Sarah Palin: Media overplayed their hand with Gingrich
posted at 6:28 pm on January 19, 2012 by Tina Korbe
In an interview with Sean Hannity on his radio program today, Sarah Palin made no bones about what she thinks of ABC’s decision to air an exclusive interview with Newt Gingrich’s ex-wife in advance of the South Carolina primary:
“The liberal media,” she added, “and some of that GOP holier-than-thou machine overplayed their hand this time.”
Palin said that Gingrich, who she identified this week as the candidate she would vote for in the South Carolina primary if eligible, would ultimately benefit from the media attack.
“I call them ‘dumb arses,’” she said. “They think by trotting out this old Gingrich divorce interview — that’s old news and it does feature this disgruntled ex- that claimed that it would destroy a campaign. All this does is, Sean, is incentivize conservatives and independents who are so sick of the politics of personal destruction because it’s played so selectively by the media.”
“Their target in this case, Newt,” Palin added, “is now going to soar even more because we know the game now and we just won’t put up with it. So you know, good call media. Way to go to covertly hype this, even with Gingrich opponents. For being so brilliant, they sure are dumb.”
Everybody keeps saying this is “old news,” but, for a new generation of voters (who are hopefully paying attention to all of this!), it’s actually not. The timing is off and Marianne Gingrich’s motivation is sketchy — but, if this inspires primary voters who haven’t yet done so to probe Newt Gingrich’s past (personal and political!) and price it into the value of his stock, then so be it. It’s relevant.
Sarah Palin is spot on, though, when she says that conservatives and independents are sick of the politics of personal destruction because it’s played so selectively. As Ed pointed out this morning, it’s maddening that the media is all too willing to revive talk of Gingrich’s past when they ignored John Edwards’ affair, which was going on as he ran for president. Personal integrity matters — and it should matter to both parties. Just because Democrats overlook the dishonorable personal lives of their pols, though, doesn’t mean Republicans have to — and I should still hope that this messy reminder of Gingrich’s past mistakes wouldn’t actually galvanize South Carolinians to vote for him if they wouldn’t have otherwise.
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: « Previous 1 … 3 4 5 6 Next »
Trailer trash. Everyone knows that evangelicals are into cheap grace and easy redemption. But guess what? You can’t be serious about leadership and integrity when you’re a proven betrayer.
aloysiusmiller on January 19, 2012 at 8:56 PM
Really? A cougar? She pursues younger men for sexual gratification?
What position will she quit within a week? And what did she ever “quit” in the past, besides the Governor’s office? And with regard to the Governor’s office, why should she have stayed? Her political career was over after McCain’s band of incompetent worthless low-lifes turned her into a national joke, and she had a job that paid $120k per year and cost her $500k a year. Anybody who would have stayed under those conditions is a moron.
Walter Sobchak on January 19, 2012 at 8:59 PM
Amazing, just like the 2008 presidential election, the romneycare dolts on cue attack Gov. palin. Only thing that this sorry arse Romneycare has is personal destruction. He can’t run on his sociolist record which is a disgrace.
Romneycare is a joke. The latest sin is him having 12 accounts setup thru Bain & co in the Cayman Islands to sheild him from paying taxes.
As yourself, what’s worse, a family issue dealing with divorce or a “businessman” knowningly sheilding money as to not pay taxes, then raises our taxes as a one term governor to the tune of $550 million (gas, fees, fines etc.)in massachusetts.
Nice, two days before the SC primary this attack happens. It won’t work, romneycare is pond scum and will never get the nomination.
Danielvito on January 19, 2012 at 9:02 PM
WTF?
darwin on January 19, 2012 at 9:07 PM
Paid trolls/bots get paid for each REPLY they receive, not comment posted. That’s one of the warnings: Don’t feed the trolls.
bluefox on January 19, 2012 at 9:14 PM
Mittbot=Obot=Democrat=FAIL
Pragmatic on January 19, 2012 at 9:14 PM
LOL, yes and Bishop has a new lure so better watch out!!!
bluefox on January 19, 2012 at 9:19 PM
Romney relaunches Operation Zany
The best evidence that Newt is rising in South Carolina is that the Romney campaign is rolling out a new effort to paint Newt as “unreliable.”
