Video: Gingrich offers Mitt a deal

posted at 11:40 am on December 13, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

We didn’t get to this yesterday, but it’s not too late to discuss Newt Gingrich’s pushback to Mitt Romney’s demand that he return over a million dollars from Freddie Mac for consultant services over the past decade. Ron Paul made the same demand, but the media is obviously more interested in Newt-Mitt attacks, and Gingrich didn’t disappoint reporters with his response — even if he did disappoint free-market conservatives:

If Gov. Romney would like to give back all of the money he’s earned from bankrupting companies and laying off employees over his years at Bain, then I would be glad to listen to him.

Romney’s shot at Gingrich might have been a little ill-advised, but Gingrich managed to make things worse with his response — although his follow-up “bet” with reporters was a bit more humorous.  Regardless of whether one thinks that Gingrich’s work for Freddie Mac was legitimate, and I’m inclined to believe so, there’s no comparison between that and Romney’s work at Bain Capital.  Romney didn’t make millions of dollars bankrupting companies and laying off workers for the sake of doing either or both.  Free-market capitalism requires some “creative destruction” to rescue capital that is being used inefficiently and/or badly and putting it to more productive use.

Anyone who doesn’t understand that really doesn’t understand free-market capitalism, and that’s not merely an academic exercise, nor is it a coincidence that this clip got posted to YouTube by anti-capitalist Think Progress.  For instance, the argument against the auto bailouts from both George Bush and Barack Obama was that it interfered with this process, locking assets into inefficient uses and subsidizing failure with billions in public money for private enterprises.  That’s what companies like Bain do, and while the short-term effects are harsh (and some firms act in overly predatory behavior), the process is a necessity to ensure that the long-term use of capital remains efficient and productive.  If Gingrich doesn’t understand that, then how can he argue against the automaker bailout?

Jonah Goldberg, who also wrote about why a “Newtzilla” might be necessary in this cycle, thinks that Gingrich understands it perfectly, but couldn’t resist taking a cheap shot — and should apologize:

Not only is it petulant, leftwing, bunk, there’s no way Gingrich actually believes it (as Ramesh noted on Twitter). I understand that Gingrich doesn’t want to admit his payments from Freddie are, at best, tacky. But there’s no equivalence between Gingrich’s business model and Romney’s. If Romney should return the money he’s earned, if there’s a immoral taint to it, then Gingrich really doesn’t believe in capitalism at all. That’s obviously not the case and so he should explain himself. Lord knows he has the verbal skills to do it. If he can apologize for sitting next to Nancy Pelosi, he can “clarify” his way out of this hole.

That probably won’t happen, although it might explain Gingrich’s new commitment to staying positive:

Newt Gingrich called on his supporters and staff Tuesday to “stay positive” and avoid attacking fellow Republican presidential candidates, the day after he engaged in a verbal back-and-forth with Mitt Romney.

In an email, the former House speaker said he would refrain from attacking other candidates so the GOP nominee emerges from the primary season “un-bloodied,” and encouraged his backers and other Republican contenders to do the same.

“I am instructing all members of my campaign staff and respectfully urge anyone acting as a surrogate for our campaign to avoid initiating attacks on other Republican candidates,” Gingrich wrote. “It is my hope that my Republican opponents will join me in this commitment.”

That is a good policy for Republicans to follow, but in the end it might help Gingrich more — not just because he will be seen as a more positive force, but because it will keep him from taking backfire on his own attacks.

Update (Allahpundit): Via Breitbart TV, here’s Krauthammer dropping the S-bomb on Gingrich on last night’s “Special Report.”


Related Posts:

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 3 4

Who’s Willard?

Akzed on December 13, 2011 at 12:07 PM

That’s Romney’s first name.

GrannyDee on December 13, 2011 at 12:11 PM

Yes..obama is awesome…we suck…our field is dumb…we are screwed…lets go home…it’s over. All you “Our field is so bad” group, who do or DID you want to run? hmmm? Educate us. If i’m a DNC operative, I’m loving all the self-loathing we on the right go engage in!

WhatsRight on December 13, 2011 at 12:11 PM

I want to know what Hurricane Lawn Gnome Reagan has to say.

dmn1972 on December 13, 2011 at 12:11 PM

For the record, when Paul was asked about it, he didn’t say that Newt should return the money. He noted that Newt was legally allowed to take that money, but that he, Ron Paul, would not have done so, because to do so would in his opinion, be immoral.

Of course, immorality carries different weight to people who have a record of being a serial adulterer, I suppose.

JohnGalt23 on December 13, 2011 at 11:49 AM

Ron Paul is pretty happy to take those government paychecks while railing about the immorality of government.

Oh, but, but…hey look, a blimp!!!!

JohnTant on December 13, 2011 at 12:11 PM

Gingrich earned money for doing a job.

Mitt earned money for doing a job.

What is the problem here?

portlandon on December 13, 2011 at 11:45 AM

All four-legs are equal, but some are more equal than others.

alwaysfiredup on December 13, 2011 at 12:12 PM

I’m not sure who’s stupider: the candidates, or the conservatives who tear down the candidates.

John the Libertarian on December 13, 2011 at 12:12 PM

This kind of squabble is a huge distraction from what ails the country – the right should focus on Obama and how 65%/Gallop belive that Big Gov’t is the land’s problem.

