Democrats feeling a little conflicted over potential Gingrich nomination; Update: Gingrich to Pelosi: Thanks for the early Christmas gift

posted at 2:45 pm on December 5, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

Republicans may have mixed feelings about the rise of Newt Gingrich in the presidential primary race, but they’re not alone.  In two articles published today, readers either learn that Gingrich’s sudden move to the top of the polls has Democrats worried (Washington Post) or delighted (TPM-DC).  Let’s start  with the Post, which focuses on the worries of Democratic strategists who see real trouble in a Gingrich-Obama matchup:

But even as Gingrich’s sudden rise has filled many Obama supporters with cheer and some Republicans with dread, some Democratic strategists worry that the combative Gingrich presents some challenges for the Obama campaign that would not exist if Romney were the GOP candidate.

Where Romney, the former business executive and Massachusetts governor, poses a threat in his ability to win independents and conservative Democrats attracted to his image as an economic Mr. Fix-It, Gingrich could pursue a strategy that combines energizing the conservative base and chipping away Democratic support among Hispanics — an electoral formula that helped George W. Bush win in 2004.

Some Democrats believe that Gingrich, a hero of the conservative movement, would excite the party base more than a former liberal-state governor with a history of centrist views. And voters yearning for authenticity may be more open to the voluble and rumpled former House speaker, who frequently discusses his past mistakes and his recent conversion to Catholicism, than to a former ­equity-fund executive with perfect salt-and-pepper hair.

“He does not carry Wall Street baggage,” said one Democratic strategist working on the Obama reelection effort, speaking on the condition of anonymity to freely discuss his thinking. “He’s really smart. He’s definitely authentic.”

Perhaps most significantly, Gingrich has an extensive Hispanic outreach organization, which he has been building for years. Unlike anything in the Romney playbook, that network could give Gingrich a head start slicing into Obama’s base in key states in the Mountain West, where Hispanics are a fast-growing swing voting bloc. Polls show Hispanic voters, two-thirds of whom backed Obama in 2008, still favor the president — but GOP strategists believe that winning 40 percent of that vote could disrupt Obama’s electoral college strategy by putting Colorado, Arizona and Nevada in the Republican column.

Plus, as the Post’s Peter Wallsten and Anne Kornblut note, the prospect of having to debate Gingrich rather than Romney is, well, daunting.  Not only does that put Obama in a potentially damaging environment, the inevitable refusal to engage in the three-hour open format Gingrich proposes will make it look as though Obama doesn’t have the confidence to match wits with Gingrich.  It should be noted, however, that Romney has also performed very well in the current, deeply-flawed debate format, and in an election that will rest in large part on economic policy, Team Obama should be just as wary of tangling with Romney as they are with Gingrich.

TPM’s Brian Beutler reports that at least one Democrat thinks a Gingrich nomination would be terrific, though:

There’s no better illustration of how ecstatic Democrats are about Newt Gingrich leading the GOP primary pack than Nancy Pelosi’s strategic silence.

Pelosi knows more about Gingrich than perhaps any other major national political figure. She was a senior Democrat when Gingrich was House Speaker, served on the ethics committee that investigated Gingrich for tax cheating and campaign finance violations, and even cut a 2008 ad with him on the importance of addressing global climate change. …

Pelosi didn’t go into detail about Gingrich’s past transgressions, but she tipped her hand. “One of these days we’ll have a conversation about Newt Gingrich,” Pelosi said. “I know a lot about him. I served on the investigative committee that investigated him, four of us locked in a room in an undisclosed location for a year. A thousand pages of his stuff.”

I’m not as familiar with House Ethics Committee rules as I should be, but I would presume that anything kept sealed from investigations are supposed to remain sealed.  Threatening to leak sensitive investigation documents — especially on a selective basis — might form the basis of an ethics complaint in and of itself.  That’s not to say that such a release would take a public, on-the-record form, of course.  It seems inevitable that these documents will leak out when the timing most favors Barack Obama and the Democrats, and that Pelosi’s hands will be unstained by the leak — or at least would have been had she not made this threat now.

So much for that interlude on the love seat, huh?

The response from Gingrich to this threat should be a demand to unseal all of the records from that investigation, which did result in a $300,000 fine for submitting “inaccurate” information to the Ethics Committee about his tax-exempt organization and politicking.  However, a subsequent IRS investigation cleared Gingrich of any wrongdoing, which somewhat undermines Pelosi’s threat.  Early exposure would defuse that threat entirely and allow Gingrich to take the high road, while emphasizing that all of this took place over a decade ago.  If the House won’t release the documents after Gingrich calls for it, then any subsequent leak will look mighty partisan and unfair, and could run the risk of a big backlash against Democrats.

In short, it’s an unpredictable, combustible combination.  While Pelosi might feel thrilled by the prospect of a Gingrich-Obama contest, there are plenty of reasons why other Democrats don’t feel anywhere near as sanguine about it.  Besides, if the debate comes down to accusations of financial impropriety, then Republicans have a card or two they can play as well:

Jon Corzine, former CEO of MF Global, has given tens of thousands of dollars to the Democratic Party in recent months, putting Democratic lawmakers in awkward positions ahead of Corzine’s subpoenaed appearance before a House committee next week.

The House Agriculture Committee wants Corzine to explain the financial collapse of MF Global and what may have happened to clients’ investments. …

Corzine gave $15,000 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee on Sept. 28 and $30,800 to the Democratic National Committee in June.

