Newt's losing it... sorry, Simon.

I've long been a fan of Newt Gingrich's policy sense, and a harsh critic of his political abilities. He lost every political battle he ever had with Bill Clinton (even while winning some of the policy issues). Like many Speakers have been, he's undoubtedly first rate at legislative politics, but not necessarily so good at normal people politics. Newt demonstrated today that he's not ready for prime time by being the first to start the name-calling among GOP presidential candidates while announcing that he may enter the race.

Dismissing the GOP presidential field as a "pathetic" bunch of "pygmies," Newt Gingrich hinted Monday he might step in to beat Democrats Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama. [Ed. note: The "pygmies" quote is out of context, in a sense. Gingrich was referring to an historical analogue. But comparing himself to Charles De Gaulle is a bit whacky, too.]

* * *

"You're watching an utterly irrelevant, shallow television celebrity dominate everybody who claimed they want to lead the most powerful nation in the world," he said.

Gingrich ridiculed "the idea of 10 or 11 people standing passively at microphones," and said he refused to "shrink to the level of 40-second answers, standing like a trained seal, waiting for someone to throw me a fish."

Substantively, I agree with much of what Gingrich said. He is correct to criticize the foolishness of what passes for "debates" among today's candidates. We've become so concerned with "equal time" and "fairness," that we've given up a chance to see how the candidates respond to each other, rather than the moderator, and the opportunity to see how the candidates respond to the sort of concerted, tough questioning that could never come from an ostensibly unbiased reporter/questioner.

He added: "These are not debates, these are auditions. By definition, the psychology of an audition reduces the person auditioning and raises the status, for example, of Chris Matthews."

I also agree with him that McCain-Feingold is an abominable set of rules:

"I have no interest in the current political process. I have no interest in trying to figure out how I can go out and raise money under John McCain's insane censorship rules so I can show up to do seven minutes and twenty seconds at some debate."

But by using childish name-calling, Gingrich immediately undercuts his point. Grown-up candidates should not go around calling other candidates, former governors, former senators, former mayors "pathetic." He can't be the "serious" candidate if he's going to adopt that kind of derogatory language. Fred Thompson, for example, is far more than someone who "decided that he would leave television for the purpose of entering television." At a minimum, Gingrich is certainly violating President Reagan's Eleventh Commandment.

Beyond that, he is revealing a decidedly unpresidential temperament. Take McCain-Feingold. I agree it's an insane set of rules. But a whole bunch of Congressmen, with a great deal of popular support, voted for it, and even the current President was willing to sign it into law. As we try to raise the level of political discourse in this country, we should ask that our presidential candidates refrain from calling each other, even each other's major policies, "insane." Wrong. Very bad. Likely to have disastrous results, even. But "insane"? I'd rather not hear that from the candidates' own mouths.

And the arrogance he displays. While De Gaulle has been dead long enough that he needn't fear being popped in a debate, he is assuredly no Charles De Gaulle. I distrust intensely any man who compares himself so directly to historical icons (especially foreign ones... from France). Sorry, Simon, but Mr. Gingrich is not ready for prime time.