“[I]n the Reagan White House, Newt Gingrich was considered quite frankly by a lot of folks to be something of a political opportunist and who was not trusted and who had played no role whatsoever,” [Pat] Buchanan said. “He was a Rockefeller Republican in the great Goldwater-Rockefeller battle, where conservatism came of age.”
. . .
Later Buchanan reiterated his criticisms of Gingrich, recalling his opposition to Reagan’s 1986 veto of a South African anti-Apartheid sanctions bill and about how Gingrich used it to score points against Reagan.
“I don’t think he has a core,” Buchanan said. “I don’t think he has a fundamental, ideological and political core. I think, look he moved, he was a Rockefeller Republican, he comes up — I remember meeting him in ’78 when he came to town, you know he is knocking Reagan. … Reagan believed that sanctions on South Africa would cripple the economy that the Africans would inherit. So it was a tough decision. Reagan vetoed it. And he scored points off us by you know voting for the sanctions and doing that. I don’t think he has an ideological core. I think he moves from one issue to another to another.”
Newt is not a real conservative and was not there with Reagan. And this latest rebuke by Pat Buchanan demonstrates a pattern in which the majority of the people who actually worked with him dislike him. This indicates to me that Newt is lacking in the executive abilities needed to be President.
I used to like Newt (and you can find that attitude in some of my old blog posts), but now I realize that I was fooled. Unfortunately, he’s still fooling a lot of the Republican primary voters.