Idiots, both!

Schadenfreude on December 13, 2011 at 12:12 PM

hey look, a blimp!!!!

JohnTant on December 13, 2011 at 12:11 PM

LMFAO! I had forgotten about that!

upinak on December 13, 2011 at 12:12 PM

No Newt did not make it worse. Bain collected millions in management fees while the ran companies into bankruptcy. Apparently, they have enough money to pay managers millions but not enough to pay employees’ health and pension benefits.

For capitalism to work bad players must be punished. I do not regard paying managers that bankrupted a company millions punishing bad players.

LaLupa on December 13, 2011 at 12:13 PM

Um, go Gingrich?

libfreeordie on December 13, 2011 at 12:13 PM

bhj on December 13, 2011 at 12:07 PM

So unless he answers the specific Romney charge he’s the old Newt?
How very convenient for you.

jjshaka on December 13, 2011 at 12:13 PM

The simple facts are that Newt promised to keep the campaign positive and attack Obama [...]

jjshaka on December 13, 2011 at 12:05 PM

Of course the guy with the most garbage in the trunk wants to keep the campaign positive. It’s good political strategy. The problem is the garbage, not the fact that other candidates are drawing attention to it.

I completely understand why Newt doesn’t want anybody talking about his lobbying for corrupt GSPs, his environmental doomsaying, his strange techno-mysticism, his support for mandates, his praising of Teddy Roosevelt, his crass protectionism, his love of entitlements, etc. I, on the other hand, am grateful to those who brought these travesties to light. It’s allowed me to completely dismiss Newt, and rather easily.

EddieC on December 13, 2011 at 12:13 PM

John_Locke on December 13, 2011 at 11:50 AM

I’m glad I skimmed before I posted because you said what I wanted to, only better.

Yeah, it was a sloppy jab in hindsight, just like Romney’s 10 thousand dollar bet, it is getting way too much play on the conservative side. Neither of these guys are socialists. Both of them are pretty solidly conservative, and remember that conservatives change just like liberals do. Democrats have gone full-on communist lately. When one party pulls that hard on the rope, the other party naturally drifts in their direction in order to remain competitive. I think we will see the right pull just as hard in the other direction for a few cycles, same way it happened from 2006 and on…..or 1994 and on…or 1980.

I’m from MA, I won’t vote Romney in the Primary. I’m just trying to provide context.

Mord on December 13, 2011 at 12:13 PM

What happened to Newt staying positive?

red_herring on December 13, 2011 at 12:14 PM

There’s a 3rd thing about Perry that you should all know; but I’ve completely forgot what it was. Oops.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:10 PM

I want to say that the 3rd this is… uh… I want to say “Montemayor”… help me out here, Lorien.

Punchenko on December 13, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Between Newt and Romney I pick Newt. Romney is a pod person.

dmn1972 on December 13, 2011 at 12:14 PM

“Mine’s bigger’n yourn.”

Akzed on December 13, 2011 at 11:53 AM

LOL you owe me a new keyboard. What made it even funnier to me, is that I have family who use that phraseology.

Flora Duh on December 13, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Who’s Willard?

Akzed on December 13, 2011 at 12:07 PM

…Willard

equanimous on December 13, 2011 at 12:15 PM

Second look at Huntsmann? LOL

Eph on December 13, 2011 at 11:46 AM

Why the LOL?
The former governor of Utah is looking better as these guys look worse.
Second look at Santorum, too.

itsnotaboutme on December 13, 2011 at 12:15 PM

This is classic Newt, but I don’t think it’s the anti-free market barb everyone is making it out to be (although, it does come off that way at first, so I’ll agree that the response was ill-advised).

The activities of both Newt (consulting/lobbying) and Mittens are healthy activities which are part of the free-market economy, but do carry some negative side effects that are easily exploitable by people. When you think about the rights that Americans, as individuals, enjoy, and you determine that they are not sacrificed by associating with other individuals, then it becomes obvious that lobbying is a necessary function within a free government, as it allows for associations of people to present their views to legislators. Okay, yeah, it was Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, but you can’t deny that they’ve been vital parts of our economic infrastructure for years, even though they shouldn’t have been. There’s a stronger conservative case against this than what Mittens did, but to complain about a career politician being a lobbyist for a government entity is a logical non-sequitur to me… at that point, why not just complain he’s a career politician?

There’s also a fairly strong argument against the leveraged buyout system which Mittens took advantage of at Bain Capital. Although criticism of the activities doesn’t take into account alot of economic principle, there’s a strong (though illusory) moral case against buying companies, firing the employees in pursuit of a profit, et cetera. Though the argument against this is weaker, it’s just as easy to make and it would resonate with working-class Americans who have lost their jobs during the recession, who view all Wall Street capitalist type people with mistrust.

I don’t think that Newt, by saying what he said, is making that latter argument, at least not seriously. I think it’s simply a barb back at Romney in the same way Romney’s comments were a barb at Newt – it’s cheap and designed to resonate with uninformed voters more than anything else. I also think there is a subtle “knock it the **** off Roms” implied in the statement as well.