It’s the campaign theme that worked well for Romney in Iowa, when Romney rolled out his strategy of crazy.
Operation Zany has been quiet lately, but no more:
http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/01/romney-relaunches-operation-zany/#comments
Romney has to destroy, since he can’t inspire.
Green eyed Lady on January 19, 2012 at 9:28 PM
No, I’m not. In her Couric interview, she could not name a SCOTUS decision she disagreed with.
Dante on January 19, 2012 at 9:29 PM
Dear Lord!
Thank goodness there wasn’t the Internet around in 1979-80: I don’t want to think what whining would have gone on like this about Ronald Reagan‘s imperfections/faults/policies.
Grow up children.
Green eyed Lady on January 19, 2012 at 9:31 PM
No kidding..LOL
idesign on January 19, 2012 at 9:31 PM
What’s your point?
darwin on January 19, 2012 at 9:31 PM
Considering that Perry’s out…and the 3 clowns that are left(I’m not including Don Black’s buddy)…I’m starting to like Palin more.
Yeah-it’s really me.
annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2012 at 7:09 PM
This is my first time to post on Hot Air (yeah, I’m one of THOSE who got through the gate!)but have been reading and enjoying comments made here for the last 3 years. I must say, ALT, that I have been frustrated by you at times seeing as how I’m a Texan and you are a transplant, from Illinois, none the less. I have to tell you I almost fell off my couch when I read this post by you. You’ve hated on Palin for quite a while so imagine my shock!! I’m still thinking maybe one of those pod people has invaded your body. Just kidding of course. Just had to let you know that while I haven’t always agreed with you, I have enjoyed many of your posts….and you led me to finally post!!
texasmagnolia on January 19, 2012 at 9:36 PM
Question: What would a Republican primary be without the national media scheming to destroy one of the candidates?
Answer: A Democrat primary.
With brazen disregard for journalistic ethics and a mere two days before the South Carolina primary, ABC News is going to air an interview tonight with Newt Gingrich’s ex-wife, allegedly complete with lurid details about her ex-husband’s sex life.
Not surprisingly, and in line with ABC’s long track record of double standard journalism, during the 1990’s ABC News refused to report Juanita Broaddrick’s allegations that President Bill Clinton sexually assaulted her.
Call ABC News right now. Let them know that this double standard is unacceptable.
ABC News President David Westin: 818-460-7477
ABC News Executive Director Jeff Winn: 212-456-2700
Green eyed Lady on January 19, 2012 at 9:37 PM
Read the thread.
Dante on January 19, 2012 at 9:47 PM
No silly … what’s your point in mentioning Palin’s Couric interview?
darwin on January 19, 2012 at 9:55 PM
Tina, you are so wrong. The new generation could give a rat’s
a$$ about Gingrich’s “messy” marital life decades ago.
And as for us older folks, 50+, we either have been divorced
or know many people who have. We have all made our own share of
mistakes in all walks of life. We forgive, we move on.
Also, us older folks know how great this country was and still
can be. We watched Newt force Clinton to balance the budget
and implement the Contract with America almost in its entirety.
We also know those ethics charges against him were bogus…just
like the ethics charges against Palin. Been there, seen that!
Don’t take us for fools.
Amjean on January 19, 2012 at 9:55 PM
ah, hahahaha!
She’s your worst nightmare.
Hey petunia… BOO!
james23 on January 19, 2012 at 9:57 PM
I wish Sarah Palin would fade quietly into the night.
BettyRuth on January 19, 2012 at 6:33 PM
Too bad for you for its not going to happen.
