E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSFrom NBC’s Catherine Chomiak
Former Speaker Newt Gingrich had harsh words for the Obama administration regarding Libya this morning on TODAY.
“This isn’t serious standard,” he said of the humanitarian reasons for going into Libya. “This is a public relations standard.” He added, “The president of the United States does not report to the United Nations.” And: “By this standard, we could get engaged in all sorts of places,” including Sudan. On Khaddafy, Gingrich said, “If this is not designed to get rid of Khaddafy, then this makes no sense at all.” On whether he would have engaged in this operation, Gingrich said flatly, “I would not have intervened. There were a lot of other ways” to deal with Khaddafy. And, he said, if Khaddafy stays in power, “it will be a defeat for the United States. …
“This is about as badly run as any foreign operation in our lifetime.”
He made similar comments in an appearance on Fox last night. Gingrich said multiple times that the Obama administration doesn't know what it is doing and that there is a “lack of sophisticated planning,” “lack of professionalism,” and “lack of leadership” in dealing with the situation.
"President Obama is going to have to answer questions, because his current policy is so incoherent and so confused that it is literally indefensible," Gingrich said. "This is as badly executed, I think, as any policy we've seen since WWII, and it will become a case study for how not to engage in this type of activity," he added.
When asked about the interactions between the executive branch and the legislative one, Gingrich said, “I think this has been so badly organized and so badly planned that they have now burned a lot of bridges in Congress and I think they can't with a straight face claim to have seriously consulted the Congress and that's a huge mistake. Presidents have to have some kind of support from the congress if they're going to be able to sustain a national security of foreign policy."
Turning to Gingrich’s own potential political aspirations, he said this situation and others make him think more seriously about a presidential bid. “The obligation as a citizen to seriously consider it (the presidency) gets higher when you look at the current damage being done, but this administration on so many different fronts.”
Leave a Comment:
Does Newt think the US is acting all alone here and coercing all of the allies involved to engage Libya? This entire thing is a political play by Obama? I think Newt's statement is political wishful thinking since many in his own party have supported the assistance to Libya and criticized Obama for not taking the lead.
Hey Newt... isn't it time for you to go find another wife?..... do something useful 'cause you are a waste as a politician and commentator.... but then Fox pays you big bucks....
The action taken was actually very much in line with the doctrine of foreign intervention that President Obama has iterated and consistently followed. The confusion with non-insiders looking at this is that this President is actually doing what he said he would do and is following a consistent path. This is not what they are used to from a President. This President actually means what he says and tries to do what he says he will do.
Don't forget, the Senate passed a resolution on March 1st indicating that the US should go to the UN to do something about the situation in Libya. There were many on the right (including many on this very board) who were questioning why he had not unilaterally imposed a no-fly zone before the UN said to do it and these same hypocrites are now denigrating him for doing what they were previously denigrating him for not doing. You do not get to have it both ways and not expect to be called out on it.
Gingrich agrees with the President's decision to impose a no-fly zone and destroy tanks and artillery. The problem is he can't say that, and so he has to quibble over style points.
Why Libya? Why now? For two very different reasons that nonetheless obtain in this case: to avoid a massacre of the rebels and innocent civilians, and, to pick the side that will best keep the oil flowing to the West.
Both can be 'true' at the same time regardless of how incompatible they seem.
Gingrich really is quite a useless fellow !!!! He will find fault with anything the President does or says without actually knowing what he is saying. Does this guy actually read or understand English ??? I think he just stands there and says anything that comes into his head - which by the way - is usually garbage.
His first name suits him - Newt is good for him as he really knows nowt !!!!!
The only problem is, that being only about 30 percent of Americans know who the Vice President is, people are so uneducated that they would really believe anything the GOP put out. Come on Amerians begin actually reading the paper and listening to the news (by the way not the FOX garbage) and educate yourselves. You may be surprised to see what you can actually learn. Plus you also may realize how many years the GOP party has hoodwinked all of you.
When Newtie says that something was badly executed, it means that it ran like clockwork.
Gingrich wouldn't know a "PR move" if it smacked him in the face. Here he is denouncing President Obama for working with the U.N. on controlling the skies over Libya for humanitarian reasons, yet when Bush and the Republicans decided to march into Iraq for no good reason - actually a very contrived reason, Gingrich was "all aboard." What's good for Goose Gingrich is not good for the gander, apparently. The Republicans were tossing the word "flip-flopper" around promiscuously a couple of elections ago in their "PR" efforts to defeat a Democratic candidate, yet here is the king of flip-floppers, Minute Gingrich. He's just posturing his presidential aspirations as he prepares to run as a GOP candidate in 2012. This is Gingrich's "PR move," but a sad one indeed. Problem is, his supporters think he's gold. So for Newt, his GOP PR strategery appears to be working.