Gingrich, Standing Ovation Video

:laugh: Gingrich handed a CNN reporter his head.

Good job!:thumbs:

 

This was the right tone, the right words, and the right moment to say all those things.

I'm glad Newt had the ability to articulate something so many people in this country believe.

The mainstream media is the greatest country-wide force which prohibits effective, rational governance. We need more people to say this, we need more people to act on it.

I've stopped watching television and completely walked away from any kind of news (outside of ESPN) because of this trash journalism (I think a lot of ESPN is trash journalism.) We are becoming a nation of rabble and despicable people, rotten to our core and led by infantile, egomaniacs who are chosen because of their "beauty" rather than their ability to reasonably govern.

BTW, Gringrich is right...most good people I know who could make a difference in local, state, and national governance want nothing to do with it because of the destructive force of the modern mainstream media.

Thanks for posting the link.

 

Actually, I thought Newt's display was one of the most despicable acts of any Presidential debate in my lifetime... and the crowd made it worse.

A serial adulterer is asked a serious question about his character because of new revelations from his ex-wife. He then attacks the questioner and receives a standing ovation for deflecting and attacking.

What a shame and a sham that the Republican Party has resorted to giving standing ovations to a serial adulterer... what a shame that Newt resorted to channeling Clinton and Cain by attacking in such a manner. If my child had done what Newt had done, they would have never forgot that moment for the rest of their life. It was juvenile, shifted the blame, focused on excuses, and sought to cover up the issue.

I said it was despicable when Cain did it, Clinton did it, and Newt did it. He may be innocent, but it shows he would rather resort to politics than deal with the issues.

He is a sham.

 

Let me add one thing:

If you notice Santorum made a great case against Newt, the exact same case I have been making against Newt for over a month (and since last April and May). Namely, Newt is not really conservative, behind closed doors he has been an enemy of conservatives by undermining our agenda, he is erratic, and his character is questionable. I doubt people were really listening to Santorum, but he hit the nail on the head showing what us conservatives have been saying, Newt will say one thing in public but undermine us behind closed doors. He says he is pro-life but then undermine our bills and agenda. That is Newt and one reason why he created some enemies in D.C.

I have no clue why a conservative would vote for Newt... none!

Newt, Big on Talk, Bigger on Himself.

 

Ditto!

I havent' decided yet which Republican I'll support. So this isn't an endorsement of Gringrich.

I'm just sick and tired of how the media is doing everything it can to shape public policy to suit its own agenda. If I were to run, as a Republican, for county dog catcher, I'm sure there's something, somewhere, in my past that would be dragged through the mud by the local media to sway other folks to vote against me. I don't know what it would be, but somebody's going to find something even if they have to fabricate an out of context situation.

 

I loved watching Next expose and tear down the intentions of the liberal media. Please, Lord God, let it happen more and more, and judge them for their evil speaking of the right, and for their lies, and please awaken the people of this nation to see it and to despise it, and the media as well for all of their bias and leading the people by deception. In Jesus name.

 

Newt was right on the money in his description of the media in this country and if I was there, I would have been a part of the standing ovation.
I'm not sure I would vote for him in a primary, unless it came down to between him and Romney, but he has impressed me this week in both debates.

 

Yes, lets not expose the hypocrisy of fools like Gingrich. Let the people remain blind to his moral faults, after all this is only important if someone is a democrat.

 

Yes we all know he is not RP.

 

No, Newt is not a sham. He is a typical American and thinks laws and commandments only apply to other people, to losers. Like the majority of BB. The Rs are the party for winners and the Ds are the party for losers.

 

Excellent post.

 

I also think that is an excellent post. The only thing left to debate for the pathetic choices in the Republican Party this year is which is closer to the essence of pure evil, Gingrich or Romney.

 

Just to make it clear, I'm no fan of the former Speaker. His excessive immorality aside, I don't care for him as a leader.

What is important here is what he said. CNN had zero...zero reason to begin a Presidential debate with this pointless question. Do we really believe the largest problem confronting our country is Newt's past moral decisions? I hope not.

Was this question just pointed at Gingrich or were the other candidates going to get a chance to respond about how they felt concerning his private life?

There is no room for this kind of junk in a Presidential debate, and definitely less as the first question. This is mindless line of questioning is exactly why the Presidential race should never be followed from the perspective of the mainline media. It is simply trying to feed the rabble their opiate. The most pointless, thoughtless, idiotic issues that the mainstream media drives into their broadcasts have no bearing on the legitimate (and significantly important) issues which should determine a Presidential nominee.

That is what Gringrich articulated well in his well-timed rebuke of a sensless, idiotic question to lead off the debate.

 

The office of President should be held in the highest of regard by citizens of the United States. We have a right to expect whoever holds the office to conduct the business of the nation according to the Constitution in an honest manner and serve the people.

It is a given that the news media is an entertainment business, and questions are asked not to probe for the best choice and an explanation of the issues, but to generate sensation and revenue. This type of mentality attracts people who are attracted to reality shows and soap operas rather than documentaries.

Having said all of that, there is no excuse for there being 300,000,000 American citizens, some quite bright and good leaders, and having a debate for the highest office in the land where two of the four remaining are from the lowest levels of morality, and hover barely above an animal instinct. That says more about us than them. We as citizens of the United States allowed them to get as far as they did.

 

Exactly.

The most important question they want answered is about an allegation made by an ex wife that he asked for an "open" marriage, when even she made clear that that was her interpretation of what he said and not his actual words?

Smacks more of prurient interest than political importantance.

But it does tell us what the media thinks the public considers "important". Sex.

 

Wonder if Newt has asked God for forgiveness.

If he did, he is no longer a "serial adulterer" in God's eyes.

Sure glad God doesn't keep a record of sins (if forgiven) like Satan does.

 

Does this mean you approve of an open marriage?

Did you cut Clinton as much slack over his affair.

After all Newt led the impeachment effort and at the same time was involved in infidelity ... the very charge he brought against Clinton.

 

Clinton did not get impeached over an affair.

 

But it was not because Newt did not try to have him impeached. Newt led the charge.

Did you cut Clinton slack ... as, and perhaps I am wrong, in the way some seem to want to cut Newt slack?

Character is important in a candidate. To me Newt is very lacking in this regard. If he is so faithless to others in his life, why would I expect him to be faithful to the nation as a whole if he felt his own self-interests were in another direction?