Was Gingrich a great speaker of the House even though misconduct forced him out of Congress?

Question

Opinions?

Some say he was great due to leading the Republicans to a majority again in 94. Yet, he was flawed as his misconduct later showed when he was forced out of Congress.

Or is it that only Democratic leaders are forced to 100% perfect standards to be considered great?

Is this a double standard or just spin in the works?

Answer 1

Bottom line, America forgets easily unless reminded constantly. Its all in the "now" or "current" perception. Democrats do not have the "go for the jugular and never let go" gene; whereas the Republicans do. If the Dems had the gene they would have been and will continue to make reference to Gingrich's misconduct at each and every opportunity. The Republicans manage to hold the spotlight to Dem misgivings in a manner that does not allow the voting public to forget. Perfect example is Clinton' look at how every time a negative comes up about BUSH and the like, they always remind us of "...Clinton did..... Clinton was...Clinton tried, whether in or out of context!" Hence never allowing space to forget the misgivings and focus on the great. If Dems would have continued to use Gingrich misconduct at every opportunity, rubbing the Republicans nose in its foulness for years, he would be less likely remembered for any perceived greatness.

Answer 2

,Let's see his personal morals made Bill Clinton look like a saint. He was elected speaker by exposing Wright's corruption, then became corrupted himself. He was forced out by this corruption. His contract on America was a heartless agenda which had no compassion for children, seniors or the less fortunate. Shutting down the government accomplished nothing and ended up costing billions. It backfired and made the Republicans look really bad. The Starr investigation also cost millions and could find nothing, so concentrated on a totally unrelated personal indiscretion. Gingrich had to keep his mouth shut during the impeachment because his personal morals were so bad. The only thing accomplished in Gingrich's tenure was welfare reform and that's because Clinton supported it. Actually, didn't Gingrich want to go back to orphanages and poorhouses? Gingrich wasn't even effective pushing through his own evil agenda, he could not even be considered a good speaker of the House.

Answer 3

Gingrich started out as a raving partisan Speaker, not a great thing. Only in his last year as Speaker did he moderate a bit a have great enough vision to let him see past the partisan side of politics. But by then he was branded a GOP mouthpiece so no matter what good he did, he'll always be viewed as a typical partisan speaker.

His infidelity issues aside, he is a smart man and a great public speaker. Too bad he didn't share his wisdom about playing partisan politics with the outgoing GOP leadership, or they might not have lost.

Answer 4

I think he is intelligent for a repuglican, but that isn't saying to much is it. No, he wasn't a good speaker of the house. He did however author the contract against America and that caught the eye of the American voter. But putting it into practice was another thing, as with repuglicans, all for the rich and take away from the poor is the answer to all of Americas problems.

Answer 5

He's a republican, of course he wasn't great. Which is what they will say about the democrats no matter what. Of course there's no "aura" of scandal yet, they haven't even taken control yet! But that just shows you the republicans have no concern for reality or accuracy of their distortions.

Answer 6

Gingrich is pretty much an evil person in general, without soul or conscience. Look how he handled his marriages, handing one of his wives divorce papers when she was in the hospital. While there are good Republicans out there, Gingrich is one who seems to have no redeeming qualities.

Answer 7

He was ,and still is ,politically smart,but unfortunately for him,quite DUMB in other matters