While he has contributed to Democrats such as Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), and Reps. Rush Holt (D-N.J.), Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) and George Miller (D-Calif.), Corzine has become a political liability to his former allies on the Hill.

That didn’t happen 14 years ago, either.

Update: Newt Gingrich fires back at Pelosi for her threat — and calls for an ethics probe of Pelosi if she makes good on it:

First of all I’d like to thank Speaker Pelosi for what I regard as an early Christmas gift. If she’s suggesting she’s gonna use material she developed while she was on the ethics committee, that is a fundamental violation of the rules of the House and I would hope members would immediately file charges against her the second she does it.

Gingrich’s appreciation for this “early Christmas gift” underscores how this threat exposes just how political her ethics probe at the time actually was.  The Right Scoop has the full statement.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

“Long before he officially announced his presidential run, he told me he’s going to run. He went through his agenda bullet point by bullet point,” Limbaugh said on his May 17 show.

Limbaugh said that, at the meeting, Gingrich detailed how he was thinking beyond the nominating process and already dismissing who at the time were thought be some of the favorites.

“And at that lunch, he practically said, ‘Now, I think I’ve already got the nomination wrapped up. I’m not worried about that. I’m looking beyond that to vice presidential running mates, policies and so forth and so on,’” Limbaugh said. “He was very, very confident that he’d already had it wrapped up. This is in the midst of Trump. I asked him about Mitch Daniels. ‘Ah, Mitch – don’t know about him running. Conventional wisdom is Mitch isn’t gonna run – his wife doesn’t like politics.’ So Mitch wasn’t going to run. ‘Romney can’t survive Romneycare.’ He went through all of this as to why he was almost the de facto, default winner of the nomination.”

from the Daily Caller above …
I want to hear from ALL the same people when Romney said He hoped to be the nominee and everyone jumped on him…when here is Gingrich has been thinking about his run and ALREADY calling himself the nominee before a single vote is cast.

My point and others against Newt is that not only is Gingrich a POLITICAL animal BUT is arrogant to assume that he WILL be the nominee. I am not seeing how guys can rip on Romney over things he ACTUALLY never said or voted on and yet are all gangbusters for an almost 40YEAR politician! I thought it was the politicians which Gingrich was a BIG member of that has helped create this mess we’re in.

Where are all the TP members that should be adamantly opposed to Gingrich???

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Pelosi & Frank preemptively strike Newt…

The media loves Mitt ..

Hmmm, is there a briar patch here?

CrazyGene on December 5, 2011 at 2:52 PM

On the nose.

Oh, and RACIST!
/

29Victor on December 5, 2011 at 4:22 PM

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Put down the keyboard and walk away. Take a Valium, it’s like a nap.

29Victor on December 5, 2011 at 4:24 PM

Of course, Pelosi has to worry about the affair in Tulsa

J_Crater on December 5, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Oh, ho, ho… Check out this O/T culture of crony corruption that features Corzine and Bill Clinton:
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=47938

Pelosi had better draw back her claws because her house is made of glass. (Talk about mixed metaphors, eh?)

onlineanalyst on December 5, 2011 at 4:25 PM

Romney as he has FIXED economic issues ALL OF HIS LIFE.

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 3:57 PM

Such as…?

alwaysfiredup on December 5, 2011 at 4:27 PM

I can’t like Gingrich, but he is slapping down all the right people. I’ll vote for him if push comes to shove, because another Obama term would be even more disastrous than his first one has been.

RebeccaH on December 5, 2011 at 4:27 PM

Newt ain’t pretty but he IS the smartest man running on either side.

inspectorudy on December 5, 2011 at 4:15 PM

First off Romney will fix the problems because he will KNOW what to do to turn the country around. His private and public experience is a force multiplier because he knows how government works and he knows how to get them to back off the private sector so it can flourish. This is why many companies are behind Romney’s candidacy because he has been in their position before…you also state that he is a Wall Street guy. His office was in Boston BUT I get the gist of what you are saying BUT he was actually a small-business guy because his whole time at Bain was getting small businesses to grow so that they could become the Staples or the Domino’s Pizza of the country.

As far as smartest man for Gingrich…I would take Romney’s two Masters degrees in Law and Business and graduating in BOTH in the top 5% over Gingrich any day. As they say in Boston, Romney is WICKED Smart! Bring it! ;o)

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 4:27 PM

Where are all the TP members that should be adamantly opposed to Gingrich???

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 4:19 PM

Learning to be political realists, as we were instructed post-Angle and -O’Donnell.

There is no good TP candidate on the presidential level. We need to keep working on our lower-level politicoes so that we have someone ready in 2016. The movement is still only 2 years old.

alwaysfiredup on December 5, 2011 at 4:29 PM

This is pretty much what Barney Frank did. Not interested in voting for our party’s version Barney Frank.”

sheryl on December 5, 2011 at 3:42 PM

So you don’t see any difference between a former member and a sitting representative taking money? Interesting.

Cindy Munford on December 5, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Romney will fix the problems because he will KNOW what to do to turn the country around.

Dude, show your work. What government has Mitt taken from red to black?

alwaysfiredup on December 5, 2011 at 4:30 PM

29Victor on December 5, 2011 at 4:24 PM

Why? Do facts bother you?