Amjean on January 19, 2012 at 9:58 PM
You obviously didn’t watch the Couric interview very closely. She did give a case and it was Roe vs. Wade. She discussed it indepth and was very effective. Couric wanted more then one.
KMav on January 19, 2012 at 10:10 PM
Smack!
idesign on January 19, 2012 at 10:16 PM
Darwin my friend,.. Dante has no point beyond being the turd in the punchbowl, check out the link on his name.. Greens, radical socialists, lunatic fringe libertarians, even communists,… all gathered together to support Paul, on an anti-war site more anti-American than the Soviets themselves were.
He’s here to insult and bait, nothing more.
mark81150 on January 19, 2012 at 10:19 PM
As a stalwart fan of Palin, she has lost me with this sickening Gingrich love of hers. Sad as it makes me to admit it. Very sad…
greeneyedconservative on January 19, 2012 at 10:25 PM
You don’t have a clue….
She wants the vetting to continue..:)
idesign on January 19, 2012 at 10:31 PM
please don’t tell me i don’t have a clue, idesign. i know what she’s trying to do, but it sickens me. she doesn’t think romney’s going to continue to get vetted? this afternoon she was on hannity and said the lsm decided to keep the john edwards story quiet, but choose to bring out the gingrich story. her point was that the lsm denied the people of knowing the truth about edwards. then she realized the point she just made and triangulated. i’m extremely disappointed in her support of gingrich, because at the end of the day, no matter how she tries to parse it, she’s supporting him. and that, i cannot abide.
greeneyedconservative on January 19, 2012 at 10:37 PM
Why? vetting occurred tonight?
Buy Danish on January 19, 2012 at 10:39 PM
So lets have John Edwards run again cause it was just the media making him look bad after his adultery came out.
Mormontheman on January 19, 2012 at 10:41 PM
Romney won’t release his tax returns…:)
idesign on January 19, 2012 at 10:42 PM
Now that the 0bamaGanda Media has again learned that real Conservatives do not fall for their tripe they will again drag out their worn out race card.
I wonder how long until lil 0
bails them out‘stimulates’ them.DannoJyd on January 19, 2012 at 10:47 PM
i guess i’m on the wrong side or something because i just don’t care. i would rather the gop scream to the high heaven about obama releasing all his secretive records he so quickly locked up. but no… they’re screaming about the gop candidates instead. stupid stupid party…
greeneyedconservative on January 19, 2012 at 10:49 PM
Of COURSE Sarah Palin is “spot on” in this remark – She is “Spot On” every time she SPEAKS!!”
williamg on January 19, 2012 at 10:52 PM
There’s just something about Sarah Palin speaking up on television that drives some people batsh_t crazy.
And all she did this time was state that if she lived in South Carolina, she’d vote for Newt Gingrich just to help keep the primary process going so that even the front runner gets vetted properly. I didn’t think that was such a horrible thing to say, but it’s got people screaming “quitter” and “embarrassment” and “moron” and “hypocrite” and “attention whore” and everything else. But then I guess it’s not a coincidence that the posters screaming the most here are the Romney fans.
Aitch748 on January 19, 2012 at 11:01 PM
texasmagnolia on January 19, 2012 at 9:36 PM
Glad to be of assistance, Ma’am!
**grin*
annoyinglittletwerp on January 19, 2012 at 11:04 PM
Good point.
DannoJyd on January 19, 2012 at 11:05 PM
I didn’t watch the debate, but I can see one very good reason why Sarah Palin might consider voting for Newt Gingrich:
Newt just stomped moderator John King into the floor. He actually said that King’s question was despicable. And the audience gave him a standing ovation.
Romney simply doesn’t fight like this. Newt does. And this is why I for one will overlook whatever messes Newt has had in his personal life. We need somebody in DC with the balls to say NO! to the people who want to keep the spending train going full steam ahead.
