MR. GREGORY:
Good morning. Another turn in the Republican
presidential
field, former
Arkansas governor
Mike Huckabee
announced on his
Fox News
program last night that he would not be a candidate for president.
FMR. GOV. MIKE HUCKABEE (R-AR):
All the factors say go, but my heart says no. And that's the decision that I've made. And in it, I finally found some resolution.
MR. GREGORY:
One many who came to the opposite conclusion this week and has announced he is full steam ahead for
2012
is here with us exclusively this morning to kick off the return of our
Meet the
Candidates series, where throughout this primary season we will once again bring you in-depth interviews with the candidates for president. Joining us live this morning, the former
Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich
. Welcome back.
REP. GINGRICH:
Good
to be with you
,
David
.
MR. GREGORY:
This is your 35th appearance on the program. You've said a lot and done a lot over the years for us to go through. Mr. Speaker, as you know, campaigns are about the future; and yet, you're doing something very interesting, you're asking the
American people
for a stunning second act in
American politics
. Why?
REP. GINGRICH:
Well, I -- you know, my dad was a career soldier for 27 years in the infantry, and I think there are times when citizenship requires that you do what you think is necessary. We are at one of the great turning points in
American history
, and I believe the decision the
American people
make in
2012
will do more to define the next half century than any election I can remember.
And I
think that we are at a crossroads economically; we're at a crossroads in our core values as a
country
, what does it mean to be an American; we are in much greater danger in
national security
and
homeland security
than people realize. And having spent my lifetime, as you point out, studying this, working at it, becoming speaker of the
House
, spending the last 12 years as a
small business
owner and, and working on things with my wife -- making movies, writing books -- when you look at where we are, it just seemed to me that, that to not seek to help the
country
fix the problems we have would have been a failure of citizenship on my part. And we spent almost a year talking about this, looking at it, thinking about it very deeply, and I really believe we have to have a
campaign
which brings together millions of people. So it's not about one
person
in the
Oval Office
performing magic. It's going to take millions of
Americans
to get this
country
back on track.
MR. GREGORY:
Let's go
through the issues that are going to be big in the
campaign
.
And I
want to start with the debt. The big fight right now is whether to raise the debt
ceiling
. The president says, "You got to do it."
The Treasury
secretary says, "If you don't do it, we have a double-dip recession."
Republicans
say, "No, not so fast, not unless we get specific cuts in our
government spending
to cut the deficit before we raise the balance on
America
's
credit card
." You've been through this kind of fight before that goes to the mat, the shutdown of the
government
in the '90s that didn't turn out well politically for
Republicans
. And you wrote in
your book "Lessons Learned the Hard Way" the following about these moments:
"I was to learn something about the
American people
," you wrote, "that too many conservatives don't appreciate. They want their leaders to have principled disagreements, but they want these disagreements to be settled in constructive ways. That is not, of course, what our own activists were telling us. They were all gung ho for a brutal fight over spending and
taxes
. We mistook their enthusiasm for the views of the American public." Given what you learned, would you tell members of your party now, "Don't go to the mat on the debt
ceiling
? Increase the debt
ceiling
and fight about the
budget
separately."
REP. GINGRICH:
No. What I'd tell them is that I think Speaker
John Boehner
's come up with a very good formula. It's like a rheostat; it's not on/off, it's not yes/no. It is, "Mr. President, how many spending cuts are you willing to accept? We'll give you the same dollar value of debt
ceiling
increase that you'll give us in spending cuts. So if you only want $500 billion over the next five years in spending cuts, fine, here's a $500 billion increase in the debt
ceiling
. And by the way, you'll be back by the end of the year for another debt
ceiling
." But I, I think the president's also got to be held to an accountability for flexibility. If the debt
ceiling
matters that much, what is he willing to be flexible on? You take just one item which, which Congressman
Paul Ryan has proposed, and most governors agree with:
If you were to block grant
Medicaid
, that one step is probably
worth
$1 trillion; $700 billion to the
federal government
, about $200 billion to $300 billion to the
state governments
. So, as a taxpayer, paying both
federal
and
state
taxes
, that's $1 trillion less in debt over the next decade. I, I would not agree to just an automatic blank-check debt
ceiling
. We want -- you know, if your kids came in and had run up their credit cards and said, "Bail me out," you wouldn't say to them, "You don't have to change your behavior. Here, have some more money." You'd say, "Let's have a conversation about your behavior."