Romney as he has FIXED economic issues ALL OF HIS LIFE.

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 3:57 PM

Such as…?

alwaysfiredup on December 5, 2011 at 4:27 PM

Are you serious? What economic issues has he fixed? He only was the guy that put Staples on the map, fixed Dominos Pizza’s woes, Sports Authority, Saved the 2002 Olympics from financial failure AND THE ONLY ONE TO MAKE A PROFIT, Pulled MA out of a 3BILLION hole and in four years left it with a 2BILLION dollar surplus a 5BILLION dollar swing.

Those are just a FEW of the economic issues he has fixed. It is a wonder why Romney may be down in the polls because some just do not want to see his strengths and ACTUAL record…thus we get Obama.

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 4:33 PM

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 4:33 PM

You mean Massachusetts is able to pay its bills via tricks and turning it self into Taxachusetts?

Does the state not have a constitutional requirement to have a balanced budget?

astonerii on December 5, 2011 at 4:37 PM

Dude, show your work. What government has Mitt taken from red to black?

alwaysfiredup on December 5, 2011 at 4:30 PM

Just posted it above…

Alwaysfiredup,
I think most people here know of Romney’s established economic record. You do not make your company billions by not knowing economics and this is what the Salt Lake Olympic Organizing Committee recognized and later the state of MA pleading with him to come back to MA to fix their DEEP FISCAL problems…So Romney’s economics are not questioned from some of you..it is his MA Healthcare that you question which he has answered over and over that he said it was not for national consumption but only something states could look at as an example.

read this by Staples Co-founder:
Parade Article from Staples co-founder
http://www.parade.com/news/2011/12/mitt-can-motivate-people-to-greatness.html

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 4:40 PM

Do you think for one minute that your boy Mitt would ever go after Wall Street? Where do you think he made his fortune? Do you think that NOW is the time to have a “Can’t we all get along” president? If you do then you don’t deserve to vote. If you want to have a nice kumbaya moment then you need to elect a Demorat and not a conservative for president. Newt ain’t pretty but he IS the smartest man running on either side.

inspectorudy on December 5, 2011 at 4:15 PM

Not only to I think he would, I think he will. I believe Mitt will appoint his supporter Darrell Issa who is heading many investigations of the Obama administration including, the Fast and Furious investigations

While governor Mitt actively went after Whitey Bulgar’s (Jack Nicholson’s character in The Departed) brother to resign from Univ. of MA because of his connection to his criminal brother.

Mitt will be tough on corruption in Washington and Wall Street.

Newt wasn’t smart enough to warn anyone of the financial meltdown Freddie and Fannie were causing will he took mega-bucks from them.

Sorry, I’ll not vote for thee symbol of why Washington is broken. And Newt is one of those symbols.

sheryl on December 5, 2011 at 4:43 PM

As far as smartest man for Gingrich…I would take Romney’s two Masters degrees in Law and Business and graduating in BOTH in the top 5% over Gingrich any day. As they say in Boston, Romney is WICKED Smart! Bring it! ;o)

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 4:27 PM

A Juris Doctorate isn’t a Master’s degree, G. You sound like an Obama supporter trying to fool everyone that Obama is *wicked* smart because he graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law. Sadly, both HLS graduates Obama and Romney both rely on teleprompters when delivering their canned remarks. :-(

Punchenko on December 5, 2011 at 4:44 PM

You mean Massachusetts is able to pay its bills via tricks and turning it self into Taxachusetts?

Does the state not have a constitutional requirement to have a balanced budget?

astonerii on December 5, 2011 at 4:37 PM

Yeah, the one that they could not meet UNTIL Romney came in and cut taxes and balanced their budget EVERY year.

Many States do astonerii and fail to do it…hence the whole Wisconsin and Ohio fiasco’s earlier this past year and telling the Unions that they cannot afford their crap anymore. Romney did the SAME thing in 85% DEM Congress and said we need to cut programs and taxes and he went about doing this and was very successful.

Some how though his success from a conservative way of tackling the issues gets lost on many people here at HA because he MUST BE LIBERAL if he lives in MA. Ahhhhhh, No.

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 4:45 PM

Threatening to leak sensitive investigation documents — especially on a selective basis — might form the basis of an ethics complaint in and of itself.

Good catch, Ed.

Buy Danish on December 5, 2011 at 4:52 PM

sheryl on December 5, 2011 at 4:43 PM

What is clear is that many people do not ACTUALLY look at what Romney has signed as legislation and supported and just listen to quotes from TV and run with those…

Even Brett Baier’s interview, Russert’s interview in 2007, etc did not look into the details of certain votes and what they meant.

Romney is conservative and people have knocked him because of where he lives in the N.E. which is basically a condemnation on ANY Republican that lives in the N.E.

Some hate on HA his wealth which is odd because that is what most conservatives and even Rush promotes all the time is the ability to succeed in anything you do and then to help others succeed. Romney is knocked though because of his success.

Those on the fence here at HA, seriously, look at Romney’s record and you will see he is a great conservative and has a better past than Gingrich compared to what Gingrich has backed and lobbied for…

For those of you knocking Romney show me with facts where he differs with us in what 90% of our platform covers…there is no 100% candidate.

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 4:54 PM

Pelosi’s just testing the safe thickness of the ice – Obama will come out later after the fishing is done and claim the catch.

