His campaign might fading, but Newt Gingrich is still wowing the New York Times (2/10/12). Reporter Trip Gabriel writes:
Mr. Gingrich is well known as the candidate of big ideas, hatched from a deep knowledge of politics and policy. But he is less recognized for his warehouse of everyday facts, the kind of small-bore knowledge useful in winning bar bets–or in impressing voters and arguing down skeptical reporters.
And:
Mr. Gingrich appears to have a steel-trap mind and would make a dangerous opponent at Trivial Pursuit.
Praising Gingrich’s intellect isn’t new, but it’s a reminder that Gingrich isn’t always dazzling people with his brains:
But what about Gingrich’s misstatements? According to PolitiFact, at one debate Gingrich claimed that Sarah Palin was right about the “death panels” in the healthcare law–which earned him a “PANTS ON FIRE” from the site.
Let’s give him the benefit of the doubt, though–the healthcare law is not precisely “history.” Perhaps the same goes for his claim that the stimulus bill “is anti-Christian legislation that will stop churches from using public schools for meeting on Sundays, as well as Boy Scouts and student Bible study groups.” To be fair, that was in 2009–way before he was the smartest presidential candidate in the room.
But PolitiFact also gave Gingrich a “PANTS ON FIRE” for his his Twitter claim that the United States spends less on its military (as a percentage of GDP) than at any time since Pearl Harbor. A historian might be expected to know something about that.
I’m amazed at how frequently FAIR can be so thick about interpreting articles in the NYT as supportive of right wing politicians and ideas rather than perceiving the irony in their content. I presume your editors are devoid of any off center sense of humor and prefer to wear horse blinders of “meaningful seriousness”. “Tis a pity.
Huh? You might not know this, bruce, but this isn’t the first time Trip (“Trip”?!) Gabriel has been bowled over by Prof Gingrich. He is serious (Tripper, that is) and there isn’t any “irony” in the content. So, un-thicken yourself here and give me some links to other times (“I’m amazed at how frequently FAIR can be so thick about interpreting articles in the NYT . . . .) that FAIR’s been gulled by the ironists at the NYT. I’ll bet there’s hundreds of examples, so git on it.
ABO
I heard somewhere that Gingrich is a stupid person’s idea of an intellectual…
I heard that too, tishado. It’s true that Gingrich has plenty of ideas, but they’re generally hare-brained ones.
i think newt’s like an overactive kid, who learns something new and blurts it out at every opportunity…”saul alinsky,” food stamps,” etc
or like a child right after he discovers comic books, “hey, we should do one about dinosaurs that are cops on their moon base.” and the parents swoon….’he’s so full of ideas”
If you can, find Lewis Lapham’s collection of essays. There at least two of them. There are at least two essays on Gingrich, and Lapham perfectly captures the former Speaker’s fraudulence. It’s not just that lightweights like Trip Gabriel see Gingrich as a deep thinker; it’s that Gingrich himself is utterly convinced that he’s a Great Man, a thinker of great thoughts, a man whose time is now, and urgently so. Gingrich is now saying that President Obama is going to destroy the Catholic Church as soon as he’s re-elected (probably on his first day in office): this is the kind of pandering, vile nonsense and tremendous lying that is the signal essence of Newt. Hopefully, soon, he’ll be pelted with rotten fruit and vegetables on one of his “campaign” stops.
P.S.: Of course, maybe Gingrich is really a great wit and a deep thinker who’s simply using ironic actions and comments (deeply ironic) to skewer our degraded politics. Just like Trip Gabriel and all the first-rate journalists at the NYT.
Im no Gingrich fan per say,and I never thought he had a chance so I have enjoyed his speeches as interesting asides.Too many conservatives were panting at the idea of him destroying Obama anywhere anytime in any debate on any subject.So he is probably miles smarter than Obama.So what…who isn’t?Obama is a very mediocre intellect.In a personality contest though Id pick him every day ,and twice on sunday over Newt.Newt seems a vindictive jerk.Moving on
I’m amazed how so many experts on intellect have arisen since Newt started his run. So far none have given me any facts that convince me they are right. When you start evaluating his statements, you really have to question what they mean by “intellect.” On the other hand, sleezy, swarmy and silly are also ways to describe Newt. Other parts of his body seems to reign over his actions. Ego, sex organs, whatever component ‘reactionary’ comes from and on and on. The man clearly doesn’t stop to think, he just gives us a viseral response. How intelligent is that?
It’s a sophists position, not an intellectual one. Ah, but so many are wooed so easily by facile speech and pretty words. Just look at the Barbie clone who stands beside her idol along with the other devotees who forgive any transgression of decency in favor of “intellect.” Something really doesn’t compute here.
His was denied tenure at West Georgia College, and as interviews with other profs show, not highly regarded. He’s shameless, is all.
http://video.pbs.org/video/2179305565
Elizabeth I agree with your over view of Mitt the man ,putting aside intelligence.In the grey matter dept. I would stack him in there with Clinton.Bill Clinton had a mind like a steel trap.Heard a name once he knew it and remembered it.Read something once and the same result.Never was without an answer to any point on anything.Brilliant was not just a word with Bill.Newt is the same way by all accounts to those sharks up on the hill where blood in the water is the norm.It is a stupid game like win Ben Steins money where one after another go down trying to prove they are smarter than him.And morality aside(both had little)Bill was loved by damn near everybody in spite of his hot temper.Newt…..not so much.In a more common world, with the more common tongue he would be called a PRICK.And I think America feels that.It is almost a visceral response.Strangely we have a president who is regarded by most people as brilliant because he is as Joe Biden once put it ..”is a clean black man who speaks well”.Really horrible to remember that.As people where he has shown brilliance and they are stumped.Barrack is not feared as a great intellect is the word on the hill and in joint chief circles..More in line with Reagan he is regarded as an ideologue.His agenda is not in tow, it is out front.I have always wondered why all his school records and grades are sealed(a first).And i wonder if he can still seal them after november when he is a private citizen.We shall see what the genius train dragged in then I suppose.
Liz I meant newt in the first line.
After his influence pedaling . The true nature of republican politics is bare. Gingrich belongs in a orange jumpsuit at a federal lockup, not a candidate for president.
Jerry Im not gonna knock you about your view on Newt.Im just gonna say look at Obama.Influence peddling?What in Gods name do you think 100% of the Dem party re-election is all about?It makes whatever Newt has done look like a grain of sand on a beach.And no Obama should not be in an orange jump suit.He should be home(wherever that is cause it aint Chicago)relaxing in a chair writing his memoirs with Bill Ayers.Or making 100 million in speeches like Bill Clinton.As long as the P before his name stands for “private citizen” we are gold.