creators.com opinion web
Conservative Opinion General Opinion
Susan Estrich
15 May 2013
Benghazi and Lewinsky

On its face, the murder of Americans in Libya, including our ambassador, has absolutely nothing to do with … Read More.

10 May 2013
Mother Love

My daughter was born on Mother's Day, 23 years ago. It was the happiest day of my life — matched only, … Read More.

8 May 2013
The Drunk Guy in the Parking Lot

The report from the Arlington, Va., Police Department is, on its face, hardly newsworthy: "SEXUAL BATTERY,… Read More.

Newt's Great Adventure

Comment

Every four years, there is one presidential campaign that is much more fun to watch than the rest, even if it has no realistic chance of success. I loved watching Mike Huckabee four years ago. It was far better than watching John McCain going from the Straight Talk Express (fun four years before) to the cautious conservative.

This time around, Herman Cain started out as the fun one. But seriously, it was never really serious.

So I was rooting for Newt Gingrich, at least to stay in the race, because he made it not only a fun race, but also a better one.

And while it was inevitable that once Rick Santorum went and the numbers started adding up, he would have to pull out, it was still a great run.

Plainly, Newt had too much baggage coming in. He tried to deal with it preemptively; he had his daughters giving interviews and standing behind him. But in retrospect, between his personal history and his professional vulnerabilities, it was more than even a skilled politician could handle.

And then there were his ideas. OK, some of them were more than a little wacky. Mining the moon? Maybe not.

But it is precisely Newt's tendency to think about big ideas and then talk about them that makes him a breath of fresh air in today's stilted world of scripted politics. Newt could debate forever. He was worth listening to. He said things that were plainly off-script, sometimes nutty, sometimes stunningly smart.

The problem with politics today is not just that it is corrupted by big money and overwhelmed by nastiness of the sort no parent would allow any child to engage in. It is also, at its very core, boring.

Very boring.

In the old days, before every word was captured on someone's cellphone recorder, it was bad enough hearing the same lines over and over again. At least there were moments of candor, occasional spontaneity.

No more. Spontaneity has become a sin in politics. OK, Mitt Romney has fallen flat a few times — with the trees and the Cadillacs and the NASCAR owners. But at least you gain a little insight — sometimes good, sometimes not so good — in those moments.

Generally, with 99 percent of what you hear, you can literally imagine the page on the briefing book with the lines scripted out. And if you pay attention, all you get is repetition. You hear those lines over and over until you feel you could recite them yourself.

Newt was different. Better. I wouldn't want to be his speechwriter, because unlike Mitt Romney, he didn't stay on script. He is, and as a candidate was, actually interested in ideas. And it seems pretty clear that they weren't pre-tested by pollsters, focus groups and language mavens before they were offered out.

Ideas, one of my old friends in politics used to say, are very fragile things. You can stomp most of them out before they've had any chance to flower, leaving yourself — as we seem most of the time to be — in the barren land of slime-bucket politics. But if you don't stomp them out, if you put them out there and give them some time under the sun, some of them might actually turn into something.

I used to do speeches with Newt, and in addition to always being very gracious to me (and believe me, in this business, not everyone is), always going the extra mile to compliment a point or praise my intelligence (very rare from any "opponent"), he always made me think. Every time we did a road show, he had something new to say. You had to listen and think, at least if you wanted to have an interesting debate and not simply an exchange of potshots.

He brought the same daring to the campaign. Of course, it didn't really work. The baggage caught up with him. Romney and his team came up with some good comebacks, which, frankly, helped Romney look like a better candidate. And Newt was never much at raising money and kissing rear ends — which is a pretty big imperative in today's politics.

