Is Newt Gingrich inoculated on old controversies? Brookings’ Darrell West says Newt isn’t, but things from 20 years ago will not be decisive.

Newt Gingrich has serious baggage: “Are Republicans really crazy enough to nominate this presumably washed-up, ethically compromised, divisive, reckless and undisciplined figure for president?,” asks Third Way’s Bill Schneider. (Politico)

“Gingrich is right about the culture of poverty, but he opens himself to easy rebuttal by speaking so sweepingly and categorically. And did he really have to pick toilet scrubbing as his preferred workfare?,” writes AEI’s Jonah Goldberg. (LA Times)

What’s the rush on picking a GOP candidate? “I and my fellow conservative pundits haven’t helped anything. We’re constantly insisting that so-and-so’s campaign is done or that he or she now has no chance. We’ve been about as right as anybody would be if he simply guessed randomly. Certainly, no one predicted Gingrich as the front-runner after his self-immolation in the spring.” (USA Today)

Hillary Clinton turns to think tankers for new Foreign Affairs Policy Board. (Washington Post)

Mitt Romney waited for Cain and Perry to implode, but will that work against Newt? (Washington Post)

AEI’s Rick Hess and Linda Darling-Hammond argue there are four functions the federal government should perform if it wants to get education reform on track. (New York Times)

Room for Debate asks: Should workplaces curtail e-mail? (New York Times)

Did the military help Egypt’s Islamists to power? (National Review)

“Sigh. Where to begin? It’s absurd to complain that Obama - who can launch wars without congressional approval and assassinate American citizens via drone strike, a man who sits atop an executive branch of 2.1 million civilian employees claiming authority over everything from how much salt we ingest to what sort of light bulbs we’re permitted to use - is powerless,” writes Cato’s Gene Healy. (Cato)