Newt's Issue

Peter, do a little more reading up and you'll learn that in both cases the illnesses weren't the precipitating factor to the divorce.

Gingrich certainly has issues, but this one is a meme.

I have and there is a trend...And this is after all his other committment phobias.

Newt seems to be doing a fairly good job defusing this.

I don't think so..Jenny Sanford came out stating she won't vote for Newt.
Romney is going to win SC

Newt was w/ #2 while legally w/ #1 , Newt is now w/ #3 while newt was legally w/ #2,forget particulars (they are private and distateful) the basics is enough to turn me off.
How do you defuse the basic fact !

Yes, well that is an excellent point too...

I think voters should be studying Gingrich's voting record and what he is on record as supporting

Recently, Gingrich “reluctantly” supported TARP; is on record supporting ethanol subsidies; has long promoted an individual health-care mandate; and he is also in favor of allowing those who have entered our country illegally to remain here if they haven’t broken our laws, but entering our country illegally is not considered by Gingrich to be breaking our law

Why did Newt hook up with Clinton to give us the NAFTA which circumvents Congress’ power to regulate commerce with foreign nations and places this authority in the hands of bi-national panels, a majority of Panel members being foreigners ___ who are now making binding decisions concerning America’s commerce with Canada and Mexico? See Establishment of Bi-national Panels

Why did Newt also side with Clinton to give China, a communist government, “Most Favored Trade Status” so products produced under slave labor wages and conditions can be imported into America duty free to compete with America manufactured products, creating full employment for China while closing down America’s loyal domestic manufactures?

Why did Newt side with progressives by co-sponsoring the “Fairness in Broadcasting Act of 1987“ which was intended by progressives to allow folks in government to “regulate” the political speech of conservative talk radio shows, which is strictly forbidden by our Constitution? Surely we all know communist and other oppressive governments all enjoy the power Gingrich wanted to place in Congress’ hands.

And with all the current bank bailout deals which are destroying our nation from within, do we not recall that Newt Gingrich is the Granddaddy of bailing out banks and set the stage for bank bailouts back in 1991 when he hooked up with other progressive RINOs in Congress to pave the way for bailing out savings and loan institutions to the tune of $40 billion?

How about the $52 billion for agriculture program subsidies and food stamps? Is this not spitting upon the defined and limited powers granted to Congress? And, what part of our Constitution allows federal revenue to be appropriated for public housing and “community development”? Or the $ 200 billion plus Gingrich voted for the Departments of Labor, HHS, and Education? Do these misappropriations of federal revenue supported by Gingrich not bother real conservatives? I’m more than certain they do not disturb RINOs and progressives, as a matter of fact RINOs and progressives embrace these misappropriations of federal revenue and spit upon our Constitution in the process. Should we not use our Constitution as our guide in judging those we support to be our next president?

JWK

Health care by consent of the governed (Article 5) our amendment process --- tyranny by a majority vote in Congress or a Supreme Court's progressive majority vote

Good post JWK

But Gingrich keeps hitting them out of the park with his rehearsed one-liners and the SC republican crowd last night ate it up like cocktail imbibers at a comedy club. Never mind what he has done in the past or that he is damn close to being amoral, he knows how to play the game and playing the game is what the beltway wants and appreciates.

Congress knows how to play the game also, the super committee couldn't come up with any cuts, they know how to play. They passed the NDAA act overwhelmingly and Obama had some concerns but signed it anyway, he knows how to play the game.

Who doesn't know how to play the game .... I think some of us know, he is the invisible candidate

What did Gingrich refer to him last night as, the doctor dressed in birthing attire? I think Gingrich's one-liner fell a little flat on that one. He'll be working on a better one soon

Herman Cain is accused of extra-marital dalliances that he and his wife deny-- his Republican support sinks like a stone.

Newt Gingrich is asked about his proven record of extra-marital dalliances-- his Republican support erupts like volcano.

I'm waiting for a liberal pundit on tv to point to this as evidence that Republicans are racists.

Good point, Virgil. Tomorrow will tell if "family values" has any meaning to Republicans whatsoever.

What attracted me to Newt was the promises he was making. Not until I started peeling the layers of the onion did I realize that Newt is a stinking scumbag. My moral values would not allow me to vote for him.