Aitch748 on January 19, 2012 at 11:13 PM
You need to watch the video…LOL
Outstanding!
idesign on January 19, 2012 at 11:21 PM
haner on January 19, 2012 at 6:39 PM and others
BettyRuth on January 19, 2012 at 6:33 PM
urban elitist on January 19, 2012 at 6:50 PM
troyriser_gopftw on January 19, 2012 at 7:39 PM
jimver on January 19, 2012 at 7:40 PM and others
echosyst on January 19, 2012 at 7:52 PM
bluegill on January 19, 2012 at 7:41 PM and others
Your Mamma loves me on January 19, 2012 at 8:44 PM
Medicate these trolls. It’s time to revoke computer privileges at the mental hospital.
CoolChange80 on January 19, 2012 at 11:26 PM
idesign on January 19, 2012 at 7:01 PM
and the great Nicole Coulter on January 19, 2012 at 7:37 PM
Mega Kudos to you!
Stayright on January 19, 2012 at 6:42 PM,
Genius
Chitown2424 on January 19, 2012 at 7:49 PM,
That is using logic.
CoolChange80 on January 19, 2012 at 11:28 PM
Read the thread. Follow the discussion. I’m not going to connect the dots for you.
Dante on January 19, 2012 at 11:32 PM
Unless if that vetting happens to involve Newt Gingrich. Then it’s negative campaigning and disgraceful!
haner on January 19, 2012 at 11:32 PM
And you must not have watched it at all. Couric brought up Roe v. Wade, not Palin.
Dante on January 19, 2012 at 11:37 PM
You obviously didn’t watch the Couric interview very closely. She did give a case and it was Roe vs. Wade. She discussed it indepth and was very effective. Couric wanted more then one.
KMav on January 19, 2012 at 10:10 PM
And you must not have watched it at all. Couric brought up Roe v. Wade, not Palin.
Dante on January 19, 2012 at 11:37 PM
Smack.
rjl1999 on January 19, 2012 at 11:43 PM
It’s big of you to say so. Haven’t been around here much lately, but I dropped in today and it was nice to read this. Thanks.
Missy on January 19, 2012 at 11:48 PM
Darwin, Dante just wants to show us how limited he/she is by bringing up 3+ year old interviews. He/she has obviously not kept current on Palin. Dante is very intellectually vapid.
karenhasfreedom on January 19, 2012 at 11:49 PM
So does this mean conservatives no longer care about the personal lives of candidates? That they never should have criticized Bill Clinton’s long history of peccadilloes? Can Republicans and Democrats finally unite and say, “I won’t show you mine if you won’t show me yours?” Yes.
RightOFLeft on January 19, 2012 at 11:59 PM
Missy on January 19, 2012 at 11:48 PM
I try to call ‘em as I see ‘em.
LoL
annoyinglittletwerp on January 20, 2012 at 12:02 AM
Our how about after that queer went all hate and Nazi on Bristol?
The left is unhinged, nothing but hate and bitterness left in most of them.
What really is making them go meltdown is the realization of what a lousy Prez O is.
KirknBurker on January 20, 2012 at 12:04 AM
Nobody here believes you’re a Republican.
You need to move on.
KirknBurker on January 20, 2012 at 12:08 AM
For those who are interested, here is the link to the entire audio of the Hannity interview of Governor Palin.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-8cEUxAgB-A
john.frank on January 20, 2012 at 12:34 AM
So what? Can you name one? How about 2? Can you name all nine justices? You must be the Jaywalking grand champion.
Nutstuyu on January 20, 2012 at 12:36 AM
Hey, Bishop.
And, regarding *this* and other, related objectionables:
“idesign” shows up on any and all Palin posts and ridicules other users here before or by Page 2 of comments. It’s as predictable as, well, Michelle Obama and big, fat meals and Axelrod and propaganda: never a discussion of the post’s issues, just ridicule of any who comment on he post’s issues that “idesign” and other Palin-adorners think poses “competition.”
