But don't forget that Newt is the smartest man in the room (so saith any number of pundits), a truth that leads me to believe Mr. Gingrich, for all his faults, does not suffer from claustrophobia.

As a foreigner I must confess to still being constantly surprised at the startling ignorance of your senior politicians. Particularly Republicans.

How do people so clearly ignorant of so much rise so very high?

Is this gaggle of dunces really the best and brightest that the world's greatest nation can provide? What is it that holds back citizens of genuine talent. It is shocking, confusing and depressing.

What's holding back citizens of talent becoming legislators/execs? The sovereign of the nation, We the People. Long, long ago, We the People decided that We didn't care about our own foundational Law. We didn't want ministers running our gov't who understood and acknowledged its clear delineation of a strictly limited Fed gov't. Instead we wanted our ears tickled. We wanted money taken from the minority to be given to whoever was politically favored. Such a situation doesn't encourage the best and the brightest.

I'm sure your own country's immigration laws along with your politicians' intelligence and integrity would utterly shame us. Particularly yours.

Why would any intelligent person put himself through the media's meat grinder?

Also, since our politicians are elected directly rather than selected by a parliamentary system, the goal is to be the best at duping everyone, not maneuvering your way through a party machine.

I am bemused by your commentary. The English, being under the thumb of a supposedly superior ruling class of hereditary royalty, never did quite grasp the concept of the citizen/soldier or the citizen/statesmen back around 1776. The success and pluck of our ragtag bunch of colonial farmers and assorted rough types (as compared to the refined gentlemen of England and their spiffy redcoated soldiers in their wigs and tidy formations) was always rather puzzling to your crowd, wasn't it?

We now have citizen/politicians, where any American regardless of education or pedigree is free to stand for office, to offer his/her ideas and proposals, and to let his/her peers vote them up or vote them down.

I never knew a wiser man than my grandfather, with his sixth grade education and his rough hands ... a man who took up arms in the US Army to defend England and Europe against the Kaiser in WWI. We rough Americans saved your bacon another time after that too, as I recall ....

You ask, "What stops the talent rising?" Nothing. The beauty of our society is that anyone may put him/herself forward for office, and the rest of us determine with whom to cast our lot. That is how we determine talent. Some turn out better than others, but certainly on average we have done better than your royals, from George III on down to the rather insipid Prince Charles and the frolicsome Prince William and his pretty bride, and I will put our Mr Reagan up against any of your elected leaders, even against my personal hero, Mr Churchill.

The talent here is not stopped from rising. What you see happening every single day here is the open and energetic process of allowing talent to rise or fall in full view of the electorate.

Would you call your Mr Major a superior leader to ours? Mr Blair? Perhaps you would. But I would not.

I am glad to listen to Herman Cain and judge him on his own merits and demerits, and to then decide whether to vote him up or vote him down. It certainly beats looking down my nose at him as you are doing.

"I am bemused by your commentary." I am not surprised.

What an irrelevant load of nonsense. Your first paragraph seemingly has not a single element of truth. It's simply bizarre.

"as compared to the refined gentlemen of England and their spiffy redcoated soldiers in their wigs and tidy formations" Yeah, our effete army was always rubbish at fighting. Still, note how this has nothing to do with my point at all and is but a knee-jerk defense of your country. (A place I love and admire which requires no protection from me).

"We now have citizen/politicians, where any American regardless of education or pedigree is free to stand for office, to offer his/her ideas and proposals, and to let his/her peers vote them up or vote them down." John Major was a 16 year old Brixton school leaver. Brown the son of a local vicar.
I note GWB though was the son of a very recent president. Still, all nonsense and not addressing my point at all. Is this merely a 'my place is better than yours argument'?

"Some turn out better than others, but certainly on average we have done better than your royals"

Again with the monarch. Apples with Pears. I said senior politicians, the inbred monarchs don't really count, why keep bringing them up? They don't debate. Ever. Do you even understand how our system works? Also I am referring to a more modern trend in US history, not the previous 200 years. BTW, are Canada and Australia also places where the cream can rise or merely repressed under the cruel yoke of the Windsors?

"I will put our Mr Reagan up against any of your elected leaders, even against my personal hero, Mr Churchill."

Few people, certainly this side of the pond, have as deep an affection and regard for the Gipper as I. I have been to his statue more than once.
Also there are many other aspects to leadership that can be compared. Decisive decision making, calmness under pressure, ability to maintain ones beliefs in the face of external pressure... None of these are necessarily reflected by ability in a debate and depth of knowledge which is what I was talking about. Not a general 'who is the better leader' argument.
But on those latter points I really wonder who would seriously suggest the historian, Nobel Prize winning writer and experienced soldier comes second to the principled and affable former actor and lifeguard. He was indeed a great president. But come on...

"Would you call your Mr Major a superior leader to ours? Mr Blair? Perhaps you would. But I would not."

I find Mr Major an underrated soul who was dealt a very tricky hand to play. But still both of those that you mention would waste these guys in a decent debate. The more free the debate and the less an over-moderated soundbite-fest the easier. Again though, I never said we had superior 'leaders'. Merely smarter senior politicians with greater depth of knowledge. Particularly than the Republican candidates, especially at the moment. If I were to line up the 5-6 next Tories in line for the top of the ticket, all of them would spank anyone of the current crop without breaking a sweat. That is not to say they would be better leaders though. I repeat my question. How many of these guys could do a better job at question time?

Are those people lined up in these debates really the best in America? They are certainly not the smartest, I realise the best presidents don't have to be, nor overly credentialed. But the sparsely educated Lincoln would whip them with ease. Do you really look upon a line up where Mitt Romney comes across as the most coherent and feel proud? As the last lines of this piece state. Newt has become the party's deep thinker. Says it all.

"I am glad to listen to Herman Cain and judge him on his own merits and demerits, and to then decide whether to vote him up or vote him down." Yup. Good for you. I am happy to watch and marvel at his foreign policy ignorance. Don't get to vote him down though.

I am from GB and now live in Canada.
I agree with your main criticism regarding US senior politicians but it strikes me that it was ever thus for all US parties and not just the GOP. Their day to day style of government is very different from the cut and thrust of parliament and it tends to lead to a huge emphasis being put on consensus and bipartisanship.

Nevertheless, it is not always what or how you say a thing but what you do that matters as has been made crystal clear by Mr. Obama.

By the way, Mr. Reagan was also a two term governor of California - a state with a larger population than Canada, as well being a lifeguard and union leader.

Excellent reply. And funny. Thank you. A relief to not simply be abused.

And I think I agree with all of it. Especially the final point. Reminds me of some of the stuff I say about GWB.