The Reason for Gingrich's Rise

By DOROTHY RABINOWITZ

It became clear two minutes after Newt Gingrich won in South Carolina that citizens were about to be treated to a non-stop effort to portray his smashing win as the result of his attack on the media. A victory, we were informed by cable and network commentators, which Mr. Gingrich owed to his cleverness in finding ways to give the press-hating right-wingers in South Carolina the red meat they craved.
He'd won, we heard repeatedly, by insulting a fine reporter, CNN's John King -- pronouncements accompanied by no little handwringing and defense of Mr. King who had only done what any good reporter-moderator would have done in raising the question about the public accusations made by Mr. Gingrich's second wife. Mr. King, it turned out, was far more serene about events than the chorus of commentators mourning his alleged victimization by Mr. Gingrich.
The image of the speaker as a man who owes his current strength mainly to attacks on the press is now a standard tool of his opponents -- a caricature meant to offset certain realities about his rise. The sort of realities recognizable to considerable numbers of people in Iowa where polls had begun running heavily in favor of Mr. Gingrich from late November on in the wake of his debate performance there and elsewhere. Iowans heard, from Mr. Gingrich, not media attacks but bracing expressions of American values electric in their effect. That was why he kept rising in the polls.

Enlarge Image

Getty Images

Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich

That is, until, under the sheer weight of a nonstop, richly financed ad assault on behalf of Mitt Romney, they began to crumble as Mr. Gingrich was depicted, relentlessly, in the darkest terms. Then came South Carolina, and a debate, in which the speaker who had held those earlier audiences in thrall appeared on stage again, and in full voice. This time, to turn aside a journalist's effort to bait him with questions suggesting he was a racist, into a powerful affirmation of the right of all citizens of every race and status to hold a job, to earn money.
That was the standing ovation moment, and he had not reached it by attacking the press. That moment was his because he had given eloquent voice to core beliefs prized by most Americans.
The speaker has made his missteps in these forums. Among them we can count those little moments -- there were two -- of flirtatious deference, Monday, to Ron Paul and some of Dr. Paul's ideas which the speaker now discovers he can embrace. Not a pretty sight. There ought to be a way in which displays of realpolitik -- attracting the Paul voters -- come out looking better than this, if they're to be made at all. A dubious proposition.
Tonight's debate in Florida may be, as advertised, crucial to the outcome of the race there. But whether Speaker Gingrich knocks this one out of the park or he doesn't, one fact stands clear. He's survived this long against extraordinary odds and attained the challenger status he now holds not because of his nifty way of attacking the media, poor dears. He's here because he speaks to people in ways that assume their interest in ideas of consequence, and they know it -- they can hear. And because he speaks in ways that reflect a respect for their intelligence, and has much to say to them. They know that, too. This way of relating to voters is no gimmick. It's a condition of mind and one of bottomless value on a campaign trail.