
Q: I wonder if I could get you to guess your impression of how Newt sees himself as a man in history.
Weyrich: I think he sees himself as a historical figure who is leading a campaign to undo a lot of wrongs that have occurred over a long period of time in the society. And I think he recognizes that anybody in that position is probably an unpopular figure to some degree. So he is less bothered by unpopularity than many simply because he knows that everyone who has shaken things up goes through that particular stage. Often times people are only appreciated in retrospect, like Harry Truman who was an extraordinarily unpopular President in his own time but today is greatly revered, precisely because he stood up.
Q: You've known Newt and thought about him and dealt with him for a number of years. I wonder if you would help me distinguish between a crusader, a man who comes and beholds a crisis and becomes a crusader to rescue a nation from it --and a crusader who helps to create crisis so he'll have something to crusade against. Which is Newt --a little bit of both?
Weyrich: He's a little bit of both. The nation has had a crisis. It's not Newt's creation. He has stepped into the breach. But on the other hand he hasn't hesitated to put himself forward as somebody who can solve some of these problems that others might be unwilling to do, so you know he's not totally in one camp or the other as you describe it.
Q: Is there another Newt out there sort of waiting to...?
Weyrich: No. I wish there were. I wish that we had lots to choose from, but we don't. He's very unique. And as a matter of fact, I've been very concerned that he might run for the Presidency because, while I admit that the people who are running are not my cup of tea, nevertheless, I think he plays a very unique role in keeping that very diverse group of Republicans together in the House and if he leaves, I think that they will not be together. I think that if he leaves, he runs the danger of not only not getting elected President, although he might get the nomination, but also of losing the House of Representatives. If that happens he will also get blamed for losing the House of Representatives and disturbing what I think will be a rightful place in history. So I'm among those who have urged him not to run, but he's getting a lot of contrary advice.
Q: You of course have no way of knowing whether he will, but I bet you don't have any doubt that he wants to.
Weyrich: Oh, I think he wants to in one sense. He learns a job very quickly and I think he's already intellectually a little bit bored with being Speaker of the House and therefore would welcome the higher challenge. On the other hand, I think he also recognizes the extraordinary risks to himself and to things that he does want to push were he to run. So, I'm not sure that it's a total burning desire to run. I think at times, when he looks at the existing field, and he hears how they handle issues, he thinks to himself, and very rightly so, 'Were I in that position, I could do a far superior job than what they're doing.' And you can't blame him for that because he could.
Q: Given his secular nature, given some of his personal difficulties in the past, is Newt Gingrich, in your view, suited to be President?
Weyrich: Well, a lot of people have failings. The real question is not whether he has failed in the past. There is no man who lives who does not sin. The question is whether he has acknowledged these failings and intends to do something about them. So I don't consider him unfit for office because of what he's done. A lot of people would be disqualified were that the case. I think it's unfortunate. I think he thinks it's unfortunate. I'm not sure that he would do the same thing today that he has done in the past.
Temperamentally, there is nothing that suggests that he wouldn't make a decent President. Contrary to all of the fol de rol of the sparks and fury that he creates, he is very pragmatic underneath and he does not do things that are terribly foolish. Most of what he does, he knows precisely what he's doing. Occasionally, he says something at the spur of the moment that he shouldn't say and as President he would have to curb that because he could cause an international crisis or bring a stock market crash or something by doing that. But he is even learning now as Speaker of the House to be more cautious with what he says. So I don't know anything about him temperamentally that suggests that he would make an erratic or foolish or impetuous decision that would endanger the country.
Q: Would your answer be the same if I asked you that question as regards to Bill Clinton, then?
Weyrich: Well, I think Bill Clinton is far more dysfunctional than Newt Gingrich. Newt has been able to translate much of what he believes into reality. I think Clinton has a disconnect between his very high intellect and his ability to absorb data and his ability to translate that into reality and then to stick with it. So, between the two of them, I personally think that Newt would make a better president.
 |