No one from Chicago does the dirty work themselves, or leave fingerprints. The alibi for Obama is, “uh,uh,uh, I was, uh,on the ,uh, golf course at the time.

Who wouldn’t believe him?

Don L on December 5, 2011 at 4:55 PM

Buy Danish on December 5, 2011 at 4:52 PM

Yes but it’s hard to bring up ethics charges on anonymous leaks and Politico is waiting to publish any and all that they can get.

Cindy Munford on December 5, 2011 at 4:56 PM

I would take Romney’s two Masters degrees in Law and Business and graduating in BOTH in the top 5% over Gingrich any day. As they say in Boston, Romney is WICKED Smart! Bring it! ;o)

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 4:27 PM

Then let Gingrich select Romney as Treasury Secretary.

onlineanalyst on December 5, 2011 at 4:57 PM

Pelosi had better draw back her claws because her house is made of glass. (Talk about mixed metaphors, eh?)

onlineanalyst on December 5, 2011 at 4:25 PM

yeah, only she does not run for president or any office for that matter…so, she couldn’t care less…if she’s got stuff on Netw, as she says she does, she will leak it, as simple as that…

jimver on December 5, 2011 at 5:03 PM

A Juris Doctorate isn’t a Master’s degree, G. You sound like an Obama supporter trying to fool everyone that Obama is *wicked* smart because he graduated magna cum laude from Harvard Law. Sadly, both HLS graduates Obama and Romney both rely on teleprompters when delivering their canned remarks. :-(

Punchenko on December 5, 2011 at 4:44 PM

Punch…whatever…haha He accomplished only what 5% of students accomplish by taking on dual degrees at Harvard in business and law and STILL graduate at the top of his class. instead of giving him props, you find some way to discount it. Sad.
Romney is brilliant and ANYONE ever surrounded by him has made comments of his intellect to grasp many topics and to be able to solve them. Romney speaks ALL the time w/o a prompter. I am sure when a prompter has been used it is because when he is giving a certain policy speech he has it there to assist but he does not read it like Obama…no one tears up a teleprompter like Obama.

Here is history on Romney’s economic prowess:
When Mitt was elected Governor of Massachusetts in 2002, the state was in severe disarray, its budget was out of balance, spending was soaring, and taxpayers were being required to pay more and more in taxes for diminishing services. The state economy was in a tailspin, with businesses cutting back on investment or even closing and unemployment ticking up. Mitt made hard decisions that brought state spending under control. He restructured and consolidated government programs, paring back where necessary and finding efficiencies throughout.

Facing a state legislature dominated by Democrats, Mitt cast more than 800 vetoes as he brought conservative principles to state government. He cut red tape for small businesses, signed into law job-creating incentives, and fought hard to bring new businesses to the state. He eliminated a $3 billion deficit without borrowing or raising taxes. By 2007, at the end of Mitt’s term, the state had accumulated a $2 billion rainy day fund in its coffers. This stringent fiscal discipline provided an essential backdrop for economic recovery. When Mitt came into office, the state was losing jobs every month. When he left office, the economy was generating new jobs by the thousands.

In 1999, the Salt Lake City Winter Olympics was on the verge of collapse. Thanks to his reputation as a superb manager, Mitt was asked to take over. The event had been bogged down in a bid-rigging scandal, sponsors were fleeing, and the budget was bleeding red ink. The attacks of September 11, 2001, just months before the start date, created a security nightmare. Some were contemplating scaling back the competition or even moving it out of the country.

Mitt set to work. In a remarkably short period, he revamped the organization’s leadership, trimmed the budget, and restored public confidence. He oversaw an unprecedented security mobilization to assure the safety of the athletes and millions of international visitors, staging one of the most successful games ever held on U.S. soil. mittromney.com

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 5:05 PM

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 5:05 PM

Bless your heart, keep plugging maybe you’ll convince some of the skeptics of Northeastern Republicans.

Cindy Munford on December 5, 2011 at 5:08 PM

Ah oh, Byran York said that people don’t seem to care about old scandals. We can’t have that.

Cindy Munford on December 5, 2011 at 5:12 PM

You do not make your company billions by not knowing economics

Jon Corzine. Paul Krugman. Orange County, CA. I could go on.

and this is what the Salt Lake Olympic Organizing Committee recognized

Total fluff job.

and later the state of MA pleading with him to come back to MA to fix their DEEP FISCAL problems

A one-term governor who borrowed heavily from federal Medicare funding to balance his budget. What’s not to like? And MA hardly pleaded with him to fix their problems. He was elected just like every other officeholder.

…So Romney’s economics are not questioned from some of you

Try again.

read this by Staples Co-founder: Parade Article from Staples co-founder http://www.parade.com/news/2011/12/mitt-can-motivate-people-to-greatness.html

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 4:40 PM

I’ve not drunk the Mitt kool-aid. He made money at Bain by systematically buying and disassembling companies. He was a shark, and good at it. That does not suggest he has any special insight into fixing public accounting problems. Newt has an actual record of fixing the national budget problems. I await an actual apples-to-apples comparison with Romney, if you can provide it without RESORTING TO SCREAMS.

alwaysfiredup on December 5, 2011 at 5:16 PM

So you don’t see any difference between a former member and a sitting representative taking money? Interesting.