To find out more about Susan Estrich and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2012 CREATORS.COM



Comments

9 Comments | Post Comment
Yeah its sad to see him go. He was an interesting fellow. He had some crazy ideas, but he also had some good ones. One of my liberal teacher friends said he agreed with Newt on education. Its too bad that his good ideas got lost in the crazy ones and all of them were overshadowed by his ego.
Comment: #1
Posted by: Chris McCoy
Fri Apr 27, 2012 10:51 AM
I met Newt once when I was 17. I remember it.vividly. What I remember is that he was quite a prick, and I am a Republican. He had great BIG ideas. His main weakness was his lack of humility. Though he attempted to feign self-deprecation at times, it was never authentic. He always had to prove he was the smartest guy in the room, and ussually was. But he always had to rub your nose in it. Bubba would never do such a thing.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Ethan Roninson
Sat Apr 28, 2012 8:42 AM
I thought the 2008 Democratic campaign was the 'fun' one. Hiliary was to be the presumptive first Socialist woman President and then what happens, a young black/white Marxist upstarts her!
Comment: #3
Posted by: Early
Mon Apr 30, 2012 6:05 AM
You always know when it has been a bad week for the boy barack or when the progressive talking points or straw men have fallen down because Estrich then writes a competely irrelevant piece of trivia while awaiting the next marching orders.
Comment: #4
Posted by: joseph wright
Mon Apr 30, 2012 6:32 AM
You always know when it has been a bad week for the boy barack or when the progressive talking points or straw men have fallen down because Estrich then writes a competely irrelevant piece of trivia while awaiting the next marching orders.
Comment: #5
Posted by: joseph wright
Mon Apr 30, 2012 6:32 AM
Does your constant posting of the word "boy" before Obama have racist implications? Are you saying that he's not a man?
that he's immature? What's with that?
Comment: #6
Posted by: John Orendorff
Mon Apr 30, 2012 1:39 PM
Re: John Orendorff
He's definitely 'boyist', not Presidential. How can you not understand?
Comment: #7
Posted by: Early
Tue May 1, 2012 5:17 AM
Re: John Orendorff
As Early says how can you not understrand? obama the man child or "boy" consistently shows just what he is, to wit, a thoroughly dishonest, petulent, thin skinned narcissistic congenital liar and juvenile creep. He can take no responsibility for his own actions and will constantly claim the credit for the work and efforts of others. With the boy barack it is always "it was his fault", "he made me do it" "the dog ate my homewiork" , "it was not me, it was him" Wha Wha wha boo hoo ! He is a spiteful brat in a man's body, has an enemies list, sulks like a baby and lashes out at whomsoever disagrees or highlights his serial lying. Unless he is with a room full of liberals he is consistently the least capable participant in anything he attempts. He is a childish thug wielding the power of an office that he fails to understand appreciate or respect. As stated by the Speaker, "this [the Presidency] is the biggest job in the world and I've never seen a president make it smaller." How true ! The boy barack has and continues to be a train wreck for America, a wreck set in place by a confederacy of fools, radicals and enemies of freedom.
Comment: #8
Posted by: joseph wright
Tue May 1, 2012 6:07 AM
Re: John Orendorff
As Early says how can you not understrand? obama the man child or "boy" consistently shows just what he is, to wit, a thoroughly dishonest, petulent, thin skinned narcissistic congenital liar and juvenile creep. He can take no responsibility for his own actions and will constantly claim the credit for the work and efforts of others. With the boy barack it is always "it was his fault", "he made me do it" "the dog ate my homewiork" , "it was not me, it was him" Wha Wha wha boo hoo ! He is a spiteful brat in a man's body, has an enemies list, sulks like a baby and lashes out at whomsoever disagrees or highlights his serial lying. Unless he is with a room full of liberals he is consistently the least capable participant in anything he attempts. He is a childish thug wielding the power of an office that he fails to understand appreciate or respect. As stated by the Speaker, "this [the Presidency] is the biggest job in the world and I've never seen a president make it smaller." How true ! The boy barack has and continues to be a train wreck for America, a wreck set in place by a confederacy of fools, radicals and enemies of freedom.
Comment: #9
Posted by: joseph wright
Tue May 1, 2012 6:07 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Susan Estrich
May. `13
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
28 29 30 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31 1
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Susan EstrichUpdated 15 May 2013
Roger Simon
Roger SimonUpdated 15 May 2013
Robert Scheer
Robert ScheerUpdated 14 May 2013

24 Apr 2009 I Had a Dream

10 Mar 2010 And the Winner Is...

10 May 2013 Mother Love