Professor de la Paz on December 13, 2011 at 12:15 PM

Punchenko on December 13, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Dept of Energy!

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:15 PM

Second look at Huntsmann? LOL

Eph on December 13, 2011 at 11:46 AM

Stop. You’re gonna give Abby fainting spells.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:16 PM

Between Newt and Romney I pick Newt. Romney is a pod person.

dmn1972 on December 13, 2011 at 12:14 PM

They’ve both had left-wing ideas in the past.
But only one has shown long-term, consistent corruption & immorality.
Romney’s clean.

itsnotaboutme on December 13, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Am I the only person here who thinks Mitt’s attack was actually fair and legitimate?

Newt Gingrich was paid almost 2 million bucks to flack for a company that ended up bankrupt and has already cost taxpayers nearly $100 billion. That used to be real money. If he had any sense of shame at all he would give back the money to the Treasury. And notice that he is no longer even trying to defend or explain his flacking for Freddie Mac, he just flings poo at whoever calls him on it. Not very becoming of a future President.

As long as we are making mountains out of molehills in this campaign – and we sure seem to have killed Rick Perry by doing exactly that – then Newt’s association with Freddie Mac is fair game. It’s ridiculous that Tea Party conservatives are giving him a pass for this.

rockmom on December 13, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Gingrich earned money for doing a job. Mitt earned money for doing a job. What is the problem here?
portlandon on December 13, 2011 at 11:45 AM

I’m still wondering when Obama is going to return the trillions he took — the vast majority of which came from people who didn’t hire him.

logis on December 13, 2011 at 12:17 PM

It’s all a p*ss*ng match.

Romney: “I can write my name in the snow.”

Newt: “Big deal. I can cross the t’s and dot the i’s.”

Ad nauseum.

GrannyDee on December 13, 2011 at 12:18 PM

itsnotaboutme on December 13, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Only one signed legislation that tossed people in jail for not buying a product from a private company.

Wait two. Obama was the other.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:19 PM

Punchenko on December 13, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Lol

JAGonzo on December 13, 2011 at 12:20 PM

Gingrich earned money for doing a job. Mitt earned money for doing a job. What is the problem here?
portlandon on December 13, 2011 at 11:45 AM

That Newt didn’t earn it planting seeds or something?

Because Newt didn’t earn his wealth by shoveling the driveway, or watering seedlings.

portlandon on December 13, 2011 at 11:57 AM

Which, apparently, Romney did. Being the farmer/driveway shoveler. And all.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:20 PM

Shameless, Glenn — real shameless. You can’t convince me that Beck isn’t quietly rooting for Willard while giving his public support for clownidates Bachmann and George Washington Santorum.

Punchenko on December 13, 2011 at 12:03 PM

Glenn Beck is a fraud.

He is simply supporting Romney because his is a fellow Mormon.

That is why he called the tea party racist.

tetriskid on December 13, 2011 at 12:20 PM

Only one signed legislation that tossed people in jail for not buying a product from a private company.

Wait two. Obama was the other.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:19 PM

You realize Newt supported the individual mandate, right?

EddieC on December 13, 2011 at 12:21 PM

Obama is also a passive-aggressive, and a narcissist to boot.

Schadenfreude on December 13, 2011 at 12:02 PM

When you get a few extra minutes, click the link in my username. Very eye-opening and frightening.

Flora Duh on December 13, 2011 at 12:24 PM

Free-market capitalism requires some “creative destruction” to rescue capital that is being used inefficiently and/or badly and putting it to more productive use.

Was Newt’s contractual agreements not required for payment? And do conservatives engage in selective free market capitalism? I’m just a bit confused here. Is advising a company for profit now considered non-productive?

Rovin on December 13, 2011 at 12:24 PM

There’s a 3rd thing about Perry that you should all know; but I’ve completely forgot what it was. Oops.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:10 PM

I want to say that the 3rd this is… uh… I want to say “Montemayor”… help me out here, Lorien.

Punchenko on December 13, 2011 at 12:14 PM

Sorry, Newtbots, your guy stinks so bad that no amount of debates can remove that putrid odor.

If you think the GOP/Tea Party putting up a candidate that is the Don of Washington insiders and one that makes the philanderer Clinton look saintly in comparison vs. Obama is a winning strategy – then I must say you deserve the Obama second term that you will surely get.

Yes, I would rather take my chances with a solid conservative that flubs a few lines in some debates while performing excellently in others over the perfect debater that will spend the next four years, should he succeed, trying to re-define conservatism while his wife lives high on the hog.

Sorry, no dice.

TheRightMan on December 13, 2011 at 12:25 PM

Stop. You’re gonna give Abby fainting spells.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:16 PM

;-)

Abby Adams on December 13, 2011 at 12:28 PM

You realize Newt supported the individual mandate, right?

EddieC on December 13, 2011 at 12:21 PM

He didn’t enact one and he supported it at the time that lots of conservatives did too (Heritage Foundation). They all came around to reality.

I know that “supporting then changing your opinion” is roughly equivalent to “enacting” so hey. There you go.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:29 PM

The establishment republican class NEED to fix this. Get a real conservative in the race immediately.

