(Reuters) – “I’m speaking as a historian.”
It’s a common refrain in Newt Gingrich’s speeches, a not-so-subtle reminder of the image he seeks to build as a Republican presidential candidate: that of a serious thinker whose opinions are rooted in an appreciation of the past.
From battle flags of the 18th century to colonial Africa and conflict in the Mideast, Gingrich peppers his opinions with sometimes-obscure — and controversial — references to history.
So when the silver-haired Gingrich argued last month against “activist” federal judges who he believes go beyond their authority in deciding cases, he didn’t just criticize the jurists. He said they should be arrested by Capitol Police or U.S. marshals.
His comments caused an uproar among many legal analysts, scholars and lawmakers, who said such a scenario would violate the U.S. Constitution’s separation of powers.
Full story: Gingrich’s nods to history don’t impress scholars