Gee Bob S try to not hold back it isn't good for you !!!!!

Right on Bob S !!

In any case, the Gingrich campaign’s statement, by focusing on the 2006 contract, conveniently left out the fact that Gingrich had been on a Freddie Mac retainer since 1999.

Just how much money has Newt taken from Freddie and Fannie?

Mike G wrote:

But Gingrich keeps hitting them out of the park with his rehearsed one-liners and the SC republican crowd last night ate it up like cocktail imbibers at a comedy club. Never mind what he has done in the past or that he is damn close to being amoral, he knows how to play the game and playing the game is what the beltway wants and appreciates.

I’m disappointed in Rush’s comments concerning the debate and the first question asked of Gingrich. As to the audience’s response (jeering King), it confirms one thing! Most Americans simply don't know the progressive media's thinking.

The question was asked to predictably infuriate our Republican voter’s hatred of the pinko media. And it worked quite well! The audience showed their loathing of the pinko media is far greater than their feelings concerning Gingrich’s infidelity which psychologically translated into the audience getting behind Gingrich . . . our progressive media’s secret global governance candidate.

JWK

Health care by consent of the governed (Article 5) our amendment process --- tyranny by a majority vote in Congress or a Supreme Court's progressive majority vote

Romney snookers Gingrich with House Ethics report!

SEE: Romney calls on Gingrich to release House Ethics report

“Romney then agreed with Haley that Gingrich should release the Ethics investigation immediately.

"Of course he should," Romney told reporters. "One of the issues that was raised last night by Rick Santorum was the fact that he was pushed out of the House by his fellow members. I think over 80 percent of Republican congressmen voted to reprimand the Speaker of the House, the first time in history. And Nancy Pelosi has the full record of that Ethics investigation. You know it's going to get out before the general election. Sure, he ought to get it out now."

The good news in all this is, thanks to Romney, we are finding out that the leadership of both political parties while in Washington are involved up to their necks in unethical practices and plundering our federal treasury! The only difference is how they do it. While Obama has plundered the American people’s federal treasury with such things as Solyndra and the Chevy Volt scam under which those well connected with Obama made out very well, even after kickbacks, Newt Gingrich was sucking taxpayer funds out of Freddy Mac by “advising” (probably blackmailing) the CEOs who have been swindling this government subsidized enterprise for countless years.

We need to get all of the Washington Establishment crowd out of DC, and this includes Newt Gingrich who has been on the public dole ever since being drummed out of Congress for ethics violations. Fact is, Gingrich gets a federal pension of over $100,000 annually which is taxed away from hard working people who can barely pay for their necessities of life. And this is how the Washington Establishment feathers its nest at taxpayer expense.

JWK

Health care by consent of the governed (Article 5) our amendment process --- tyranny by a majority vote in Congress or a Supreme Court's progressive majority vote

"You know it's going to get out before the general election."

Is that Romney conceding the nomination????

Gingrich has come out in favor of a Gold Standard, against Article 21, and for reining in the power of the judiciary. And he actually knows how to achieve these objectives. We should stop eating our young - even before they are hatched:-)

By the way, Cain's support increased with the initial infidelity claims. It was only when they became undeniable and even tawdrier than first reported that he sank in the polls.

I really don't give a damn about who's doin' who. I care about who's doin' me! Go Ron Paul!

charlie

Amen Charlie.

Apparently my question has been answered, at least in conservative S. Carolina. Family values is just a Republican sound bite and means nothing. Newt "dated" his second wife while married to #1. He "dated" his third wife for six years while married to #2. How can Rs even pretend to be for "the family" and nominate Newt?

I suspect that Newt benefited from ABC 'News' crude attempt to damage his campaign. But David Allen does raise an interesting question: why did the conservative vote go to Newt, after all this news about his flawed personal life? I find myself wondering if his conversion to the Catholic faith may have something to do with it; could there be a story we haven't heard there, possibly that he really has had a life-changing experience, that South Carolinians know about? Or is it that religious conservatives are more willing to give people second chances than other groups?

I don't know if any of this is true or not. Perhaps we'll find out as the dust settles from the primary (but not from ABC, obviously).