Cindy Munford on December 5, 2011 at 4:30 PM

There is no difference in Barney Frank and Newt Gingrich regarding F&F because they both were promoting them as sound good institutions when trouble was brewing that eventually caused one of the most significant financial problems this country has ever faced.

The fact that Newt was taking money from F&F during that time completely disqualifies him for any leadership roll of any kind and Republicans are just kidding themselves if they think defend that kind of baggage, along with the tons more that is on it’s way about Newt in the general election.

Sorry it’s too much, it’s too dirty, Newt is too slimy of a politician and I won’t belong to a party that is going to self-destruct like this.

sheryl on December 5, 2011 at 5:16 PM

Buy Danish on December 5, 2011 at 4:52 PM

Yes but it’s hard to bring up ethics charges on anonymous leaks and Politico is waiting to publish any and all that they can get.
Cindy Munford on December 5, 2011 at 4:56 PM

Yup, the dirt on Newt is going to come out – leakers will be given protection so it will be only the dirt that will count. Just as Politico did with Cain.

whatcat on December 5, 2011 at 5:16 PM

So you don’t see any difference between a former member and a sitting representative taking money? Interesting.

Cindy Munford on December 5, 2011 at 4:30 PM

There is no difference in Barney Frank and Newt Gingrich regarding F&F because they both were promoting them as sound good institutions when trouble was brewing that eventually caused one of the most significant financial problems this country has ever faced.

The fact that Newt was taking money from F&F during that time completely disqualifies him for any leadership roll of any kind and Republicans are just kidding themselves if they think defend that kind of baggage, along with the tons more that is on it’s way about Newt in the general election.

Sorry it’s too much, it’s too dirty, Newt is too slimy of a politician and I won’t belong to a party that is going to self-destruct like this.

sheryl on December 5, 2011 at 5:17 PM

Bless your heart, keep plugging maybe you’ll convince some of the skeptics of Northeastern Republicans.

Cindy Munford on December 5, 2011 at 5:08 PM

haha bless you, Cindy! :o)

Just a little frustrating with some on here that do not do their research on Romney…or any candidate they are not interested in and so that leaves a lot of misinformation to be able to seep in and be believed.

Thanks for the moral support even though I know you may be backing a different person.

I just look for HONEST Debate on the candidates here on HA and some people are lazy and do not research or when pointed out their comment was ill-informed they do not respectfully correct themselves. If I ever made a wrong statement about any of the candidates I would want their backer to correct me with the facts and links…that’s all.

Gotta go to bed…its late here!

This is an interesting read by Joe…not a big fan of his but sounds like he is not of Gingrich’s either
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/69798.html

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 5:19 PM

Sorry it’s too much, it’s too dirty, Newt is too slimy of a politician and I won’t belong to a party that is going to self-destruct like this.

sheryl on December 5, 2011 at 5:17 PM

“Besides, Mitt speaks French. Ooh-la-la.”///

kingsjester on December 5, 2011 at 5:19 PM

sheryl on December 5, 2011 at 5:16 PM

Don’t be sorry, you are entitled to your opinion. Luckily there is a nondisclosure contract between Newt and F & F so the blanks will get to be filled in at will, truth won’t even need to figure into it. That bodes well for Gov. Romney.

Cindy Munford on December 5, 2011 at 5:20 PM

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 5:19 PM

You’ve been a honest broker with reasoned arguments. Who knows what I will do by the time of Florida’s primary?

Cindy Munford on December 5, 2011 at 5:22 PM

You’ve been a honest broker with reasoned arguments.

Cindy Munford on December 5, 2011 at 5:22 PM

That’s a joke, right?

alwaysfiredup on December 5, 2011 at 5:23 PM

alwaysfiredup on December 5, 2011 at 5:23 PM

No, while he has certainly been dogged in commenting on his support, he has always said he will vote for the nominee and has never, that I have seen, been ugly to or about people who don’t see it the way he does.

Cindy Munford on December 5, 2011 at 5:29 PM

alwaysfiredup on December 5, 2011 at 5:16 PM

haha your responses to the FACTS are funny…because you can find people who have defrauded their companies does not put Romney in that same boat…

MA did plead with him to return to the state to fix their fiscal woes…he CUT taxes and closed loopholes to fix his economy, eliminated many other gov’t jobs to streamline the state…he left his State with a 2 Billion dollar fund when it was down 3 Billion, this did not come from Medicare money!

He did save the 2002 Olympics and to this date is the ONLY one to make a profit. He helped more companies than any he ever had to assist when going through a bankruptcy which is caused by the business owner in the first place for mismanagement.

Interesting how hard you are trying to play down his economic background and that is the ONE thing 98% of people AGREE that Romney has accomplished it is his other questionable stances pre-2005 that some diverge with Romney but NOT his economic background and history. This is well known.

Okay, good nite this time…

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 5:30 PM

sheryl on December 5, 2011 at 5:16 PM

Romney promoted and implemented healthcare mandates as in Obamacare. Oui, oui! C’est vrai!

MeatHeadinCA on December 5, 2011 at 5:33 PM

alwaysfiredup on December 5, 2011 at 5:23 PM

No, while he has certainly been dogged in commenting on his support, he has always said he will vote for the nominee and has never, that I have seen, been ugly to or about people who don’t see it the way he does.