Danielvito on December 13, 2011 at 12:08 PM

The establishment GOP class does not want to do any such thing. They are totally invested in having the status quo remain as it is. I know Rush has said this many a time: the establishment GOP does not want any conservative anywhere close to the beltway, let alone in the White House or in Congress.

They cannot be relied upon to fix anything. They are part of the problem.

PatriotGal2257 on December 13, 2011 at 12:29 PM

And I kid you not, I am still trying to decide whether Ron Paul is a better or worse candidate than Gingrich and Romney.

The pathetic defense – and I mean none – that Newtbots have for his rotten past and the lack of a principled core by Romney is actually driving me to the former.

I might end up agreeing with Beck that Paul is better than those two clowns.

TheRightMan on December 13, 2011 at 12:29 PM

I might end up agreeing with Beck that Paul is better than those two clowns.

TheRightMan on December 13, 2011 at 12:29 PM

He’s a ton better!

It makes total sense that every random goofball on the planet gets veto power over our foreign policy.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:30 PM

we sure seem to have killed Rick Perry by doing exactly that

rockmom on December 13, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Perry killed himself – to the extent that he’s dead. He was spotted a 30 point lead in the polls, before most of the country had ever heard or seen him speak.

Then we found out that he comes across as a petty, vindictive, unlikable, less-articulate George W. Bush.

Whatever his administrative acumen, the country will never find out. If he can’t sway the demographic that actually leans favorably toward W, and wanted desperately to jump on the Perry bandwagon, he doesn’t stand a chance in the general election.

Plus, he’s run a worse campaign than Fred Thompson did. At least Fred didn’t pull out the “out-Huckabee Huckabee” social con card.

notropis on December 13, 2011 at 12:31 PM

Is advising a company for profit now considered non-productive?

Rovin on December 13, 2011 at 12:24 PM

Was it advising or lobbying? Seems like the latter. Which would be illegal.
And whatever it was, it was for an organization Newt has slammed as corrupt. And Newt has slammed people who took money from Fannie/Freddie.

itsnotaboutme on December 13, 2011 at 12:31 PM

He’s a ton better!

It makes total sense that every random goofball on the planet gets veto power over our foreign policy.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:30 PM

Meh..

It’s a lot better than every female intern in the White House getting veto power over our domestic and foreign policy.

Who knows when next Gingrich will get all patriotic with female interns and promise them the moon?

And we (GOP/Tea Party) will be the casualties.

TheRightMan on December 13, 2011 at 12:33 PM

They’ve both had left-wing ideas in the past.
But only one has shown long-term, consistent corruption & immorality.
Romney’s clean.

itsnotaboutme on December 13, 2011 at 12:17 PM

Only one signed legislation that tossed people in jail for not buying a product from a private company.

Wait two. Obama was the other.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:19 PM

Newt has advocated the same thing many times. But he was shamed out of office, so he couldn’t do anything about it.

itsnotaboutme on December 13, 2011 at 12:33 PM

Then we found out that he comes across as a petty, vindictive, unlikable, less-articulate George W. Bush.

Yep. That’s Rick Perry right there.

He lost me at “less-articulate George W. Bush” – I can’t/won’t suffer thru another 4/8 years of that.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:34 PM

Still trying to listen and not get all wonky like some others are doing….but when I heard Newt give the response to Mitt about returning his money it sounded to me that it was, as Rush says, “using absurdity to explain absurdity.” Mitt’s comment was silly and Newt responded in kind. Why do we have to read 15 degrees worth of meaning into everything???

1nolibgal on December 13, 2011 at 12:35 PM

Plus, he’s run a worse campaign than Fred Thompson did. At least Fred didn’t pull out the “out-Huckabee Huckabee” social con card.

notropis on December 13, 2011 at 12:31 PM

Sorry… I hope your misguided attack on Perry assuages your own guilts and hatred of social conservatives. /sarc

TheRightMan on December 13, 2011 at 12:35 PM

TheRightMan on December 13, 2011 at 12:33 PM

LOL. Everyone needs a straw to grasp at, I suppose.

But he was shamed out of office, so he couldn’t do anything about it.

itsnotaboutme on December 13, 2011 at 12:33 PM

So, your logic here is that since Romney could, he did. But since Newt couldn’t, he didn’t.

Whatever works!

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:37 PM

This is why Gingrich will lose to Obama. They guy is so enamored with himself that he can’t tell when he is spouting his progressive tendencies.
Another week and a half and Gingrich will have come back down to earth.

csdeven on December 13, 2011 at 12:37 PM

I’m amused at those who say, “why you picking on our GOP field or these are our choices”. I say bullcrap to that, now is the time to tell the GOP establishment are choices are unacceptable. The RNC, is the mover/shaker in our election process. They make the rules (annoint primary/caucus dates, pick our candidates etc..

I’m not going to sit back and watch Romneycare or Lobbyist for big government Gingrich lose us the presidency, cost us the house, again lose the senate and close govenor races.

WE NEED A TRUE CONSERVATIVE CANDIDATE THAT WILL DO CHANGE. EVEN IF THAT CHANGE COSTS THOSE BELTWAY PIMPS THEIR CUSHY JOBS LIVING OFF OUR TAXPAYER DOLLARS!