MR. GREGORY:
But bottom line, if there's negotiations going on and they can't come to real resolution, you say go ahead, don't vote to increase the debt
ceiling
?
REP. GINGRICH:
I would say find a formula and pass very, very short debt
ceiling
increases with very small amounts and take some savings that the president couldn't possibly veto. And if you had to, do a debt
ceiling
every three weeks. But do not give him a
blank check
. Because it's wrong for the
American people
.
MR. GREGORY:
But don't let
America
default is what you're saying as well.
REP. GINGRICH:
Avoid default if you possibly can. And frankly, if you watch, they've
all of a sudden
said they got an extra four months that they didn't think they had. So the secretary of the Treasury can do a great deal to maneuver.
MR. GREGORY:
What about entitlements? The
Medicare
trust fund, in stories that have come out over the weekend, is now going to be depleted by
2024
, five years earlier than predicted. Do you think that
Republicans
ought to buck the public opposition and really move forward to completely change
Medicare
, turn it into a voucher program where you give seniors...
REP. GINGRICH:
Right.
MR. GREGORY:
...some premium support and -- so that they can go out and buy private
insurance
?
REP. GINGRICH:
I don't think right-wing
social engineering
is any more desirable than left- wing
social engineering
. I don't think imposing
radical change
from the right or the left is a very good way for a
free society
to operate. I think we need a
national conversation
to get to a better
Medicare
system
with more choices for seniors. But there are specific
things you can do
. At the
Center
for
Health Transformation
, which I helped found, we published a book called "
Stop Paying
the
Crooks
." We thought that was a clear enough, simple enough idea, even for
Washington
. We -- between
Medicare and Medicaid
, we pay between $70 billion and $120 billion a year to crooks. And
IBM
has agreed to help solve it,
American Express
has agreed to help solve it,
Visa
's agreed to help solve it. You can't get anybody in this town to look at it. That's, that's almost $1 trillion over a decade. So there are
things you can do
to improve
Medicare
.
MR. GREGORY:
But not what
Paul Ryan
is suggesting, which is completely changing
Medicare
.
REP. GINGRICH:
I, I think that, I think, I think that that is too big a jump. I think what you want to have is a
system
where people voluntarily migrate to better outcomes, better solutions, better options, not one where you suddenly impose upon the -- I don't want to -- I'm against
Obamacare
, which is imposing
radical change
, and I would be against a
conservative
imposing
radical change
.
MR. GREGORY:
Let me ask you about the issue of
taxes
. You've been clear so far in your
campaign
. You want to reduce the
corporate tax
rate, reduce other
taxes
, make permanent the
Bush
era
tax cuts
. You won't raise
taxes
? You won't consider it as part of a
balanced budget
at any point,
raising taxes
?
REP. GINGRICH:
No.
MR. GREGORY:
Under no circumstances?
REP. GINGRICH:
I, I believe this is a
country
which has overspent, it's not undertaxed.
And I
believe every time you raise
taxes
, the politicians use that as an excuse to avoid facing the real decisions we're, we're confronting. We have a moment in history where we can get our
house
in order if we have the courage to stick to the job. I mean, I helped balance the
budget
for four straight years. We did it by cutting
taxes
and bringing the unemployment rate down to below 4 percent. The number one job in
America
today is to get people back to work because
America
only works when
Americans
are working.
MR. GREGORY:
But serious bipartisan figures who have looked at this said you can't simply have a conversation about bringing the deficit into balance, the
budget
into balance, without looking at revenue increases.
REP. GINGRICH:
Look, serious bipartisan figures are operating within the
Washington consensus
, which is wrong. You can, in fact, fundamentally rethink the
federal government
. Let me give you an example.
IBM
and
Dell
, and the other high-tech companies came together,
issued a report:
If the
federal government
was simply run as effectively as a multinational corporation, it's
worth
$125 billion a year. I just put on the table for you not paying crooks, which is
worth
between $70 billion and $120 billion a year.
None of these
serious bipartisan figures rethink the
federal government
. They fight over the current shape of the
federal government
.
MR. GREGORY:
What, what about jobs? Jobless rate now at 9 percent. You gave a speech
on Friday in Georgia, and you said the following about this president:
You want to be a
country
that creates
food stamps
, in which case frankly
Obama
's is an enormous success. The most successful
food stamp
president in
American history
. Or
do you want to
be a
country
that creates paychecks?
REP. GINGRICH:
First of all, you gave a speech in
Georgia
with language a lot of people think could be coded racially-tinged language, calling the president, the first
black president
, a
food stamp
president.
