Newt the Inevitable

In the most recent couple of debates, many conservatives have gotten excited over Newt's beat down of liberal journalists and the liberal media in general.  In the most recent debate, moderator John King was taken to task by Newt when he asked him in the opening minutes about the charges brought by his second wife, Marianne.  The argument seems to go something like this:  Oh wow, what an epic beatdown by Newt on the liberal journalists!  Imagine Newt in a debate against Obama!  He would crush him and win the election!

But I think there is something amiss here.  Just because Newt has the rhetorical skills to take down the media and show them for what they are does not necessarily mean he has any of the needed virtues to be a good president.  Attacks like the ones Newt has been increasingly making are red meat for conservatives, but in a debate during the general election, I just can't see how attacks like that would do anything for a moderate (or even a liberal leaning) audience who are not predisposed to agree or even see their relevance in an election about who is best able to lead the country. 

Rich Lowry has a great take on this here:

The thing is if you make a list of the 100 qualities and skills a president needs to succeed, the capacity to administer epic beat-downs of liberal journalists is pretty far down the list. So Newt’s debate triumphs really tell us nothing about his ability to be president, or even his ability to win debates in a general election. Since when has the candidate for president in a general election who shows the most bombast and ill-temper won a debate? Al Gore just sighed and lost a debate.