Yeah, but he's totally cool now so please vote for him.

So does God now forgive false claims against a news service? Because if so, Newt is covered...

LeoffDaGrate: So does God now forgive false claims against a news service? Because if so, Newt is covered...

God forgives all if you are a you have accepted St Reagan into your heart.

bmongar: St Reagan

Speaking of a guy that liked to feed the media lies on a regular basis.

FARK headline: Newt Gingrich forced to admit...

Article headline: Gingrich admits ABC claim was false

Article: "Tonight, after persistent questioning by our staff, the Gingrich campaign concedes now Speaker Gingrich was wrong - both in his debate answer, and in our interview yesterday..."

So, yeah. He still cannot admit he's wrong and has to hide behind some (overzealous?) staffer's press release. That's what I figured.

You know who also offered his two daughters from his first wife to the mob?

John King: I completely pussied out when it actually mattered, allowing Newt to completely avoid the question and come out looking great, but my staff just totally pwned his staff a week later in emails, so it's ok!



Yeah, no. King still sucks. How the hell could he fark that up?

William Jefferson Gingrich.

John King sounds like a desperate ex girlfriend.

"I was too drunk to legally give consent, so technically I didn't cheat on you. We're cool right?"

No, you're just a tramp. A dirty, filthy tramp with no personal standards. And that dress makes you look fat.

SmackLT: Newt doesn't care about apologizing after the fact. He scored his political points and won SC. Week-late apologies are cheap

Yep, it's like a coach forcing a ref to admit he made a bad call a week after losing the game. You still lost.

An important victory for John King in his ongoing effort to justify last Thursday's confrontation

Gingrich was "attacked" for being a man running for president in a party that has made it a point for forty years to try and force its version of morality into everyone else's marriages and bedrooms.

He is a man who cheated on two prior wives, leaving them for mistresses while they were ill or recovering from illness.

He is a man who attacked and persecuted then president of the United States Bill Clinton for having an affair, paying for his crusade with taxpayer money even as he himself engaged in his second affair.

He is a man who was censured and fined for his ethical failings on the job by an overwhelming bipartisan vote....

I'm unclear on what needs to be justified here.... except King's inexcusable blubbering breakdown after Newt too exception to being fairly and accurately hit with the facts of his own immorality.

Nauseating! How many more republican debates will the american people be subjected to? I don't remember there being this many in previous elections. This definitely qualifies as cruel and unusual.

He still is.

But since he and his whore wife converted to Catholicism, he's now a hypocrite as well.

Nurglitch: You know who also offered his two daughters from his first wife to the mob?

Scott Brown, for one.

So he didn't offer any witnesses... except for the two witnesses he offered.

F*ck off, John King.

Has Ron Paul been caught in any lies yet?

It looks like Gingrich is on track for the nod now, yet he says he won't do another republican debate where the audience can't boo or hiss or cheer.

Once he has that nod, there won't be any audience participation at future Presidential debates... Short of filing a lawsuit to allow people to make noise during the actual debates, he'll be left alone with his opponent, the questioner, the watching nation, and the questions he's asked. I do not think he will do well.

goobergal: Has Ron Paul been caught in any lies yet?

His entire campaign is a lie

1morerun: It looks like Gingrich is on track for the nod now, yet he says he won't do another republican debate where the audience can't boo or hiss or cheer.

Once he has that nod, there won't be any audience participation at future Presidential debates... Short of filing a lawsuit to allow people to make noise during the actual debates, he'll be left alone with his opponent, the questioner, the watching nation, and the questions he's asked. I do not think he will do well.

I still don't think he'll get the nod. He's simply not even on ballots in a lot of states, and his poll numbers are fading fast in Florida (which is winner take all)

I think its pretty funny that Newt demands that the audience be allowed to cheer and applaud at these GOP water boarding America sessions. PACs could start packing audiences. They could potentially turn these things into real spectacles. That's exactly what these debates need, old religious people speaking in tongues and sudden patriotic aneurysms causing large portions of the audience to spontaneously start reciting the pledge of Allegiance.

It's time for a full fledged GOP revival.

abb3w: Wendy's Chili: So he didn't offer any witnesses... except for the two witnesses he offered.