MR. GREGORY:
Oh, come on,
David
.
REP. GINGRICH:
What did you mean? What was the point?
MR. GREGORY:
That's, that's bizarre. That -- this kind of automatic reference to racism, this is the president of the
United States
. The president of the
United States
has to be held accountable. Now, the idea that -- and what I said is factually true.
Forty-seven
million
Americans
are on
food stamps
. One out of every six
Americans
is on
food stamps
. And to hide behind the charge of racism? I have -- I have never said anything about
President Obama
which is racist.
REP. GINGRICH:
Well, what did you mean?
MR. GREGORY:
Well, it's very simple. He has policies --
and I
used a very direct analogy. He follows the same destructive
political model
that destroyed the city of
Detroit
. I follow the model that
Rick Perry
and others have used to create more jobs in
Texas
. You know,
Texas
two out of the last four years created more jobs than the other 49
states
combined. I'm suggesting we know how to create jobs.
Ronald Reagan
did it. I was part of that. We know how to create jobs. We did it when I was speaker. And, and the way you create jobs is you have lower
taxes
, you have less regulation, you have litigation reform. When the
New York Stock Exchange
puts its headquarters at
Amsterdam
,
Holland
and, by the way, follows 40 other companies in the last year; when
General Electric
pays zero in
taxes
; there's something fundamentally wrong with the current
system
. The
Obama
system
of the
National Labor Relations Board
basically breaking the law to try to punish
Boeing
and to threaten every right-to-work
state
. The
Environmental Protection Agency
trying to control the entire
American economy
by bureaucratic fiat. The
Obama
system
's going to lead us down the path to
Detroit
and destruction. I think we need a brand-new path. It's a path of
job creation
. And one of the central themes of this
campaign
is going to be paychecks vs.
food stamps
.
REP. GINGRICH:
All right, let me ask you about another hot-button issue in the
Republican primary
, of course, and that's
health care
.
Mitt Romney
having to defend his proponent -- that he was a proponent of universal
health care in Massachusetts
, and specifically around this idea of the individual mandate where you make
Americans
buy
insurance
if they don't have it. Now, I know you've got big difference with what you call
Obamacare
. But back in
1993
on this program this is what you said about the individual mandate. Watch.
MR. GREGORY:
I am for people, individuals -- exactly like
automobile insurance
-- individuals having
health insurance
and being required to have
health insurance
.
And I
am prepared to vote for a voucher
system
which will give individuals, on a sliding scale, a
government subsidy
so we insure that everyone as individuals have
health insurance
.
REP. GINGRICH:
What you advocate there is precisely what
President Obama
did with his healthcare legislation, is it not?
MR. GREGORY:
No, it's not precisely what he did. In,
in the first place
,
Obama
basically is trying to replace the entire
insurance
system
, creating
state
exchanges, building a
Washington
- based model, creating a
federal system
. I believe all of us -- and this is going to be a big debate -- I believe all of us have a responsibility to help pay for
health care
. I think the idea that...
REP. GINGRICH:
You agree with
Mitt Romney
on this point.
MR. GREGORY:
Well, I agree that all of us have a responsibility to pay -- help pay for
health care
. And, and I think that there are ways to do it that make most libertarians relatively happy. I've said consistently we ought to have some requirement that you either have
health insurance
or you post a bond...
REP. GINGRICH:
Mm-hmm.
MR. GREGORY:
...or in some way you indicate you're going to be held accountable.
REP. GINGRICH:
But that is the individual mandate, is it not?
MR. GREGORY:
It's a variation on it.
REP. GINGRICH:
OK.
MR. GREGORY:
But it's a
system
...
REP. GINGRICH:
And so you won't use that issue against
Mitt Romney
.
MR. GREGORY:
No. But it's a
system
which allows people to have a range of choices which are designed by the economy. But I think setting the precedent -- you know, there are an amazing number of people who think that they ought to be given
health care
. And, and so a
large number
of the uninsured earn $75,000 or more a year, don't buy any
health insurance
because they want to buy a second
house
or a better car or go on vacation. And then you and I and everybody else ends up picking up for them. I don't think having a
free rider
system
in
health
is any more appropriate than having a
free rider
system
in any other part of our society.