Cindy Munford on December 5, 2011 at 5:29 PM

Thanks, Cindy. and true on all accounts. I will vote for WHOEVER the nominee is because my overall FEAR is the SCOTUS appointments as those last longer than ANY presidency and WE cannot allow Obama another four years because those appointments will happen. Also we need to eliminate ANY implementation of his vision. We know that in a second term there will be NOTHING holding him back from going Alinsky on us and attempting to pass radical laws.

So yes, in the end I will vote for Lady Gaga if I felt she would be slightly better…we just need to continue to implement conservative issues and move the ball forward even if it is not as fast as would like, the direction is the important thing.

nite, all and Cindy!

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 5:36 PM

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 5:36 PM

Sweet dreams! I’m pretty sure that Lady Gaga won’t be on the ballot so that’s a big sigh of relief.

Cindy Munford on December 5, 2011 at 5:44 PM

MA did plead with him to return to the state to fix their fiscal woes……he left his State with a 2 Billion dollar fund when it was down 3 Billion, this did not come from Medicare money!

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 5:30 PM

Links, please. I do not believe you. “MA” is a state without a voice. He won the governorship with 50% of the vote. It is well established that the only reason MassCare did not tear a gigantic hole in the budget is because it was half paid for with federal money.

Provide links and stop screaming.

alwaysfiredup on December 5, 2011 at 5:49 PM

Im not thinking Newt can win but a handful of states. Romney can sweep most of them.

ObamatheMessiah on December 5, 2011 at 5:56 PM

Pelosi says: “my parents didn’t raise me to be a politician, they raised me to be holy.”

WEll, whattheheck happened to her? Is Pelosi possessed? I ask in all seriousness, is she possessed?

Lourdes on December 5, 2011 at 5:57 PM

I’ll provide my own links, which are a lot less positive than information from “aboutmittromney.com”.

The 2005 MA surplus was less than $500 million.

Massachusetts was 47th out of 50 states in job creation throughout Mitt’s leadership.

He significantly raised per-capita spending, property taxes, gas taxes and various fees.

After 4 years he cut only 600 public sector jobs, compared to a predecessor who cut over 7700.

Don’t believe everything you read on a candidate’s website.

alwaysfiredup on December 5, 2011 at 6:00 PM

This is an interesting read by Joe…not a big fan of his but sounds like he is not of Gingrich’s either
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1211/69798.html

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 5:19 PM

It’s worthy reading, thanks for the link.

Scarborough has of late written several blunt opeds about Gingrich and what/who “conservative” is but he hasn’t been fringe in what I’ve read from him.

Lourdes on December 5, 2011 at 6:07 PM

Where are all the TP members that should be adamantly opposed to Gingrich???

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 4:19 PM

So this is what Romney supporters have become:

“My guy is horrible, but Gingrich is too!”

Daemonocracy on December 5, 2011 at 6:22 PM

Don’t believe everything you read on a candidate’s website.
alwaysfiredup on December 5, 2011 at 6:00 PM

oh, come on now, you also choose only those stats that prove your point and ignore the ones that tell an entirely different story about his record…For instance, you ommitted to say (or failed to acknowledge, whichever it is) that MA unemployment rate was below the national average during Romney’s first three years as governor in 2003, 2004 and 2005, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics figures for yearly averages.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/srgune_03012006.pdf

If you check the stats, 2006, the last year he held office, the MA unemployment rate was 5 % – dropping from an annual average of 5.8% to 5 %…but sure, all this doesn’t count, as long as it does not fit your anti-Mitt argument…

and btw, these stats arenot from the ‘candidates’ websites’…

jimver on December 5, 2011 at 6:26 PM

Pelosi says: “my parents didn’t raise me to be a politician, they raised me to be holy.”

WEll, whattheheck happened to her? Is Pelosi possessed? I ask in all seriousness, is she possessed?

Lourdes on December 5, 2011 at 5:57 PM
LOL what ? Really I guess her parents were Joseph and Mary.
LOL I hate nazi pelotas.

ColdWarrior57 on December 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM

Let’s just say, for instance, that there IS something politically harmful in those sealed docs. If they start calling for him to release them, he will look even more guilty by refusing. True or not, there’s just a little more doubt to add to the baggage.

cartooner on December 5, 2011 at 3:30 PM

OH, like college transcripts, passport records, citizenship papers?

Do you think Newt will not shoot these obvious bullets? Not to mention Ayers, Wright and Rezko?

The Demons fear. And I like this Newt, to quote Lincoln, “He Fights!”

Who is John Galt on December 5, 2011 at 7:44 PM

I received this in an email today. Does anyone know anything about it, or if it’s true?

