And Newt shall lead them
In serious conversations among Republicans since their election debacle Tuesday, what name is mentioned most often as the Moses, or Reagan, who could lead them out of the wilderness before 40 years?
To the consternation of many Republicans, it is none other than Newt Gingrich, the former speaker of the House.
Skill and energy
Gingrich is far from a unanimous or even a consensus choice to run for president in 2012. But there is a strong feeling in Republican ranks that he is the only leader of their party who has shown the skill and energy to attempt a comeback quickly.
Even one of his strongest supporters for president in 2012 admits it is a "very risky choice." But Republicans are in a desperate mood after the fiasco of John McCain's seemingly safe candidacy.
Republicans appear chastened by the failure of seeking moderate, independent and even Democrat votes. They are ready to try going back to the "old-time religion."
One Republican critic of Gingrich concedes that he has an "unlimited" energy flow and a constant stream of ideas, an important commodity in a party that appears to have run short of ideas during the Bush years.
But there is widespread concern about what is described in the party as deep "character flaws" of Gingrich's that would be difficult to overcome in a presidential campaign.
Nobody in Republican ranks, however, matches Gingrich's dynamism.
The consternation among Republicans is concentrated on McCain's failure to capitalize on Democrat flaws.
It would be a rocky road for Gingrich to the nomination, much less the presidency, but there are no other serious candidates inside the party at the moment.
What's clear is that Republicans are unanimous in trying to avoid a repeat of what happened this year, and there is a surprising consensus that McCain was going in the wrong direction and was the wrong candidate.
What one GOP critic calls Gingrich's "unlimited energy supply" must be overcome by anyone opposing him. Several old Republican hands feel that Gingrich in 2012 is no more outrageous than Ronald Reagan was in 1980.
What is certain is that Gingrich has the desire and the will. He has a deep-seated ambition. He had not even settled into the House speaker's chair in 1995 when he confessed to me his presidential desires for 1996.
That was not to be, but he never abandoned the personal dream and is ready to pursue it now.
Robert Novak is the retired Chicago Sun-Times political columnist.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.