REP. GINGRICH:
Let me ask you about the
U.S.
role in the world. We're still digesting the intelligence that's coming out of the raid in
Pakistan
that killed
Osama bin Laden
. You said back in February, "Any honest assessment on 9/11 this year, 10 years after the attack, would have to lead to the conclusion that we are simply and slowly losing the war." Do you still feel we're losing the war against terror?
MR. GREGORY:
Absolutely. Absolutely.
And I
think...
REP. GINGRICH:
Even after
bin Laden
?
MR. GREGORY:
...the thing -- sure, look at what we've learned about
bin Laden
. We've learned that for nine and a half years the
country
,
Pakistan
, to which we have given $20 billion was apparently hiding him. Now, does any serious
person
believe that the
Pakistani government
had no idea
bin Laden
was sitting there? Does anybody -- and notice, by the way, what the intelligence chief has apologized for. He's apologized for the
Americans
getting
bin Laden
. He didn't apologize for nine and a half years of failing to find him. He didn't apologize for
Pakistan
having failed to do its duty. And who did the -- who did the
Pakistanis
call the minute the American covert helicopter was shot down? They called the Chinese. Now, I would just suggest to you, we need to rethink carefully what do we mean by the word, "ally."
REP. GINGRICH:
Well so, what does it mean? Would you cut off foreign aid to
Pakistan
right now?
MR. GREGORY:
I would look very seriously at the whole relationship. But I, I, I believe something much deeper. I think this conflict with radical
Islamists
is so much more profound and is going to last so much longer that we had better be thinking about very different strategies. I, I don't know that a simple boots-on-the-ground and violence from predators model -- this is not a comment on
President Obama
. I think the, the whole
system
, including in the
Bush administration
, has underestimated the depth of the problem and, and the level of the, of the challenge that we face.
REP. GINGRICH:
Let me turn to another area that has earned you criticism, and that is questions about your temperament, given things that you have said during the long career in, in the public arena where people question your motivation. Once such comment was made in September of last year. You were talking about the president. I'll put it up on the screen. "What if [
Obama
] is so outside our comprehension, that only if you understand Kenyan, anti- colonial behavior, can you begin to piece together [his actions]? That is the most accurate, predictive model for his behavior. ... This is a
person
who is fundamentally out of touch with how the world works, who happened to have played a wonderful con, as a result of which he is now president." Now somebody like you has this reputation for such an intellect to make statement like that sounds either ill-informed or, at worst, bigoted. What's the basis for making a comment like that?
MR. GREGORY:
Well, first of all, that comment was made in reference to a book by
Dinesh D'Souza
who's a first generation American from
India
, who wrote a very interesting book arguing away a thing about
Obama
. So it was in the context of a discussion about a book written by an American first generation immigrant who says, "Gosh, from my perspective here's a way of thinking about the president." Second, I think it's fair to say that I'm going to have -- one of the tests on this
campaign
trail is going to be whether I have the discipline and the judgment to be president. I think that's a perfectly fair question.
REP. GINGRICH:
Is this a fair example -- in other words, this notion that somehow
Obama
's anti-American, that he is not on
America's team
, that he doesn't love
America
, are you prepared to say right now to say both on behalf of yourself and to other
Republicans
out there that this is nonsense, we ought to put this to rest?
MR. GREGORY:
Well, look, I think he loves
America
. But I think he has a very different vision of what
America
is.
REP. GINGRICH:
And what is that?
MR. GREGORY:
I think it's a -- well, for example, he gives a speech to the
National Defense University
on
Libya
in which he cites the
United Nations
and the
Arab League
eight times and the
U.S. Congress
once. Now, I just think there's a little bit of imbalance there.
REP. GINGRICH:
You don't think he believes in
American exceptionalism
?
MR. GREGORY:
I don't. I'm fairly confident if you look at the -- now, he's learned recently how to say it.
REP. GINGRICH:
Hm.
MR. GREGORY:
But if you go back and look at the first two years of his presidency, it was a
real change
, a real...
REP. GINGRICH:
All right.
MR. GREGORY:
But here -- let me talk about me for a second, not about
President Obama
.
REP. GINGRICH:
Yeah.
MR. GREGORY:
One of my great weaknesses is that
part of me
is a teacher analyst. And
part of me
is a political leader. And I've -- one of the most painful lessons I've had to learn, and I haven't fully learned it obviously, is that if you seek to be the president of the
United States
, you are never an analyst, you know, you're never a college teacher because those folks can say what they want to say. And somebody who offers to lead
America
has to be much more disciplined and, and much more thoughtful than an analyst. Analysts can say anything they want to because there's no downside. But the
person
to whom you're entrusting the leadership of the
United States
had better think long and hard before they say things. I think that's a fair criticism of me.
