February 6th, 2012 @ 12:41 am

[…] of examining the origins of Newt’s whining. Over at The Other McCain, Robert Stacy McCain makes the argument that Newt’s whining stems from his (widely recognized) […]
Gddddddg
February 6th, 2012 @ 1:00 am

It’s refreshing to see someone with grassroots bonafides calling out Newt for the train wreck he is. Usually, any sort of criticism is met with a chorus of “You’re an Establishment Mittbot!” but that’s obviously not the case here. I’m amazed so many otherwise intelligent people have jumped on Newt’s crazy train, although I think it’s clear it’s headed off the skids.

I honestly don’t know what sort of Rube Goldberg logic you have to construct to be able to tell yourself that Newt is a “better” conservative than say Mitt Romney (support of federal mandates, global warming nonsense, etc.) but even if you could convince yourself he’s to the “right” of said candidate, character and temperament matter a great deal, both in office and in life.

Watching Newt and his bitter rage has been absolutely disgusting, to think of the GOP having him as our nominee against Obama makes my skin crawl. It’s the sort of nomination that could destroy the GOP into irrelevance.
Evi L. Bloggerlady
February 6th, 2012 @ 1:11 am

Not quote Thomas, but let’s just say we have had a few.
Michael Bates
February 6th, 2012 @ 2:12 am

This was a great piece, right up until you went back to the “Not Good Enough for BlogCon” refrain. The reason we didn’t complain of your absence in Denver is, I suspect, that most of us knew you had been invited as an attendee and had declined to accept that invitation.

No, you weren’t offered a slot on a panel, but that doesn’t mean that the scheduler thinks your work as a blogger is worthless. Right Online (where you had a slot on a panel) had parallel seminar tracks, but both BlogCons have had a single track for everyone, which limits the available opportunities.

You ask rhetorically whether “BlogCon-worthy requires more than merely having a good blog” and I think it does. For a panel to be worth scheduling, it has to be something generally applicable to the attendees, and as much as we admire your work, few bloggers are able or willing to do what you do. We don’t have the training or experience, we don’t have spouses with the otherworldly patience and tolerance of Mrs. Other McCain, and and we aren’t prepared to leave our nets, rise up, and follow the path of the itinerant shoe-leather blogger/reporter.

I’ve pitched a couple of panel ideas for BlogCon — one on local blogging, and one on the inner mechanics of the Republican Party, both of which tap into my expertise — and neither has been accepted, but I may host a special after-hours session for those interested in either topic to exchange ideas, and I’ll keep pitching ideas, but without casting blame or shame on self or others.
Edward
February 6th, 2012 @ 2:14 am

Seriously. Dick Armey? Abrams? Didn’t we go through this before? Pat?

As for the backstabbing by colleagues. Is that really a surprise to you? It doesn’t surprise me at all.

Frankly this reminds me of people jockeying to gain approval from the new capo before the election.
Edward
February 6th, 2012 @ 2:29 am

Frankly it’s been a long time since VDH impressed me as someone to listen to. And Ed Morrissey? Don’t make me laugh.

Narcissism? Of course Newt suffers from it. Most politicians do otherwise they’d be in a different line of work. It’s also why some politicians are more effective than others. Look at Bush 43. Seemingly not narcissist at all. But self-effacing enough to be little more than a political punching bag for the left for most of his 8 years. That was an improvement? Was that better? Anybody remember the endless frustrations as Bush would just go off to his ranch while liberals just completely trashed conservatives over and over again?

What I find amusing about all this is that these deficiencies make Newt supposedly completely unacceptable. But Romney’s deficiencies somehow don’t enter into the picture.

Let me clarify it for you: Romney is an ass.

This is a man who has run for President for much of the past decade and who still has shown a complete lack of ability. I’ve listen to his speeches and his debate performance. Plank of wood is a kind description. Tin ear is a kinder one. Utterly ineffective is frankly more accurate.

Here we have someone who is supposedly a great capitalist, who can’t defend capitalism!

…

meh it’s late, I’m tired and I’m starting to think the whole routine is pointless.

Do I approve of Newt? No. I think he’s a jackass.

Do I approve of Romney? No. I think he’s an incompetent jackass.

Do I approve of Santorum? No. I think he’s an idiot.

How about Ron Paul? No. I think his brain was replaced with a block of fruitcake.

Seriously RSM. You’re trying to tell me that Newt’s a bad candidate? Frankly after having pushed Cain, someone who was unaware that China is a nuclear power, that’s rather amusing.
Edward
February 6th, 2012 @ 2:31 am

” It’s the sort of nomination that could destroy the GOP into irrelevance.”

As opposed to the last 30 years?
GayPatriot » Game Over. Newt Gingrich.Hasn’t experience taught him the perils of public temper tantrums?
February 6th, 2012 @ 3:18 am

[…] Indeed, we may have to call upon a skilled therapist to understand not why Newt whined about his loss, but why, he, with nearly forty years experience on the public stage, would fail to realize how such an outburst could hurt him. Is it due, as Stacy McCain contends, to the former Speaker’s “tendency to think of himself as a person so transcendently important that the rules which govern the…“? […]
Anonymous
February 6th, 2012 @ 4:19 am

On the political Narcissism scale of 1-10, I’d rate both Newt and Barack at 11. Mitt though is no slouch if you listen to his everlasting faith in his managerial talents. He hides it a little better though so lets give him a 9. Santorum, IMO comes across as amazingly level headed for a pol. A 5. Ron Paul OTOH, for all his hypocrisies and crazy talk, ranks at a very psychologically healthy 1.
Adjoran
February 6th, 2012 @ 4:50 am

So the fact that so few of his colleagues support him is, in your view, a plus, then?
Adjoran
February 6th, 2012 @ 4:52 am

Their meds wore off?
Adjoran
February 6th, 2012 @ 5:00 am

Well, Mitt did make $250,000,000 or so off his managerial talents, so he earned the right to mention it. Gingrich is claiming credit for every good thing that happened in the ’90s, and he is due some of it, but getting bills through the House with the Majority is one heckuva lot easier than getting them through the Senate with its 60-vote threshold, so Bob Dole should get more of the credit, shouldn’t he?
Adjoran
February 6th, 2012 @ 5:25 am

Look, I hate to praise McCain because if his head gets too big the fedora will just look ridiculous, but the guy has a point. He’s a pioneer at this stuff – “How to get a million hits” and sharing the wealth and helping other bloggers and bringing actual on-the-ground-reporting street cred to blogging, not to mention Rule 5 Sunday for which his name shall be ever hallowed – and has at the very least earned the respect of bloggers and their readers.

If you took my life’s work, including innovations and hard-nosed ground work that struck blows against the empire, for granted, and appointed some chick with an impressive two years experience and more impressive bodacious ta-tas to judge whether or not I had done a good enough job for years to impart knowledge to others, I’d be ticked off too.

I mean, these people invite Conor Freakin’ Friedersdorf and not Stacy? Dave Weigel, a card-carrying Journolister? And a fair number of others I won’t mention because I actually like them, but are far less qualified by experience and achievement.Maybe if he would just bow to fashion and get his testicles waxed like Conor, Dave, and Tabitha, he’d be invited.
Adjoran
February 6th, 2012 @ 5:30 am

If you believe Newt is competent, you disagree with the conservatives who served with him, and forced him out.