VERY QUIETLY OBAMA’S CITIZENSHIP CASE REACHES THE SUPREME COURT.
Just researched : Apparently Hawaii had until August 8, 2011, to produce documents and open the books for a full investigation. This order was delivered on July 5, 2011, under a direct order of the Supreme Court.
VERY QUIETLY OBAMA’S CITIZENSHIP CASE REACHES THE SUPREME COURT
AP – WASHINGTON D.C. –
In a move certain to fuel the debate over Obama’s qualifications for the presidency, the group “Americans for Freedom of Information” has Released copies of President Obama’s college transcripts from Occidental College.
Now released, the transcript school indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign student from Indonesia as an undergraduate. The transcript was released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California.
The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for foreign students from the Fulbright Foundation Scholarship program. To qualify, for the scholarship, a student must claim foreign citizenship.
This document would seem to provide the smoking gun that many of Obama’s detractors have been seeking. Along with the evidence that he was first born inKenya and there is no record of him ever applying for US citizenship, this is looking pretty grim.
The news has created a firestorm at the White House as the release casts increasing doubt about Obama’s legitimacy and qualification to serve as President in an article titled, “Obama Eligibility Questioned,” which led some to speculate that the story may overshadow economic issues on Obama’s first official visit to the U.K.
In a related matter, under growing pressure from several groups, Justice Antonin Scalia announced that the Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to hear arguments concerning Obama’s legal eligibility to serve as President in a case brought by Leo Donofrio of New Jersey .
This lawsuit claims Obama’s dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president.. Donofrio’s case is just one of 18 suits brought by citizens demanding proof of Obama’s citizenship or qualification to serve as president.
Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation has released the results of their investigation of Obama’s campaign spending. This study estimates that Obama has spent upwards of $950,000 in campaign funds in the past year with eleven law firms in 12 states for legal resources to block disclosure of any of his personal records.
Mr. Kreep indicated that the investigation is still ongoing but that the final report will be provided to the U.S. Attorney general, Eric Holder. Mr. Holder has refused to comment on the matter…
LET OTHERS KNOW THIS NEWS, THE MEDIA WON’T !
Subject RE: Issue of Passport?
Paul Hollrah at FSM asked and believes the issue can be resolved by Obama answering one simple question: What passport did Obama use when he was shuttling between New York , Jakarta , and Karachi ?
So how did a young man who arrived in New York in early June 1981, without the price of a hotel room in his pocket, suddenly come up with the price of a round-the-world trip just a month later?
And once he was on a plane, shuttling between New York , Jakarta , and Karachi , what passport was he offering when he passed through Customs and Immigration?
The American people not only deserve to have answers to these questions, they must have answers. It makes the debate over Obama’s citizenship a rather short and simple one.
Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?
A : Yes, by his own admission.
Q: What passport did he travel under?
A : There are only three possibilities:
1) He traveled with a U.S. Passport,
2) He traveled with a British passport, or
3) He traveled with an Indonesia passport.
Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. Passport in 1981?
A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department’s “no travel” list in 1981.
Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981, he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport.
If he were traveling with a British passport, that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims.
And if he were traveling with an Indonesian passport, that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967.
Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people need to know how he managed to become a “natural born” American citizen between 1981 and 2008.
Given the destructive nature of his plans for America, as illustrated by his speech before Congress and the disastrous spending plan he has presented to Congress, the sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better.
If you Don’t carethat Your President is not a natural born Citizen and in Violation of the Constitution, then Delete this, and then lower your American Flag to half-staff, because the U.S. Constitution is already on life-support, and won’t survive much longer.

Bambi on December 5, 2011 at 7:50 PM

“He Fights!”

Who is John Galt on December 5, 2011 at 7:44 PM

He does fight! Newt will fight that right wing social engineering wherever he finds it!

sheryl on December 5, 2011 at 7:53 PM

g2825m

I’m so glad you are out there. Thanks again for your service.
I was part of the Olympics and I know how awful it was in the beginning. I know what he had to do because of the threats to this country. It was great and yes the volunteers were wonderful and it came away in the black and we all had the most beautiful coats, ski pants, vest, gloves, hat and watch. And all in the red. And I understand he took $1.00 a year.
Come on people, you will never catch him sitting on a couch with princess nanci, nor with any other woman.

Bambi on December 5, 2011 at 7:55 PM

Does anyone know anything about it, or if it’s true?

Bambi on December 5, 2011 at 7:50 PM

It’s false.

rukiddingme on December 5, 2011 at 7:56 PM

You know if it is proved that obama’s stuff was not real, will the gov in Hawaii be in any trouble. I mean he said he was there and knew where he was born.

Bambi on December 5, 2011 at 7:57 PM

rukiddingme:
Glad you straightened me out. Only wish it was true.
Thanks

Bambi on December 5, 2011 at 7:59 PM

BTW, did anyone read the article in Parade Mag this week-end about Romney? It was a good read.

Bambi on December 5, 2011 at 8:00 PM

Bambi on December 5, 2011 at 7:50 PM
First I have heard of it ! WOW!
is all I can say

ColdWarrior57 on December 5, 2011 at 8:07 PM

Pelosi licking her chops?

I don’t think I’ve ever seen Pelosi licking her chops though once in slow motion she appeared to be licking her eyeballs as those rotated independently.

Members of the House should request an investigation NOW into Pelosi threatening that she would misuse her political office to blackmail a private citizen.

Keep up the fight, Newt. Throw that bucket of water on Pelosi to see if her pointy hat sinks.

viking01 on December 5, 2011 at 8:19 PM

Pelosi says: “my parents didn’t raise me to be a politician, they raised me to be holy.”

WEll, whattheheck happened to her? Is Pelosi possessed? I ask in all seriousness, is she possessed?

Lourdes on December 5, 2011 at 5:57 PM

LOL what ? Really I guess her parents were Joseph and Mary.
LOL I hate nazi pelotas.

ColdWarrior57 on December 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM

Yes, she recently said that in a public statement.

I don’t hate her but what I do feel about Pelosi is something akin to what I feel for vomit in a gutter. She is a foul, foul semblance of a human being and her ongoing claims to somehow being a religious puritan (especially as to her tenuous claims to being “an ardent Catholic”) are particularly disgusting.