His two daughters.

And the prospect that they might know any damn thing about his sex life (beyond "mommy claims it was him") raises the shadow of even more disturbing questions.

Regardless of their relation or what anybody from the outside could know about a marriage, the story claims he didn't offer ABC any witnesses and then goes on to say he offered two witnesses. Kicking off a debate with questions about someone's sex life is bad enough, now that dipshiat is hammering on it for weeks to score some kind of petty victory.

F*ck you and your "journalism", John King. You're the reason I watch MSNBC.

The anti-Newt machine is working overtime now, and it's amazing to watch. Drudge is going way, way overboard the last few days like nothing I've seen before. He's pissed off the wrong people in his party, and now it's coming back to haunt him in full force.

America has tried leaders that refuse to admit any personal failings. Parents teach their children that admitting you are not perfect and asking for forgiveness is strength. It is a principle upon which his Nation was founded. Newt is a timely and refreshing through back to the intellectual greatness that our Founder's admired and embodied.

John King deserves to get fired. It was never about the subject matter or whether or not he was right. His first question was "would you care to comment on that?" and he followed it up by apologizing to Newt. It clearly exposed him as a fail journalist.

You have to get someone in there who frames the question "how do you reconcile the hypocrisy" or something like that. Or at least someone that in follow-up doesn't apologize and instead explains by the many different reasons why that question was relevant and not unexpected.

Death to New Rome: I think its pretty funny that Newt demands that the audience be allowed to cheer and applaud at these GOP water boarding America sessions. PACs could start packing audiences. They could potentially turn these things into real spectacles. That's exactly what these debates need, old religious people speaking in tongues and sudden patriotic aneurysms causing large portions of the audience to spontaneously start reciting the pledge of Allegiance.

It's time for a full fledged GOP revival.

Someone in another thread noted that if the audience started chanting "MIC CHECK" Newt would drop that demand faster than a hot coal.

Jake Havechek: To: teg_76

I hope all conservatives will remember what drudge, fox, coulter and others are doing to Newt.

Townhall.com, mrc.org, and cnsnews.com are much better, more fair,and far more conservative than these pigs that have deserted the conservative movement.

NO more drudge, coulter, or fox for me....!

11 posted on Thursday, January 26, 2012 9:19:39 AM by swampfox101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]


Cannibalism in politics can be so fun to watch in progress at times.

Wendy's Chili: Kicking off a debate with questions about someone's sex life is bad enough

First, there are plenty of examples where presidents are asked personal questions of this nature.

Second, Newt Gingrich was cheating on his wife and suggesting an open marriage, while also chastising and leading the impeachment of Clinton for doing the exact same thing.

His sex life is irrelevant. The hypocrisy on the other hand is extremely relevant and that's why if John King were a real journalist, he would have framed the question in an extremely relevant manner. But he's not, so there it is.

Wendy's Chili: ABC any witnesses and then goes on to say he offered two witnesses

Er, you think his two daughters are credible witnesses? I'm sure they're very nice people but you're just going to take them at their word about their dad being a great guy? Dude, I got a bridge to sell you and if you don't believe me on how great it is, I'll have my son describe it to you.

lennavan: John King deserves to get fired. It was never about the subject matter or whether or not he was right. His first question was "would you care to comment on that?" and he followed it up by apologizing to Newt. It clearly exposed him as a fail journalist.

You have to get someone in there who frames the question "how do you reconcile the hypocrisy" or something like that. Or at least someone that in follow-up doesn't apologize and instead explains by the many different reasons why that question was relevant and not unexpected.

John King got his start at CNN as "white house correspondent", which I believe is code for "paraphrase official press releases". He's not used to the whole asking probing questions shtick.

RandomExcess: America has tried leaders that refuse to admit any personal failings. Parents teach their children that admitting you are not perfect and asking for forgiveness is strength. It is a principle upon which his Nation was founded. Newt is a timely and refreshing through back to the intellectual greatness that our Founder's admired and embodied.

Sure it's ok to admit personal failings, but it's not really ok to attack others for those same personal failings at the very same time.

lennavan: His sex life is irrelevant. The hypocrisy on the other hand is extremely relevant and that's why if John King were a real journalist, he would have framed the question in an extremely relevant manner. But he's not, so there it is.