Without a conservative candidate, turnout will be down. Wait till June/July/August and Obamacare starts hitting Gingrich or Romneycare w/ads pointing out how liberal they are to keep conservatives from voting.

All Obamacare has to do is running the following ads

Obama modeled Obamacare after Romneycare. I’m sure conservatives will like that and pointing out that during Gingrich 12 years at making millions from lobbying, in 2003 paid to pass the medicare fix that blew a hole in medicare, his $312,000 to support ethanol subsidaries, his $1.8 mil killing freddie mac reform which caused the 2008 housing crisis, etc..

How can we be excited by these two toads!!!

Danielvito on December 13, 2011 at 12:39 PM

Anyone ever stop to think that Newt might be using a little “tongue-in-cheek” sarcasm here to kick ol’ Roms in the shins? Just a thought.

Speakeasy on December 13, 2011 at 12:07 PM

Yes, I have thought that.

GaltBlvnAtty on December 13, 2011 at 12:39 PM

Why do we have to read 15 degrees worth of meaning into everything???

1nolibgal on December 13, 2011 at 12:35 PM

Because it is fact. Gingrich could have made his point in a different way while using conservative principles. But no! Gingrich’s first thought was that capitalists are bad people. No thanks. Gingrich is a fraud.

csdeven on December 13, 2011 at 12:39 PM

Newt Gingrich was paid almost 2 million bucks to flack for a company that ended up bankrupt and has already cost taxpayers nearly $100 billion. That used to be real money. If he had any sense of shame at all he would give back the money to the Treasury. And notice that he is no longer even trying to defend or explain his flacking for Freddie Mac, he just flings poo at whoever calls him on it. Not very becoming of a future President.

Being in the consulting business, I can attest that the consultant does not run the company. Even if you are paid for your advice…that doesn’t mean or guarantee the company does as you wish.

tinkerthinker on December 13, 2011 at 12:40 PM

Am I the only person here who thinks Mitt’s attack was actually fair and legitimate?

I think its ok,

but I am a Mitt supporter from mass.

gerry-Moderate republican lawn gnome

gerrym51 on December 13, 2011 at 12:41 PM

Perry killed himself – to the extent that he’s dead. He was spotted a 30 point lead in the polls, before most of the country had ever heard or seen him speak.

Then we found out that he comes across as a petty, vindictive, unlikable, less-articulate George W. Bush.

notropis on December 13, 2011 at 12:31 PM

Bullseye.

MadisonConservative on December 13, 2011 at 12:41 PM

TheRightMan on December 13, 2011 at 12:05 PM

Three reasons why Perry will lose to Obama:
1. Guardasil
2. In-state tuition support for illegal immigrants
3. Uh….uh…I forgot

timberline on December 13, 2011 at 12:42 PM

He didn’t enact one and he supported it at the time that lots of conservatives did too (Heritage Foundation). They all came around to reality.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:29 PM

It’s sad that people don’t seem to appreciate the concept of federalism. Romney implemented a mandate in 1 state and has stated again and again that the 10th Amendment reserves such policies to the states only. Gingrich supported a national mandate, a far more egregious violation. He supported expanding medicare. He opposed Ryan’s plan to reform entitlements. I think we know the sort of big government president he’d be.

If you’d rather choose the guy who wanted to violate the Constitution to impose national health care on all 50 states over the guy who imposed it in one state and who seems to understand a one-size-fits-all policy is both unconstitutional and unwise, that’s your prerogative.

EddieC on December 13, 2011 at 12:42 PM

csdeven on December 13, 2011 at 12:39 PM

I’m sure the majority of people in MA want Romney to return that money; so therefore they have the power to compel him.

Am I right? Oh, you know I’m right.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:42 PM

I’m just a bit confused here. Is advising a company for profit now considered non-productive?

Rovin on December 13, 2011 at 12:24 PM

Advising a company that bankrupt this nation is way different than shutting down non viable companies and reinvesting that capital into companies that succeeded and are still employing thousands of Americans to this day. What Gingrich did was a bad as ?fred? Thompson lobbying for a Haitian dictator.

csdeven on December 13, 2011 at 12:43 PM

3. Uh….uh…I forgot

timberline on December 13, 2011 at 12:42 PM

Bwahahahahaha!!!

Good one!

csdeven on December 13, 2011 at 12:43 PM

He opposed Ryan’s plan to reform entitlements.

Newt actually was/is opposed to forcing people off entitlements. He thinks they should have the option to do so. Which is, oddly similar to statements he made back in the 1990′s – which conservatives loved him for. Weird how that pans out.

Romney implemented a mandate in 1 state

Oh I agree. It’s terrific when a state decides that the people who live there should be forced to enter into contracts with a private party. It’s all legal and proper!

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:44 PM

What Gingrich did was a bad as ?fred? Thompson lobbying for a Haitian dictator.

csdeven on December 13, 2011 at 12:43 PM

Pretty much! Roughly equivalent.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:45 PM

Oh I agree. It’s terrific when a state decides that the people who live there should be forced to enter into contracts with a private party. It’s all legal and proper!

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:44 PM

No, actually it’s pretty sad. What’s even worse is when somebody wants the same thing for an entire nation.

EddieC on December 13, 2011 at 12:47 PM

No, actually it’s pretty sad. What’s even worse is when somebody wants the same thing for an entire nation.