One thing that's helping Newt is that conservatives especially Tea Partiers resent having the media and the "establishment" pick their candidate for them. When Newt takes on John King, voters see him as a "fighter" and they imagine that's what we need in the White House, or at least in the fall campaign.

Speaking for myself, I want a president who is demonstrably competent and effective at not just dreaming up ideas, but in leading large organizations and implementing change.

Newt is not that guy.
Romney is.

I think among certain Christians, there is a mistrust of Mormons that is hurting Romney.
An example is one lady I saw back in Iowa telling a Nightly News reporter she was a Baptist and couldn't vote for Romney because he's a Mormon, not a Christian.

there is a key here that is beyond Newt. In the early running of a race-and it is early- people want their base needs met and THEN their higher hopes and standards also met. Right now Newt has an understanding of the intense and massive anger the right has toward both the media and the Left. It isn't that Newt is the guy people want...as much as he is doing what they have long wanted done- he is swinging back. I am way past tired of being on the reception end of abuse, and I have no way to strike back...and Newt has done so. frankly, I'd rather lose with someone who will draw blood, than lose with someone with good hair and money (who just will NOT punch back no matter what).
This is a war-and a very important war- and I don't want Charlie Brown in my foxhole- I want Batman-even if he is flawed.

Newt is a major player in a field of bench players. That he is so poor in so many ways doesn't matter this early...it will only matter in the general election- and then it will be him vs. Obama...and I think we all will hold our nose and vote for Newt.

(as an aside-I think this Newtonian aggression is also why Palin had so strong of a following ...she struck back when attacked, and we liked it)

Ayn

I think we all will hold our nose and vote for Newt.

I won't! I will leave the space blank if Newt gets the GOP nomination. Newt would be worse than Obama. Newt is a self centered arrogant little man, worse than Obama.

So.Carolina, I look at as I do Mass. and California, Texas these are areas where extremes of one thing or another are usually the norm not neccessarily the more middle or usual you find in most areas. Entertaining maybe ,effective questionable!
Politically these people held on to the Stars and Bars long after most put it rest and put up with politicians who were enjoyable in their rhetoric and questionable in their ethics sounds familiar to me. In 1968 I saw alot of black draftee inductees who went to Vietnam while a few white boys didn't after Mendall Rivers made a phone call! Ya the evangelicals voted for him too!

Well...we will see. Newt is deeply flawed to be sure and I blame him for the ten years of butt-sitting by a GOP Congress that did nothing to implement the Contract of 1994. His cowardice in resigning and not following through- and allowing a "professional loser like Hasterat to "run" Congress was terrible!
Also, his personal treatment of Arianna Huffington (to be fair her husband's gay sexual preference and the subsequent divorce may also have contributed in large part to her volte- face) resulted in her bolting the GOP and "becoming" a VERY powerful Liberal and having a serious impact on American intellectual and political life via her blogging empire.
Having said that, he articulates the Conservative position very well, is a brilliant organizer and actually knows how to get stuff done. It would be an amazing series of Lincoln/Douglas debates between Obama and Newt- a far cry from the insipid, "say nothing of substance, do-not-offend-any-special-interest-group, platitude-ridden "debates of past 20 years.
If Newt did a Perot he might just win, ("it's the economy stupid"...."10% unemployment...it's all Obama's fault"...etc.etc.) because America really is hungry for a change: an efficient overhaul of the Federal government. In Newt you have a capable, articulate visionary of the American Libertarian/Conservative tradition and in Obama you have a very articulate spokesman for the European style "collectivist" tradition.
Nothing like it has ever been presented to the American populace since Reagan/Carter in 1980.
It could be ...."epic".

I can't take the election results of a state that re-elected Strom Thurmond to the U.S. Senate at age 93 very seriously.

Why do we condemn Barney Franks relationship to Fannie and Freddie and think that it is OK for Newt to take millions from them?

Ulsterman : Brilliant post!

Bob S,

Because what most Republicans are really looking for is the keys to the treasury and they don't care how they get them. Newt's theft from the taxpayers via Fannie & Freddie matter nothing to them as long as they get the keys to the treasury and can take some for themselves. I'm beginning to agree with woodcanoe that we need a total collapse to get these thieves out of government.