I think she makes these inherently evil declarations because she knows and WANTS to inspire something akin to sickness in other people when they hear her. But, oh, it’s said with a smile. ::for the children:: and all that, like Bawney’s crookedness. It’s evil.

Lourdes on December 5, 2011 at 8:27 PM

About the threat against Gingrich by Pelosi, I’d rather she dump her evil handbasket sooner than later and then suffer the consequences should she violate Senate Ethics Rules and it looks like she would if she does.

But best to let her toss down her evil clutch now and get it out there rather than wait for Obama to leak-leak-leak-the-drip over the course of his upcoming Carnivale. He’ll allude to things, we can count on that, if Pelosi doesn’t let loose her evil clutch now.

But I would request that Pelosi be ‘investigated’. I’d particularly like to see exposed the record of what she and her Communist pals covered in their Obamacare meeting from whence all Republicans were prevented access. Let’s see what Pelosi stated in those meetings and why the secrecy about them. Investigate that.

You can bet that people such as Pelosi who make these sickly-sweet threats have a lot to hide in their own messy experiences and relationships. My guess is Pelosi has a list of ‘payback’ names with dates and specific debts owed her (according to her) to fill a library.

Lourdes on December 5, 2011 at 8:32 PM

Another sickly detail about Pelosi:

she keeps “a book” of “favors” she deems are owed to her by whom and for what…and she leans on those in her “favors book” when she wants to “call in” a “favor.”

She extends acts to or for others from her Congressional office but keeps track of to whom, when and what so she later can lean on them to pay her back.

It’s really classic Mafioso behavior.

And she didn’t learn THAT from among her “ardent Catholic” beliefs.

Lourdes on December 5, 2011 at 8:35 PM

Hey there Republicans, are you finally convinced that being friends with libs gets you nothing when it counts?

I’m talking to you McCain. And you Scotty Brown. And you Boehner. And you McConnell. And the rest of you “let’s get along and work together” morons out there.

angryed on December 5, 2011 at 9:03 PM

angryed on December 5, 2011 at 9:03 PM

When did your America stop getting along and working together? If I had that attitude, I wouldn’t care about any of it.

mike_NC9 on December 5, 2011 at 9:49 PM

Hoo boy, Pelosi is already walking it back, according to her “spokesman,” as reported by John Parkinson of ABC News:

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi now says she is not sitting on a trove of opposition research on former House Speaker-turned-GOP presidential candidate Newt Gingrich.

In an interview conducted Friday and published Monday, Pelosi hinted that once the time is right she has some juicy stories to tell about her former colleague.

“One of these days we’ll have a conversation about Newt Gingrich,” Pelosi, D-Calif., told Talking Points Memo. “I know a lot about him. I served on the investigative committee that investigated him. Four of us locked in a room in an undisclosed location for a year. A thousand pages of his stuff.”

But this afternoon, Pelosi’s spokesman, Drew Hammill, suggested that her comments have been misconstrued beyond the leader’s intent.

“Leader Pelosi was clearly referring to the extensive amount of information that is in the public record, including the comprehensive committee report with which the public may not be fully aware,” Hammill wrote in a statement.

Sure. This is “clearly” what Pelosi meant.

onlineanalyst on December 5, 2011 at 9:50 PM

So, a reason that Gingrich is good for Dems is that Pelosi has been silent? I mean, just today there was this example of Pelosi publicly stating just how silent she is being. Boy, the Dems must really want Gingrich–especially since they have not been announcing how silent they intend to be about all the skeletons in Mitt’s closets!

Such self-contradictory blather doesn’t deserve to be recognized as journalism. Even as an opinion piece, it isn’t anything more than fatuous claptrap.

BryanS on December 5, 2011 at 10:15 PM

Romney as he has FIXED economic issues ALL OF HIS LIFE.

g2825m on December 5, 2011 at 3:57 PM

RANDOM capitalization of WORDS makes ANY ARGUMENT very VERY PERSUASIVE.

But to really SELL THE CRAZY ARGUMENT you need MORE PUNCTUATION!!!!!!!!!

EXCLAMATION POINTS ARE LIKE THE BEST ARGUMENT EVAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What? I’m just trying to help.

gekkobear on December 5, 2011 at 11:41 PM

Great photo of The Witch and Freddie Mac. They look like a couple of love birds. I wish we could see the whole picture. Does he have his hand on her knee?

Basilsbest on December 6, 2011 at 12:38 AM

As with all Republicans, it’s the accusation against them that matters, not any evidence pro or con. The charge itself is a conviction. That’s the media template. Thus will it ever remain.

Extrafishy on December 6, 2011 at 7:23 AM

Perhaps Newt has finally learned that liberal/leftists like Pelosi are rabid jackals . . . if you attempt to stroke their heads they’ll rip your hand off. Furthermore, if you intend to defeat them you must be equally as mean, dirty and ruthless.

rplat on December 6, 2011 at 8:10 AM

F*ckin’ A. This is why we need Newt. The only republican in my lifetime (outside Rudy G.) who knows how to fight — dirty, clean, smart, whatever way is necessary.

rrpjr on December 5, 2011 at 3:19 PM

I agree. Enough already of this mamby, pamby bs.

Amjean on December 6, 2011 at 9:47 AM

Comment pages: 1 2