Eh. Perhaps it is relevant, but it's a topic for an interview, not a debate. His ex-wife wasn't on the stage. How the f*ck is Ron Paul going to know whether Newt asked for an open marriage or not?

lennavan: Er, you think his two daughters are credible witnesses?

About as credible as an angry ex-wife. But that's not the point. The article says he didn't offer witnesses, then it says he offered witnesses. It doesn't say he didn't offer good witnesses--as if there could be any to such a dispute.

This whole shiat is retarded.

"Gingrich spokesman R.C. Hammond says the only people the Gingrich campaign offered to ABC were his two daughters from his first marriage."

Bath them and then bring them to me.

abb3w: Wendy's Chili: So he didn't offer any witnesses... except for the two witnesses he offered.

His two daughters.

And the prospect that they might know any damn thing about his sex life (beyond "mommy claims it was him") raises the shadow of even more disturbing questions.

how is this guy not a hero to every self-respecting american male? he bangs who he wants to, and he always gets away with it. someone brings it up in a debate? he deflects well enough to keep the attention off it for a week or so, and by then it's old news. he's a player who is ugly, old, fat, and white. he's not even all that rich! he's my goddamn hero. and his wife is way hotter than anyone gives her credit for.

Jake Havechek: To: teg_76

I hope all conservatives will remember what drudge, fox, coulter and others are doing to Newt.

Townhall.com, mrc.org, and cnsnews.com are much better, more fair,and far more conservative than these pigs that have deserted the conservative movement.

NO more drudge, coulter, or fox for me....!

11 posted on Thursday, January 26, 2012 9:19:39 AM by swampfox101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Wow. That's like giving up eating lead paint chips because they're not toxic enough.

The base doesn't care if Newt is caught doing blow off a trannie's ass-crack at a gay orgy at Jeanine Garofalo's. He's the only one that can "stick it to the libs" and that's all that matters.

Scroll down to the comments section for proof.

Wyalt Derp: RandomExcess: America has tried leaders that refuse to admit any personal failings. Parents teach their children that admitting you are not perfect and asking for forgiveness is strength. It is a principle upon which his Nation was founded. Newt is a timely and refreshing through back to the intellectual greatness that our Founder's admired and embodied.

Sure it's ok to admit personal failings, but it's not really ok to attack others for those same personal failings at the very same time.

Tell that to Hamilton and Jefferson.

Lost Thought 00: 1morerun: It looks like Gingrich is on track for the nod now, yet he says he won't do another republican debate where the audience can't boo or hiss or cheer.

Once he has that nod, there won't be any audience participation at future Presidential debates... Short of filing a lawsuit to allow people to make noise during the actual debates, he'll be left alone with his opponent, the questioner, the watching nation, and the questions he's asked. I do not think he will do well.

I still don't think he'll get the nod. He's simply not even on ballots in a lot of states, and his poll numbers are fading fast in Florida (which is winner take all)

Okay good, we can only hope. Any links for that?

FAO Hamilton and Jefferson, and Aaron Burr: it's ok to admit personal failings, but it's not really ok to attack others for those same personal failings at the very same time. I'm definitely not voting for you after this.

I_C_Weener: Andy Andy: The anti-Newt machine is working overtime now, and it's amazing to watch. Drudge is going way, way overboard the last few days like nothing I've seen before. He's pissed off the wrong people in his party, and now it's coming back to haunt him in full force.

I agree with this. The quotes from Gingrich about Reagan are the best.

I was wondering about that, I thought that Drudge was a "stick it to the evil libs" type no matter what. Seems like Drudge is unloading on Newt, and there is a lot to unload because not only does Newt have a big head, he has an even bigger mouth and he has been running it for years to get what he wants.

Libtards say that conservatives are afraid of powerful women (despite bachmann, palin, coulter, need i go on?) but I think the libs are afraid of men with balls, who do what they want to and don't apologize for it. Newt does what he wants, and if he breaks a couple of hearts along the way? Fark it, that's someone else's problem. You don't see his daughters complaining about his first wife's heart being broken. Don't hate the player. hate the game.