EddieC on December 13, 2011 at 12:47 PM

I know. That Romney guy is a real retard, isn’t he? Stupid ass, wanted to make Romneycare a model for the nation.

And, after seeing its effects on MA (higher premiums, state talking about rationing), he still supports the concept.

I mean. What a tard.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:49 PM

Bain & Company website. Looks like they consult with governmental agencies. So Newt is called a socialist by some media outlets for responding to Romney’s spitball but it’s okay for Romney’s former company to consult with government agencies. Both men were private citizens working for private companies. Can’t really think Bain would turn down a contract from FM.

Public sector and government consulting:
In the government sector, our efforts have been directed toward:
Strategic planning with government agencies
Supporting state-owned enterprises
Working with government entities to realize economic and social goals.

momoftxmomof3 on December 13, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Gingrich earned money for doing a job.

Mitt earned money for doing a job.

What is the problem here?

portlandon on December 13, 2011 at 11:45 AM

Precisely, and that is what Newt said in the Saturday debate. To claim as Kraut did that Newt does not understand capitalism, or speaks like a socialist, is just the Republican establishment continuing to do all it can to stop Newt, who, they know, will disrupt their comfortable positions. On the other hand, as Newt knows, politics ain’t beanbag, and he needs to avoid giving his opponents this type of opportunity.

GaltBlvnAtty on December 13, 2011 at 11:52 AM

I agree, there shouldn’t be a problem here at all. I’m amazed at the republican establishment politicians and pundits and how transparent they are when they go after Newt Gingrich. They’re really freaking out. They might as well go on over and join in with the liberal mainstream media attacks.

Did you see Brit Hume when he opined on Newt’s comment? He had a regular hissy fit; hope he doesn’t have high blood pressure. Usually Brit doesn’t show any emotion, but he blew his top last night.

Krauthammer just picked up on Brit’s lead and followed suit, but was at least in control of his emotions. Brian Kilmeade pretty much continued their tirade against Newt on Fox & Friends today. It’s like there’s a major rehabilitation of Romney/destruction of Newt going on at Fox since the Bret Baier interview debacle.

Hmmm, I’m wondering just how the Fox Debate on Thursday will play out re questions from the Fox moderators. Pile on Newt, softball Romney, or actually be fair and balanced?

IndeCon on December 13, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Oh I agree. It’s terrific when a state decides that the people who live there should be forced to enter into contracts with a private party. It’s all legal and proper!

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:44 PM

Yeah, only 68% of the people in Massachussetts likes RomneyCare. WHAT A DISASTER!!! You should start a petition to end that extremely unpopular program.

Or maybe you should elect a president who will FORCE Massachussetts to give up their healthcare plan. Screw the 10th amendment, right?

Jailbreak on December 13, 2011 at 12:50 PM

Noot is a complete disaster. He’ll spout any “zinger” that comes to his mind when he’s challenged, which is why until the tea party hopped on the train for some reason he’s been nothing more than an irrelevant laughing stock. No thanks.

Bachmann is still in the race.

Ruiner on December 13, 2011 at 12:51 PM

Being in the consulting business, I can attest that the consultant does not run the company. Even if you are paid for your advice…that doesn’t mean or guarantee the company does as you wish.

tinkerthinker on December 13, 2011 at 12:40 PM

You don’t understand, Tinker. Newt had special control over Democrats in Congress that convinced them not to regulate Freddie Mac. Newt also was the shadow CEO of Freddie Mac — while he was President (Bush was a puppet) — and he made sure that Bush, Congressional Republicans, Democrats, the Fed, and every Tom DeLay, Dick Durbin, and Harry Reid DID NOTHING to stop the housing bubble.

Newt also fed Alan Greenspan and Ben Bernanke bad information *convincing* them to do nothing. Mitt Romney, who was locked in a basement somewhere (probably the work of McCain trying to steal the nomination from him!), likewise said and did nothing. Most of Wall Street — who were also locked in the basement with their friend Mitt — were also powerless to stop the bubble.

Did I mention Newt blew up the levees in New Orleans with the help of Dick Cheney? Well he did — that was after he stuffed his pockets with Grandma’s Social Security check, the monster! Newt Gingrich is an evil man out to stop Mitt’s glorious coronation.

You know who won’t stand for Newt snatching the crown from Saint Willard Mittens of Boston? I’ll tell you:

Charles Krauthammer, Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, Chris Christie, John Sununu, Brit Hume, A.B Stoddard, National Review, Congressional Republicans, Senate Republicans, Bill O’Reilly, Dick Morris, Karl Rove, Fox and Friends, Moaning Joe, S.E. Cupp, and every other creature of the Washington/New York Establishment that fear power returning back to the rubes.

Punchenko on December 13, 2011 at 12:51 PM

You people have officially been brainwashed by FOX News and Karl Rove who are now aggressively pushing Romney and Gingrich on all their news programs. They’re barely even covering the other candidates anymore. It is only the beginning of the primaries and they have you believing RomneyCare and Gingrich/Sharpton are the only two candidates to choose from. You guys are evil. You’re demons is what you are and you guys deserve to be defeated like Michael the archangel defeated the devil. You make me sick.

apocalypse on December 13, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Punchenko on December 13, 2011 at 12:08 PM

Texas is now projected to collect $82.7 billion in this 2-year budget cycle, up from the $81.1 billion being spent. The result: $1.6 billion in surplus.