REP. GINGRICH:
Let's talk
about the
campaign
and your role in the
campaign
. You said back in
1996
that you're not a natural leader, that you're more of an intellectual gadfly. And yet here you are running for the presidency. Is that your role in this
campaign
, to be an ideas guy...
MR. GREGORY:
No.
REP. GINGRICH:
...to force the issue or to actually win?
MR. GREGORY:
That's a very fair question. And all I can tell you is that I've now spent 15 years trying to grow from gadfly to proposer of very serious, very fundamental policy change. And one of the real parts of this
campaign
will be the process of going to the
American people
, starting tomorrow in
Iowa
, talking about the things you and I are talking about.
What do we do
to get people back to work?
What do we do
to get back to a
balanced budget
? How do we enforce the
10th Amendment
and move power out of
Washington
? These are huge undertakings. And my job is to gather together really bright people, listen to them carefully, and develop
over time
a series of proposals around which I think
America
, not just
Newt Gingrich
, but
America
, should stake its future.
REP. GINGRICH:
You look at the field that's starting to take shape on the
Republican side
-- and we'll put the, the current polling on the board --
Mike Huckabee
is now not running. He was high up there.
Donald Trump
. You were there at 10 percent. And our latest poll still indicates that you've still got high negatives. There's still a high unfavorable rating. Some of that, Mr. Speaker, has to do with your own
personal life
, the fact that you've been married three times, you had extramarital affairs, one of -- during which the time that
Republicans
were pursuing
President Clinton
for impeachment that earned you the label of being a hypocrite.
And I
wonder how you're going to deal with this, particularly when
social conservatives
, like
Tom Coburn
, senator from
Oklahoma
, has said the following about you.
And I
'll put it up on the screen. This was from last summer. Senator Coburn "made it clear that he won't be on
Newt Gingrich
's
2012
presidential
bandwagon. "
Gingrich
'is a super-smart man, but he doesn't know anything about commitment to marriage,' he said of the thrice-married former
House speaker
. 'He's the last
person
I'd vote for, for president of the
United States
. His life indicates he does not have a commitment to the character traits necessary to be a great president.'"
MR. GREGORY:
Well,
all I can say
to every American, and every American has the right to ask these questions, is that I have made mistakes in my life. I have had to go to God for forgiveness and to seek reconciliation.
And I
'd ask them to look at who I am today, look at the strong marriage that
Callista
and I have, look at the close relationship I have with my two daughters and their husbands, look at the loving relationship we have with our grandchildren, and decide whether or not I am today a
person
that they believe could lead the
country
and could
save us
in a period of, of enormous problems. I think the problems we face require a leader with the courage to take the heat and to try to bring together millions of people so that collectively we can get this
country
back on the right track
.
REP. GINGRICH:
But before you get there, it becomes an electability issue. You've said -- one of the things you've said is that you've matured. But you were 55 years old at the time these things were going on, hardly a young man. And at the same time, just this year, you've talked about what was going on in your life at the time. This is what you told the
Christian Broadcasting Network
.
MR. GREGORY:
There's no question that at times of my life, partially driven by, by how passionately I felt about this
country
, that I worked far too hard and that things happened in my life that were not appropriate.
REP. GINGRICH:
Do people -- should they be expected to take that as a serious act of contrition?
MR. GREGORY:
No.
REP. GINGRICH:
That you were so patriotic and so passionate that you cheated on your wife?
MR. GREGORY:
No.
David
, and that, that's 15 seconds out of what I think was a 20- something minute interview. I have said -- I'll repeat what I said to you a minute ago. I clearly have done things that were wrong. I've clearly had to seek God's forgiveness. I've seen -- I believe people have to decide whether or not what I've said and what I've done is real.
And I
think that if people watch me and talk with me and get to know me, my hope is it'll -- the majority of
Americans
will decide that I can help this
country
get back on track in a way that no one else can. And if they decide that that's true, then I think we will have a very successful
campaign
. But people have every right to ask the tough questions and to measure somebody personally.
REP. GINGRICH:
You understand people, particularly
conservative
Republicans
saying...
MR. GREGORY:
Absolutely. Yes.
REP. GINGRICH:
..."This is not a guy I can support."