I am wondering just when the moment arrived wherein these Palin-adorners went from blasting those divorced to somehow now promoting those divorced. Perhaps the divining line is if you’re obsessed with Palin or not? If so, OK, if not, you’re damned?
I think Gingrich’s personal behaviors are important BECAUSE who a person is as to temperament emotionally is just as important as who a person is intellectually: both aspects impact behavior.
I grant ANYone forgiveness (and understanding) when they perceive their errors in character and then profess those errors as also determine to change, and then do so. So Gingrich’s past behaviors can be understood to be the product of a bad character (apparently so) just as his “change” and determination to live differently can be understood to be the product of a renewed character.
It’s that latter aspect that some of us voters are not sure about. His ex-wives have as much right as anyone to share their experiences and opinions as they chose to do so, especially since Gingrich himself is certainly doing so about his, respectively.
We all must live with the decisions we’ve made in life. Overcoming bad character is a very good thing, those who do so should be commended, not condemned.
The biggest hurdle is that a man who claims to have overcome bad character — in this case, Gingrich — is new to the “change” he claims he’s made and his emotional temperament displays questionable aspects that suggest he has not made that change entirely, is not necessarily as “renewed” in character as his intellect is asking people to believe he is.
Therein lies his borderline appeal as also his borderline repulsive aspect: no one can be sure he’s not still Mr. Rumpled-Stinky-Pants, just as we can’t be sure he’s fresh and new.
The second wife now sharing her experiences with who she knows as Mr. RumpledStinkyPants shouldn’t (also) be condemned but I sure can’t find forgiveness here for those Palin Fringe Adorners who have so hatefully tried to destroy the reputations of others who comment here.
Lourdes on January 20, 2012 at 1:24 AM
Shut up Sarah.
You-Eh-Vee on January 20, 2012 at 1:32 AM
Thanks for filling in the leftist on what really happened on the Couric interview.
Probably thinks John Daily is a credible news source.
KirknBurker on January 20, 2012 at 1:37 AM
Racist incivility hate monger.
tom daschle concerned on January 20, 2012 at 1:38 AM
And we are supposed to vote for Romney because of all those..words of yours?
“Anybody But Romney!!!”
KirknBurker on January 20, 2012 at 1:40 AM
This is the only reason I can support Newt. He fights. And not in the panty-fantastic whiney way that the Mittens and His Mittbot fight. They are totally absurd. It is like they think Joseph Smith was right about anything.
I loathe Mitt. Mitt is the worst thing that could happen to the republican party in a century. Mitt makes George W. Bush look like a MENSA VEEP.
tom daschle concerned on January 20, 2012 at 1:42 AM
Who is more likely to bring financial and regulatory reform to the federal government and help reduce federal spending back down to under 20% of GDP?
Newt or Mitt?
That is the problem right now we face.
Vote for the best chance to really stop ‘leviathan’ from the candidates you have.
To face that problem, you MUST rock the boat and NOT BLINK with fortitude and courage.
Compare the two and you know who comes out the winner.
KirknBurker on January 20, 2012 at 1:47 AM
No, she’s not. She’s supporting a Romney’s defeat in SC, because it’s the only way to slow him down at the moment. That’s entirely different.
Want a proof? This talkback: all the Romneybots are foaming at the mouth. Endlessly.
BabyGrace on January 20, 2012 at 2:36 AM
Slow him down? To what end?
I happen to disagree, BG. You see, in my world, to want someone to win means you support them. Some folks will cheer on a team they despise if it will give their team an advantage somehow. Me? If two teams I don’t like are playing each other I’ll find something else to do. Yes, it creates a dilemma for me, and it will, especially come November. This whole primary is making me sick. We are given incredibly flawed candidates and asked, and even it seems, commanded, to choose one and cheer for him. And then we’re unhappy and angry for the next four years until we get to start the same crap again. Palin is contributing to the perpetuation of this loopty-loop and I don’t like it. I’m tired of the games. Sick and tired.