Texas closed the 2010-2011 budget cycle with a General Revenue balance of $1.1 billion.

Texas’ Economic Stabilization Fund (ESF), or Rainy Day Fund, is now projected to have $7.321 billion at the end of the 2-year budget cycle.

State Comptroller’s Report December 12 2011
http://www.scribd.com/doc/75566547/Texas-Comptroller-Revenue-Estimate-December-2011?utm_source=The+Per

Texas has seen 20 straight months of sales tax revenue growth, and November 2011 receipts were up 12.2% over November 2010.

Texas went from the 6th lowest per capita debt to the 2nd lowest under Rick Perry. Texas now leads the nation in exports for the 9th straight year.

So Puchenko…how’s your state doing?

Results Matter

Gig Em’
Perry 2012

workingclass artist on December 13, 2011 at 12:53 PM

Yeah, only 68% of the people in Massachussetts likes RomneyCare.

Totally. 68% of people demanding that 32% give up their rights (which is, of course, not to be forced by government to do things against their will) is what this country was founded upon. You go with that.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:53 PM

Bachmann is still in the race.

Ruiner on December 13, 2011 at 12:51 PM

So’s Buddy Roemer….

notropis on December 13, 2011 at 12:53 PM

That Romney guy is a real retard, isn’t he? Stupid ass, [...] What a tard.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:49 PM

Sorry, I won’t be joining you in the gutter.

EddieC on December 13, 2011 at 12:53 PM

locking assets into inefficient uses and subsidizing failure with billions in public money for private enterprises. That’s what companies like Bain do,

Please clarify.

Christien on December 13, 2011 at 12:55 PM

Gig Em’
Perry 2012

workingclass artist on December 13, 2011 at 12:53 PM

Too bad Perry is so bad he can’t spew basic facts about his own state. That’s Perry’s problem. It isn’t a belief set, it’s that no one wants to rerun GWB. That’s why Perry faulted.

Forget tardasil. Forget in state tuition. Those weren’t big deals.

Perry being less articulate than GWB killed him. It’s that simple.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:55 PM

Sorry, I won’t be joining you in the gutter.

EddieC on December 13, 2011 at 12:53 PM

Can’t dispute the content; just the delivery. I like giving people outs. Cuz he’s indefensible.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:55 PM

FOX News > All decent people that want a better world.

apocalypse on December 13, 2011 at 12:56 PM

You guys are evil. You’re demons is what you are and you guys deserve to be defeated like Michael the archangel defeated the devil. You make me sick.

apocalypse on December 13, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Pretty much! We stole your jesus fish too! :(

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:57 PM

Gingrich has been in Washington for 34 years. He is an insider, a backroom dealer. He has been involved in legislation that has created our huge debt. He is for global warming/cap & trade legislation (made commercial w/Nancy Pelosi), he is more republican than conservative (supporting dede scazzafazza over a tea party candidate, costing us the seat, he lobbies the last 12 years for big government and goes on fox saying government should be smaller, he talks family values and has been married three times, he had to resign his speakership because of ethics violations (republicans gave him the boot), he’s NEVER won a statewide race, he HAS NO EXECUTIVE EXPERIENCE!

Romneycare is a RINO, Flip Flopper who is an empty suit that even his own dog wouldn’t support him in battle.

Now I’m sitting here looking at these two choices and I’m ready to throw up in my mouth. IS THIS THE BEST WE HAVE. I WANT TO VOTE FOR SOMEONE. I’m not holding my nose again, if those two warts are my choices I’m staying at home and not voting!

Danielvito on December 13, 2011 at 1:00 PM

How to beat Obama in 2012

“We’re seeing a stronger recovery than originally expected,” said Dale Craymer, president of the Texas Taxpayers and Research Association, an Austin-based nonprofit group supported by businesses. “The last six months is a story of good news in the Texas economy getting better.”

The gains in the state led by Governor Rick Perry, a contender for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, contrast with shortfalls in California, the biggest state, and New York, where Governor Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, has described revenue as “collapsing.” In Sacramento, Democratic Governor Jerry Brown is seeking to raise income and sales taxes to cope with receipts that are already $1 billion short of forecasts…”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-12-12/texas-budget-picture-improves-as-sales-tax-collections-jump-combs-

workingclass artist on December 13, 2011 at 1:01 PM

apocalypse on December 13, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Weren’t you a Huckabee backer in the last round?

If so, he’s backing Romney.

Who is your candidate this year?

Schadenfreude on December 13, 2011 at 1:02 PM

workingclass, your link doesn’t work.

Here it is, I think.

Schadenfreude on December 13, 2011 at 1:04 PM

Totally. 68% of people demanding that 32% give up their rights (which is, of course, not to be forced by government to do things against their will) is what this country was founded upon. You go with that.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:53 PM

Yeah, I bet 25% of the people think the drinking age should be lowered and that they shouldnt have to pay property tax and that they shouldnt have to get auto insurance. THOSE TITANS!!!