MR. GREGORY:
I, I understand people questioning. And then we'll see whether or not,
over time
, they decide I'm somebody they can support or whether, as many people say to me, that as they get to know me and as they listen to what I'm doing and they watch how I operate and they watch what I'm doing, they say, "You know, I really do think you can help
America
, and we're going to help you." I have a
large number
of
social conservatives
who support me because, as we've talked this through, they've reached a different conclusion about what
America
needs and what I can bring in trying to fill that role of leader.
REP. GINGRICH:
What about
taxes
? Also important to conservatives. There are reports about your businesses having unpaid
taxes
. Can that be resolved?
MR. GREGORY:
Look. I -- they're all -- every single thing in that report had already been resolved. We run four businesses. Over 12 years we've paid millions of dollars in
taxes
. There were, I think, four or five places where, largely because stuff got lost in the mail coming to us, we didn't even know we had the liens. And several of the cases, when we called, the liens didn't even exist. All of that's taken care of. I think the total amount was $6,000 over a 12-year period.
REP. GINGRICH:
What about
Mike Huckabee
? Do his voters go to you? Will you be working for him?
MR. GREGORY:
Look, his voters are very independent, and they're going to go where they believe that
America
needs to go both on
conservative
and spiritual values.
Huckabee
-- Governor
Huckabee
is going to remain a very important figure in the
conservative
moment, and I suspect that, that he is going to have a role to play for many years to come.
REP. GINGRICH:
In the
conservative
moment, there is, of course, a celebration of
Ronald Reagan
. And a lot of candidates, you -- try to grab that mantle of
Reagan
. Back on this program in
1990
, you said some interesting things about
Reagan
. I want to show them.
MR. GREGORY:
First of all,
Ronald Reagan
did a lot of things that conservatives didn't like.
And I
think it's a little bit much to go back and say that was
Camelot
, that that was an era of pure conservatism.
George Bush
isn't as good as
Reagan
was at making speeches on the right while governing in the
center
, but the fact is, that's what
Ronald Reagan
did.
REP. GINGRICH:
Is that a model for President
Gingrich
? Run on the right, govern from the
center
?
MR. GREGORY:
Well,
Ronald Reagan
ran a very broad
center
right platform.
Ronald Reagan
ran on defeating the
Soviet empire
. He and I agreed totally on cutting
taxes
, and I helped pass
REP. GINGRICH:
Rendezvous with
Destiny
." I just spoke yesterday at
Eureka College
, his alma mater, at -- in the commencement. He is an extraordinary man. But there is a lot to learn from him. You were mentioning earlier about the debt
ceiling
fight.
Reagan
had a pretty firm rule of get 80 percent and keep moving. Don't go for 100 percent.
the three tax cuts. Callista and I have done a movie, "Ronald Reagan:
Is that how you would approach it? Try to govern from the
center
?
MR. GREGORY:
I -- the
center
right. I think it -- I don't think that people on the left would be very happy, but I've always said publicly, and
Reagan
believed this, you can't have a hard right presidency succeed because the
country
, there's a
center
-right majority that will isolate the left. There's not a right wing majority in this
country
. But clearly
Reagan
was a great
conservative
overall, and I think that my record is pretty extraordinarily
conservative
in the same tradition.
REP. GINGRICH:
Who's the front-runner right now on the
Republican side
?
MR. GREGORY:
Oh, I suspect Governor
Romney
is just because of the scale of the money he has and the amount he can raise. But, candidly, since Governor Huntsman probably has equal amount of money, he may be in. If
Donald Trump
comes in, he has, he has...
REP. GINGRICH:
Is he a serious candidate? Is
Trump
a serious candidate?
MR. GREGORY:
Who knows? I mean, this is a
free society
, and anybody who wants to can come play. All three of them are capable of providing enough money on their own that they're very formidable candidates.
REP. GINGRICH:
Would you entertain being on the ticket as a number two if it came to that?
MR. GREGORY:
David
, I want you to ask yourself, can you imagine any
presidential nominee
who would pick me to be the
vice presidential candidate
?
REP. GINGRICH:
But would you entertain it? Would that be a no?
MR. GREGORY:
Nobody -- as
Reagan
said in '76 when he was hoping
Ford
would not ask him, nobody could automatically say no to the president of the
United States
. But it strikes me as so implausible, I'm not --
Callista
and I will not spend long hours worrying about that question.
REP. GINGRICH:
And the debate goes on. Speaker
Gingrich
,
thank you very much
.
MR. GREGORY:
Thank you.
REP. GINGRICH:
“ ”