Besides that, what exactly do you think she hopes the ultimate outcome of this will be? Oh, she wants the vetting to continue. Okay. But she obviously doesn’t and won’t support Santorum, or Paul and she absolutely doesn’t want Romney to win. So if she doesn’t support Gingrich, who then? She’s playing games and supporting a creep. That’s just how I see it.
greeneyedconservative on January 20, 2012 at 4:06 AM
Backfire…ABC News…Big Time.
By the way, aloysiusmiller needs to be banned. Please refer to the first post on this page, Ed, AP.
kingsjester on January 20, 2012 at 6:40 AM
Aitch748 on January 19, 2012 at 11:01 PM
Couldn’t have said it better.
HerneTheHunter on January 20, 2012 at 7:01 AM
Lourdes on January 20, 2012 at 1:24 AM
what a babble of incoherence.
HerneTheHunter on January 20, 2012 at 7:02 AM
This is not her most flattering picture in my opinion. Giving her the sort of confused expression that she had when trying to remember Supreme Court rulings….
by the way KingsJester should formally be recognized as the HA Sergeant At Arms (or decider of what is an appropriate comment).
Bradky on January 20, 2012 at 7:11 AM
Bradky on January 20, 2012 at 7:11 AM
still smarter than your mama though.
HerneTheHunter on January 20, 2012 at 7:40 AM
by the way KingsJester should formally be recognized as the HA Sergeant At Arms (or decider of what is an appropriate comment).
Bradky on January 20, 2012 at 7:11 AM
People have been banned for using that very description concerning Gov. Palin, before. Back off, Troll.
kingsjester on January 20, 2012 at 7:40 AM
greeneyedconservative on January 20, 2012 at 4:06 AM
To what end you ask? To stop Mitt Romney from being the nominee. Are you that slow?
HerneTheHunter on January 20, 2012 at 7:42 AM
It’s disappointing that Palin is so vigorously defending that complete pig of a person, Newt Gingrich. Terrible, terrible judgment on her part.
JA on January 20, 2012 at 8:07 AM
And she endorsed and campaigned for John McCain.
Dante on January 20, 2012 at 8:30 AM
In that case, the President was shot and killed is not old news, because this generation didn’t live through it…now which President am I talking about? I guess you don’t know because “you didn’t live through it”…
The fact is, old family divorce news is exactly what it is worth, old family divorce news that is re-hashed, and opens new wounds into the family just so youngsters like you can “learn”.
The fact is, if you were older and wiser, you would better understand how complex the dynamics of a divorce and separation is…like I had said before, it’s a good thing you are good looking, because you haven’t quite “learned” what is important yet, and haven’t quite “learned” how to disregard and throw away the trashy news.
But then you are not a Newt supporter, so this family incident is more important than the sanctity of their daughters and grand kids life…so maybe you have “learned something”, that to gain journalism points it’s okay to attack and tear apart a family, time and time again.
*
Welcome to the new journalism, pretty on the outside and ugly on the inside.
right2bright on January 20, 2012 at 8:36 AM
So what??? The woman was a governor and she couldn’t name a SCOTUS decision she disagreed with???
And yes, Kelo v. New London, Kennedy v. Louisiana, and Mich. Police v. Stitz.
Kelo should have jumped off her tongue immediately.
Dante on January 20, 2012 at 8:39 AM
And being a governor, she should have been able to name the Kennedy decision, especially since it was only a few months old (if that) at the time.
Dante on January 20, 2012 at 8:40 AM
And of course their kids now have to come forth and set the record straight, opening up the wounds of a divorce that children don’t need to live through every 10 years…but that is of no concern to you, let the kids and grand kids suffer because it is “news”…news that is over 10 years old and has nothing to do with the economy, nothing to do with his life now, nothing to do with our country…meanwhile you have other candidates who have supported and financed abortions, the killing of thousands of babies…how foolish…
right2bright on January 20, 2012 at 8:40 AM
You asked that and about 8 hours later, after Googling for those 8 hours he/she had an answer…amazing…
right2bright on January 20, 2012 at 8:43 AM
For some reason, I’m glad you are disappointed. ;o)
tinkerthinker on January 20, 2012 at 8:45 AM
Personal past vs transformation of the country. Not really a hard choice, is it.
Kissmygrits on January 20, 2012 at 8:47 AM
Oh, yeah. That’s exactly what happened. It’s impossible that someone could name a couple of SCOTUS decisions. If Palin can’t do it, no one can.
Oof. If only you had read through the thread and learned how it was Couric who brought up Roe v. Wade and not Palin, you may have prevented having egg on your face.
Dante on January 20, 2012 at 8:50 AM
Why are you obsessed with this interview?
darwin on January 20, 2012 at 9:00 AM
Dude. Panfish are good eats! And a ton of fun to catch on ultralite rigs.
2lbsTest on January 20, 2012 at 9:06 AM
Trailer trash?
You’ve got explain that.
Cheap grace and easy redemption?
It’s too difficult and expensive for YOU.
listens2glenn on January 20, 2012 at 9:15 AM
and I should still hope that this messy reminder of Gingrich’s past mistakes wouldn’t actually galvanize South Carolinians to vote for him if they wouldn’t have otherwise.
Personally I hope it does. I simply cannot stand Romney and will not vote for him in a primary. If he however wins the nomination then I will vote for him with a lot of skepticism as I would envision him with all the spinal fortitude of jello on a stick when the real pressure comes to bear.
jistincase on January 20, 2012 at 9:16 AM
I didn’t say that, I stated that it took you 8 hours to come up with an answer…I am sure if she had 8 hours, however, I am sure she would have been able to answer it.
Go ahead, ask me about Oliver vs. Commonwealth, in just a few minutes I can give you all the details…
right2bright on January 20, 2012 at 9:17 AM
“I am not a Reagan conservative, I was an independent”…your metaphor is so accurate.
right2bright on January 20, 2012 at 9:19 AM
Trailer trash. Everyone knows that evangelicals are into cheap grace and easy redemption. But guess what? You can’t be serious about leadership and integrity when you’re a proven betrayer.
aloysiusmiller on January 19, 2012 at 8:56 PM
I see the local Pharisee is in the house proclaiming their piety for all the world to see. It is people like this that made me make the decision to leave the church and take God with me on the go.
jistincase on January 20, 2012 at 9:22 AM
Trailer trash. Everyone knows that evangelicals are into cheap grace and easy redemption. But guess what? You can’t be serious about leadership and integrity when you’re a proven betrayer.
aloysiusmiller on January 19, 2012 at 8:56 PM
I would like to throw out Mary Magdalene as another one of the seriously flawed leaders that you are talking about s/
jistincase on January 20, 2012 at 9:32 AM
Really, so God, and than Jesus made all those sinners leaders, so they weren’t serious?
How interesting, judging God as not being serious…my, you are pious, or you are off your meds again.
right2bright on January 20, 2012 at 9:32 AM
No, it took me less than a second to answer when I saw the question. It’s not as if the first two are obscure cases.
Dante on January 20, 2012 at 9:38 AM
This sums it up for me. In addition, Newt had the decency to divorce and admitted what he did when confronted, unlike the liar-in-chief, Bill Clinton, who perjured himself when asked a direct question, and never had the decency to pursue his proclivities as a divorced man.
Newt may be flawed, but he’s been more honest about his flaws than others.
Mommynator on January 20, 2012 at 9:39 AM
Your obsession with Palin is amusing..:)
idesign on January 20, 2012 at 9:43 AM
our obsession with Palin is amusing..:)
idesign on January 20, 2012 at 9:43 AM
It’s because he was getting nowhere just being obnoxious in his support of Dr. Paul.
kingsjester on January 20, 2012 at 9:47 AM
I like Palin because she knows who the bad guys are and isn’t afraid to call them by name.
Dino V on January 20, 2012 at 9:47 AM
For some reason I’d like to make you sick—some of us have the capacity to forgive, as in Newt who repented his sin, forgiveness is the armor of a Christian.
tinkerthinker on January 20, 2012 at 9:54 AM
I think Sarah wants all the candidates vetted, and Romney deterred, so that there is no clear winner going into the Nominating Convention. Perhaps a brokered convention will result, and then who knows what could happen. I am probably wrong, but no one inspires me like Palin…and no one elicits stronger responses, both positive and negative like she does. Underestimate her to your peril!
MJScanlonOH on January 20, 2012 at 10:03 AM
Isn’t it bad form to constantly link to your own personal blog on someone else’s blog?
antisense on January 20, 2012 at 10:30 AM
Ending every sentence with ellipses gives the impression of disability…:)
antisense on January 20, 2012 at 10:36 AM
Adam Graham.
But hey, The Newtron is the “real” “true” “conservative” in the race.
(Do I need to add the sark tag?)
Gunlock Bill on January 20, 2012 at 10:40 AM
It disgusts me that this is the same media that STILL hasn’t vetted Barack Obama! He has YET to submit his grades from college, a REAL birth certificate,not just a record of live birth, etc…I keep hoping that the media will see how their blatant partisanship is costing them readership and viewers but they seem hell bent on destruction as long as they can keep covering for their Democrat favorites. Newsweek used to be a respected magazine, ditto Time, ditto NY Times. Now all they do is print left wing rags and their circulation is down big time. I’m no fan of Newt but I thought he took down that CNN reporter big time in last night’s debate and so did the audience who gave him a standing ovation. The tragic thing about Newt is that he could have been so great but he lets his personal demons and political beast take him over from time-to-time and that makes me distrust him. When he’s on point however like he was last night he is greatness personified. As to the media, they are the “mouth of Sauron” and we all know they have an agenda. It can’t be hidden anymore.
neyney on January 20, 2012 at 10:41 AM
couple things:
1) Those of you expressing moral outrage at Gingrich’s lifestyle of the past: Congratulations, the liberal media has you where they want you.
2) Those of you expressing moral outrage at Gingrich’s past, and according to someone whose own morals can’t be questioned: those of you without guilt, stand up and cast the first stone…
The rest of us conservatives who don’t want to lose our country and have lived longer than 30 seconds recognize a red herring when we see one. Obama is scared to death of Gingrich because Gingrich makes obama look and sound like a petulant child…..and if I can hold my nose and vote for Gingrich….you can too. Romney has no argument against Obamacare and that puts him on the same level as Obama with the voters…If Romney had renounced Romneycare…maybe (but he didn’t – get a clue)
Palin is dead on…….
Sarah, I would have voted for you in an instant….
colonelkurtz on January 20, 2012 at 10:41 AM
You paint with too broad of brush.
Everyone knows that ABRtards are into cheap grace and easy redemption of the Newtron if it hurts Romney. But guess what? You can’t be serious about leadership and integrity when you’re a proven betrayer unless you happen to be the best hope of stopping Romney. Then it is ok.
Gunlock Bill on January 20, 2012 at 10:43 AM
Isn’t it bad form to constantly link to your own personal blog on someone else’s blog?
antisense on January 20, 2012 at 10:30 AM
Uh…no. It’s been done at Hot Air by numerous posters for several years. It is a setting on WordPress…or didn’t you notice?
As the father of a special daughter, your second comment wasn’t particularly funny.
Was your mother frightened by Emily Post, or something?
kingsjester on January 20, 2012 at 11:08 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 3 4 5 6 Next »