Thats why the 10th amendment, something you dont understand, is so critical. People who dont like it can move to New Hampshire and still be an American. See how it works? Its great..really.

Or maybe you think the 32% should boss around the 68% so they dont get their pretend-rights trampled.

Jailbreak on December 13, 2011 at 1:05 PM

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:55 PM

Perry is doing a lot of local media in Iowa…and he’s doing just fine. Folks won’t care about impressive articulation They want JOBS!

He getting his second look even if Big Media isn’t covering it.

http://www.seacoastonline.com/articles/20111213-OPINION-112130337?utm_source=The+Perry+Almanac&utm_campai

workingclass artist on December 13, 2011 at 1:08 PM

I’m sure the majority of people in MA want Romney to return that money; so therefore they have the power to compel him.

Am I right? Oh, you know I’m right.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 12:42 PM

I doubt it. Romney’s money doesn’t place a burden on the people of MA. Depending on where the companies he created are operating, his actions would benefit them.

csdeven on December 13, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Yeah, I bet 25% of the people think the drinking age should be lowered and that they shouldnt have to pay property tax and that they shouldnt have to get auto insurance.

You know what’s roughly equivalent to an age limit to buy a drink?

Forcing people to buy that drink.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Schadenfreude on December 13, 2011 at 1:04 PM

thanks

workingclass artist on December 13, 2011 at 1:09 PM

LISTEN TO NEWT IN HIS OWN WORDS….

How is he better than Obama? And NEWT believes that the “FREEDOM FROM WANT” is something the Government should work towards?

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/gingrich-flashback-progressive-fdr-was-greatest-president-of-the-20th-century-plus-seius-andy-stern-is-visionary-union-leader/

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NEWT!!!!

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NEWT!!!!

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NEWT!!!!

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NEWT!!!!

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NEWT!!!!

PappyD61 on December 13, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Anyone ever stop to think that Newt might be using a little “tongue-in-cheek” sarcasm here to kick ol’ Roms in the shins? Just a thought.

Speakeasy on December 13, 2011 at 12:07 PM

Of course, and obviously so. However our little groups of hyper-loyal candidate supporters will try to make hay with it regardless. Meanwhile every talking head with an axe to grind will intentionally have the vapors. Predictable and boring, but whatever gets them through the night.

Irritable Pundit on December 13, 2011 at 1:09 PM

csdeven on December 13, 2011 at 1:09 PM

Some people were put out of jobs by Bain’s actions (and therefore Romney’s income), so there was at least some burden. Yes?

Just agree and you can move on. It’s not difficult.

At least see how the argument in favor of Romneycare can be extended to virtually every action you take.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 1:11 PM

apocalypse on December 13, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Hahahaha! If your candidate is as hung up with religious references as you are, it’s no wonder they can’t get any traction in the polls.

csdeven on December 13, 2011 at 1:11 PM

Just agree and you can move on. It’s not difficult.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 1:11 PM

What a very liberal way of arguing. Agree with me and shut up.

luckedout26 on December 13, 2011 at 1:16 PM

What a very liberal way of arguing. Agree with me and shut up.

luckedout26 on December 13, 2011 at 1:16 PM

You can’t see the point, I guess? It’s pretty apparent.

If Romneycare was okay because the uninsured created a burden on the taxpayers; then Romney should give up his earned income at Bain cuz his causing people to go on unemployment also created a burden on taxpayers.

It’s not difficult. If you agree with one, it’s hard to see how you’d agree with another.

If the idea is that the state can regulate your activity if there is an impact on tax payers, there is nothing the state cannot regulate.

lorien1973 on December 13, 2011 at 1:20 PM

Wanna shout out to all the TRUE Michelle Bachmann supporters who haven’t given up on our candidate… who stand up to the Republican establishment. I’m very proud of you for doing that. Uh, it’s time people start standing up. Whether it’s Twitter or whether it’s Facebook, or vlogs, blogs, whatever. Do what you got to do! Don’t let these jerks write history again, man. Let them know you switched from Newt Romney to Michele Bachmann. Don’t let them down on her man because these guys are a cancer to the nation.

apocalypse on December 13, 2011 at 1:23 PM

You guys are evil. You’re demons is what you are and you guys deserve to be defeated like Michael the archangel defeated the devil. You make me sick.

apocalypse on December 13, 2011 at 12:52 PM

Hyperbole much?

Flora Duh on December 13, 2011 at 1:25 PM

Am I the only person here who thinks Mitt’s attack was actually fair and legitimate?

rockmom on December 13, 2011 at 12:17 PM

..you aren’t. But like Granny Dee said, it’s a pissing contest.

This episode is also so-o-o-o-o-o 15 minutes ago. Why is there a HA thread on this unless it’s to offer more opportunity to slam the Mittster?

Ladies and gentlemen, Mittens and Neuter, the real object of our affection is in the White House!

The War Planner on December 13, 2011 at 1:26 PM

Anyone else receive an email of this youtube video showing Newt fawning of FDR? It’s only about a minute and a half long but… sheesh. People snap out of the “he’s a great debater” fog.

Fallon on December 13, 2011 at 1:26 PM

They are the two biggest kids on the block..Sooner or later they are going to fight..:)

Dire Straits on December 13, 2011 at 1:27 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4