Appearing on Fox News Sunday this morning, Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) said he would have trouble supporting Newt Gingrich as the Republican Presidential nominee based upon his experience as a member of the House while Gingrich was Speaker. Here’s the key portion of Chris Wallace’s interview:
WALLACE: Let me, Senator Coburn, switch topic. I want to ask you about one last political issue. You served with Newt Gingrich in the House and you say that he was brilliant. But earlier this year, you were asked about whether or not he could be a good president and you raised questions about that. Let’s watch.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
COBURN: We need somebody whose eye is critical but is not harsh in their — in their manner. And I don’t mean to say he’s necessarily harsh. But I’m looking for a leader that can bring us together.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
WALLACE: As Speaker Gingrich takes the lead in the Republican race, do you still have those questions about his fitness to be president?
COBURN: Chris, there is a lot of candidates out there. I’m not inclined to be a supporter of Newt Gingrich, having served under him for four years and experienced personally his leadership.
WALLACE: Why is that?
COBURN: Because I found it lacking often times.
WALLACE: I don’t want to pull teeth, but if you could just explain why. I think it’s an important thing. People want to know what you think.
COBURN: Well, I — you know, the thing is, there’s all types of leaders. Leaders that instill confidence. Leaders that are somewhat abrupt and brisk. Leaders that have one standard for the people that they are leading and a different standard for themselves. I just found his leadership lacking and I’m not going to go into greater detail in that. And I think if you were poll the gang — the group of people that came in Congress in 1994, in which he did a wonderful job in organizing that, he’s brilliant, he has a lot of positives. But I still — it would be — I will have difficulty supporting him as president of the United States.
WALLACE: We’re going to have to leave it there. Senator Coburn.
Many who worked with or within the Republican Congressional majority during Gingrich’s tenure as Speaker feel much the same way. Senator Coburn is just the first to say what many have been thinking.
And this is a problem for Gingrich why? The only time Coburn pries his lips off his good friend's Obum is when he's bashing a republican. What a shock. Coburn can't say enough good things about the guy who is literally destroying this country, but he can't tolerate Gingrich. And Adle, of course, is in full agreement.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe key sentence here is: "Leaders that have one standard for the people that they are leading and a different standard for themselves."
That's very telling.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe Republican establishment (and i think its fair to include NRO) are running scared about Newt's rise, so expect many more hit pieces such as this :-). They believe Newt is unelectable in a general election, i happen to agree, but it would be fun!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWell, the Rep establishment should have selected a better candidate than Mr. 20%
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat do you mean "selected"? Who the hell declared that Mitt Romney was going to be the candidate and ordered all the other "better" more conservative candidates to stay out of the race?
If the party is supposedly so conservative then why has Michelle Bachman cratered since Iowa? Why is Santorum leading only in embarrassing Google search results? Romney, for all his faults, still gets the highest poll numbers except for the ongoing flavor of the week candidate. This week is Gingrich's turn. No one else has lasted in the "not Romney" position for very long and I'll bet Newt won't either.
The hard edge of the party may not like it, but Romney is still the most likely candidate to beat Obama. The hard 20% on the right won't win a national election since you need a majority to win. And that takes independents, the people who don't like Newt, think Bachman is stupid and think Santorum is way too conservative. Face it, you don't always get what you want, but what we need is Obama gone. Romney stands the best chance of doing that.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIn Coburn's 2003 book, Breach of Trust, he talks in detail about Gingrich's leadership failings as Speaker. Among other things, Gingrich quickly and knowingly broke the Contract with America.
In 2003, Coburn was a private citizen, having left Congress in 2000 keeping a 3-term pledge. He got recruited for the Senate to replace the retiring Don Nickles.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseSo they're complaining about the guy who got them the job? Nice.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOn the other hand, that "lack of leadership" was more effective than any of the Republican leadership we've had in the Congress since.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf Gingrich were President Congress would need to serve as a regulatory mechanism to avoid the production of solutions for problems better left alone, that seems certain. Further, the Gingrich who allowed Bill Clinton to roll him isn't anyone's idea of a strong President.
On another note, I'd be happier if Coburn were able to get more agreement between his subjects and verbs, as well as being more candid.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI visited the Capitol in January 1997 and sat with Newt's constituents when he was narrowly reelected speaker with 216 votes. First cracks in the wall, then the attempted coup, and squandered 1998 election. Oh well, at least he got Reagan's name on a federal building.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI don't consider NR or NRO part of the "Republican Establishment" and I think the criticism regarding Gingrich (and all the other candidates) is fair game. Regardless, at the end of the day, we will all have a very simple binary choice: (1) four more years of Obama; or (2) the Republican nominee who will--by any measure--be more conservative than the President. Jonah Goldberg's G-File of last week was exactly on point: I do not identify with being "Republican" as much as I identify being a "Conservative." If you think yourself a conservative, you have no choice but to go to the polls next November and vote AGAINST Obama. Forget any third party bids; it will never happen. The best thing for this nation is to get the most conservative person in the White House that we can, even if he/she is not as conservative as we would like. Wake up.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIs there any legislator that has endorsed Newt yet? I don't recall anyone.
Anyone in the House, Senate, or a Governor's mansion?
I know many Republicans do not endorse during the primary, and I understand that. But many do endorse also - just not Newt....
THAT is telling also.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAnd yet he is going to win the nomination.
Tells you the vast gulf between the establishment and the people.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI don't think every elected official is 'the establishment' - and Newt hasn't exactly won anything yet.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAt least he is doing better than Mr 20%.
You have to be a really horrible candidate to be in Mitt's position. With all the money, prior campaign experience, establishment support, he still can't get past such a weak field.
He was thrashed by an evangelical socialist and a doddering fool, neither with any money, in 2008. He will be thrashed by a bunch of no-hopers and dead-beats with no money this time.
He just doesn't appeal.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"And yet he is going to win the nomination."
He does not have it in the bag yet, he has a better shot than most, but I would say the odds are against him being the nominee.
He is building an organization on the fly, has barely anything in the first few states and next to nothing outside of them. And as Mr. Gutfeld said, "He also has more more baggage than JFK, the airport not the President." I don't see him surviving the airing of his laundry, unless voters put on blinders.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis primary is not about Newt. The story of the primaries is the flat-lining of the Romney campaign.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAs much as people have decided that he is the second coming of Obama only worse, if it becomes a binary choice, Romney and Gingrich, and people are not in this irrational anyone but Romney mode, I'm not sure Gingrich comes out the better.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRepublican voters are nothing these days if not contrarian. The more national-level politicians who endorse Romney, the more stubbornly the ornery Tea Party is likely to cleave to Gingrich.
Because, of course, endorsements appear in the "lamestream media," and we can't have no stinkin' media telling US who we should vote for...
The combination of Newt and the Tea Party, egging each other on, may well create a situation that's not just combustible... it could go nuclear. The question is... what would be left of the party after the Big Bang?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWhat I'd really like to see is the establishment abandon Romney in favor of someone acceptable to the base. When I read pieces like this about Gingrich, my reaction is "yeah, he's got some serious drawbacks. But at least he isn't Romney."
I'd be leaving off the last sentence if the alternative to Gingrich was Perry, Santorum or Huntsman. Or Bachmann, but I can't imagine the Washington GOP rallying to her.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse