Tweet: Gingrich boasts he survived the Santorum surge

posted at 3:16 pm on April 10, 2012 by Tina Korbe

Lindsey Boerma, 2012 campaign trail reporter for CBS News/National Journal, fired off a provocative tweet in the midst of Rick Santorum’s concession speech.

“Newt lists the candidate surges he’s ‘lived through during this election,’ says he’s now ‘survived’ the Santorum surge,” she wrote.

According to Boerma, Gingrich said moments before Santorum’s announcement that he hadn’t spoken to Santorum yet today and that he “thought he was going to campaign through Pennsylvania.”

Plus, Megyn Kelly just said on “America Live” that Gingrich told Mike Huckabee on Huckabee’s radio show that he’s excited to “finally” have the chance to go one-on-one against Mitt Romney. He reportedly said his focus will not be Mitt Romney but the issues.

It sounds as though we have every reason to think Newt Gingrich really means it when he says he’s not going away.

In case you’re tempted to give Newt Gingrich a sixth look, a quick reminder that he’s won just two states, one of which was his home state of Georgia, and has a mere 136 delegates to Mitt Romney’s 661.

Update (Allahpundit): Here’s the statement Gingrich’s team issued after Santorum’s presser. Second third fourth fifth sixth seventh look at Newt?

“Rick has waged a remarkable campaign. His success is a testament to his tenacity and the power of conservative principles.

“I am committed to staying in this race all the way to Tampa so that the conservative movement has a real choice. I humbly ask Senator Santorum’s supporters to visit Newt.org to review my conservative record and join us as we bring these values to Tampa. We know well that only a conservative can protect life, defend the Constitution, restore jobs and growth and return to a balanced budget.”


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

You’re just a bigot like every other true con.

1984 in real life on April 10, 2012 at 6:08 PM

This guy consistently ridicules conservatives after making the case Romney really is a true conservative. I love that. :)

Dr. Tesla on April 10, 2012 at 6:22 PM

Just SAY NO to Newt and Mittens!

Run-Sarah-Run! PALIN 2012!

Pork-Chop on April 10, 2012 at 6:25 PM

If Obama wants to get in the middle of religious wars all I can say is bring it on!

Happy Nomad on April 10, 2012 at 6:20 PM

Obama doesn’t want to go anywhere near religion given his church of hate and J Wright. I don’t think Romney’s Mormonism is going to be an issue for voters but liberals are going to try to use it to make him out as nuts. I think Bill Maher and Maureen Dowd have already been barking up that tree.

Dr. Tesla on April 10, 2012 at 6:25 PM

Geaux Newt!

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 6:26 PM

Buy Danish on April 10, 2012 at 6:11 PM

Ah, the flattery…thanks.

cozmo on April 10, 2012 at 6:29 PM

Obama doesn’t want to go anywhere near religion given his church of hate and J Wright. I don’t think Romney’s Mormonism is going to be an issue for voters but liberals are going to try to use it to make him out as nuts. I think Bill Maher and Maureen Dowd have already been barking up that tree.

Dr. Tesla on April 10, 2012 at 6:25 PM

You’re missing it. Obama’s already insulated against Jeremiah Wright. any complaint about him is instantly racist. It’s now in the same classification as birther comments. Whereas since Romney’s white, criticism of his religion is not racist. Plus the Mormons have some rituals that seem bizarre to the un-churched (nonbelievers and lapsed), which is Obama’s base. He’s going to make the whole thing sound “weird” and “crazy” and “nuts” and cons are going to be on their heels explaining why their rituals are not crazy. That’s a weak political position to be in. Romney already lacks natural advantages, and this is just going to be one more nail.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 6:29 PM

You just can’t quit, can you. Stop taking shots at people’s religion and bringing up gay issues when it’s not warranted.

Rusty Allen on April 10, 2012 at 5:30 PM

I think you’ve established you are either a hack or braindead. I never attacked Mormons or Romney for being Mormon, I pointed out that you are not a bigot if you disagree with religious beliefs of somebody else. If we go with your logic there, everybody is a bigot on religion b/c we all have different religious beliefs and that must mean that we think other religious beliefs are wrong, false, nutty, however you want to describe it.

I wouldn’t need Romney’s religion to make a case against him. RomneyCare pretty much is all I need. So you can play the religion card if you want but you going to own the lie behind it.

Dr. Tesla on April 10, 2012 at 6:34 PM

Hang in there Newt!!!

29Victor on April 10, 2012 at 6:36 PM

So how does one stay in the race when in debt? Or is that just good experience to have for the job of POTUS?

deuce on April 10, 2012 at 6:37 PM

You’re missing it. Obama’s already insulated against Jeremiah Wright. any complaint about him is instantly racist. It’s now in the same classification as birther comments. Whereas since Romney’s white, criticism of his religion is not racist. Plus the Mormons have some rituals that seem bizarre to the un-churched (nonbelievers and lapsed), which is Obama’s base. He’s going to make the whole thing sound “weird” and “crazy” and “nuts” and cons are going to be on their heels explaining why their rituals are not crazy. That’s a weak political position to be in. Romney already lacks natural advantages, and this is just going to be one more nail.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 6:29 PM

I think you are missing it, I think people are more receptive to hearing about Obama’s associations now than they were in 2008. I bet there are a large number of voters who have no clue about J. Wright and Bill Ayers, etc. I don’t think it’s wrong or racist to bring up Obama’s past associations, and I don’t think the racist label will stick to Romney if he does bring it up. Liberals can’t make Romney out as KKK.

Dr. Tesla on April 10, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Newt is a moron and if this is the best we have we are screwed.

EnochCain on April 10, 2012 at 6:38 PM

Hang in there Newt!!!

29Victor on April 10, 2012 at 6:36 PM

In what scenario can Gingrich win the nomination? He is way behind in the delegate count. Romney’s going to destroy Gingrich in PA and other states.

Dr. Tesla on April 10, 2012 at 6:40 PM

I think people are more receptive to hearing about Obama’s associations now than they were in 2008. I bet there are a large number of voters who have no clue about J. Wright and Bill Ayers, etc. I don’t think it’s wrong or racist to bring up Obama’s past associations, and I don’t think the racist label will stick to Romney if he does bring it up. Liberals can’t make Romney out as KKK.

Dr. Tesla on April 10, 2012 at 6:38 PM

No one wants to hear about stuff already discussed in the 2008 elections, and Mitt won’t make it an issue anyway. And we have very different views of what depths Obama and the media will sink.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 6:43 PM

In what scenario can Gingrich win the nomination? He is way behind in the delegate count. Romney’s going to destroy Gingrich in PA and other states.

Dr. Tesla on April 10, 2012 at 6:40 PM

In the scenario where Santorum’s delegates switch to Newt and Romney fails to obtain 1144, giving Newt all he needs to take the fight to the convention floor. It’s more possible today than it was yesterday, for sure.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 6:45 PM

I wish you would quit using that photo of Newt. You may be
too young to appreciate all the hard work he did for this
country in that he worked diligently and accomplished much.

He may or may not fit the image of whom some want for president, however, he deserves our respect. In
particular, the respect of a decent photo.

Amjean on April 10, 2012 at 6:50 PM

Gingrich is out of money, out of gas, and out of the race, whether he admits it or not. He’s still in contention with Ron Paul for fourth place, and might get it.

Confutus on April 10, 2012 at 6:54 PM

What a turd.

Murf76 on April 10, 2012 at 6:57 PM

It is now essentially a two man race. Newt might do well, or Romney might just carpet bomb him out of the race. When it was Newt or Santorum, Romney wanted to keep them both in the race to give his sub 40% vote as the highest. Now that one is out it is possible for people to rally around a single conservative alternative to the progressive money bags candidate. So far the voters have shown themselves to be ignorant easily manipulated fools with the only focus of their vote on electability against Obama. Let us hope they have grown up a small amount over the last few weeks. I think that hope is minimal and pointless.

astonerii on April 10, 2012 at 6:57 PM

I think people are more receptive to hearing about Obama’s associations now than they were in 2008. I bet there are a large number of voters who have no clue about J. Wright and Bill Ayers, etc. I don’t think it’s wrong or racist to bring up Obama’s past associations, and I don’t think the racist label will stick to Romney if he does bring it up. Liberals can’t make Romney out as KKK.

Dr. Tesla on April 10, 2012 at 6:38 PM

I am delighted to see people speaking out against our socialist
president, his bordering on if not outright criminal activities and
his thuggish regime. Either they are no longer afraid or are
taking one for the conservative agenda, knowing that another Obama term will fully ruin this country.

As far as the “racism” attacks from the left, I think we all realize that enough is enough; their agenda is on display for all to see.

Noone but a few (Palin tried) even gave a nod to his associations
that should have sunk his campaign.

Amjean on April 10, 2012 at 6:58 PM

Tina said:

In case you’re tempted to give Newt Gingrich a sixth look, a quick reminder that he’s won just two states, one of which was his home state of Georgia, and has a mere 136 delegates to Mitt Romney’s 661.

Count the pledged delegates and the unpledged delegates who have publicly endorsed a candidate.

How many does Romney have?

According to the RNC, the answer is 573… only 1 more than half the number he needs.

It ain’t over until someone secures the vote of 1,144 delegates.

Gingrich doesn’t have to reach 1,144, he just needs to ensure that Romney doesn’t reach 1,144 by the first round vote. If Romney doesn’t get at least 1,144 delegates in the first round, his pledged delegates will be released, and anyone, including Newt, could end up being the first to get to 1,144 total delegates and the Republican Party nomination.

And if anyone other than Romney gets to 1,144 first, I expect Team
Romney to “fall in line” behind that nominee. If they wouldn’t, then they are incredible hypocrites.

ITguy on April 10, 2012 at 7:01 PM

Won’t support ANYONE who supported the individual mandate. Sorry, Newt.

michaelo on April 10, 2012 at 7:02 PM

“he’s now ‘survived’ the Santorum surge”

Just like the Baltimore Orioles “survived” the 2011 baseball season.

crosspatch on April 10, 2012 at 7:03 PM

Won’t support ANYONE who supported the individual mandate. Sorry, Newt.

michaelo on April 10, 2012 at 7:02 PM

…didn’t Romney support the individual mandate in Mass?

…didn’t Santorum support the individual mandate back in the 1990s?

Does that make you a Paulian then?

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:04 PM

Mitt Romney could worship pie on a stick and he’d still be in trouble. It’s the vision thing, folks.

People don’t know who the man is under all that calculated pollster-driven politi-speak. They don’t know him; they don’t trust him; and they really don’t like him all that much.

His religion is the least of his problems.

IndieDogg on April 10, 2012 at 7:04 PM

I am committed to staying in this race all the way to Tampa so that the conservative movement has a real choice.

Thank you, Newt.

And when anyone pressures you to quit before then, just tell them that you are going to actually follow through and do what Romney promised, but failed, to do in 2008:

We’re gonna keep on battling. We’re gonna go all the way to the convention.

ITguy on April 10, 2012 at 7:04 PM

You may be
too young to appreciate all the hard work he did for this
country in that he worked diligently and accomplished much.

Amjean on April 10, 2012 at 6:50 PM

I’m not too young, and that’s just not true. He accomplished more for Clinton than anyone and that great Contract of his ended up being nothing but a piece of paper.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:05 PM

ITguy on April 10, 2012 at 7:04 PM

Newt and vows — not really one of his selling points.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:06 PM

And if anyone other than Romney gets to 1,144 first, I expect Team
Romney to “fall in line” behind that nominee. If they wouldn’t, then they are incredible hypocrites.

ITguy on April 10, 2012 at 7:01 PM

They might also enjoy shooting at the flying pigs or figure skating in Hades.

Hollowpoint on April 10, 2012 at 7:06 PM

He accomplished more for Clinton than anyone and that great Contract of his ended up being nothing but a piece of paper.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:05 PM

His congress was the only congress post-New Deal to hold down the federal budget. That wasn’t for Clinton.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:09 PM

Newt’s disorganized and dysfunctional campaign is 4.5 millions in the hole. His health care consulting group has declared bankruptcy with 10 millions dollars in debt. Yes, he is the one to manage the country, especially at this juncture.

galtani on April 10, 2012 at 7:13 PM

His congress was the only congress post-New Deal to hold down the federal budget. That wasn’t for Clinton.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:09 PM

In his third year.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:13 PM

Five Republicans have filed the necessary papers and $500 fee to qualify for the June 26 Utah presidential primary election, but with Rick Santorum dropping out of the race Tuesday, only four will be on the ballot.

Or possibly three.

Newt Gingrich’s check bounced.

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/politics/53886982-90/utah-romney-gingrich-campaign.html.csp

crosspatch on April 10, 2012 at 7:17 PM

Newt is a moron…

A lot of adjectives come to mind with Newt, but “moron” isn’t one of them.

He has spent many years thinking about how to successfully govern and would make a great president.

Unlike Etch-a-Sketch.

Arms Merchant on April 10, 2012 at 7:21 PM

In his third year.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:13 PM

When the GOP took over the House for the first time in 30 years, and for the next four, yes.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:22 PM

Tweet: Gingrich boasts he survived the Santorum surge

Can’t imagine what measure he used to reach this conclusion.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:23 PM

crosspatch on April 10, 2012 at 7:17 PM

Same link was posted several pages ago. You’re late to the party again.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:23 PM

When the GOP took over the House for the first time in 30 years, and for the next four, yes.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:22 PM

Oh, is he still taking credit for four years? Dude was gone for the last two. And he had very little to do with the first two.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:25 PM

Denial and delusion has reached an all time high with the ABR trolls if you’re all suddenly lining up behind newt again. Still floating these brain dead fantasy scenarios about conventions and stuff too. I’m convinced many of you are paid axlefraud mobys.

1984 in real life on April 10, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Oh, is he still taking credit for four years? Dude was gone for the last two. And he had very little to do with the first two.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:25 PM

1994-1998 is the period to which I refer. He was there the whole time.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Same link was posted several pages ago. You’re late to the party again.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:23 PM

The check still hasn’t cleared. Second notice. Standard stuff for deadbeats. He’s a balanced budget guy though.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:27 PM

I’m convinced many of you are paid axlefraud mobys.

1984 in real life on April 10, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Yes, it’s just so unbelievable that some of us meant it when we said we wouldn’t vote for Romney.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:28 PM

1994-1998 is the period to which I refer. He was there the whole time.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:26 PM

Except the budget wasn’t balanced until fiscal 1998 and it was balanced until 2011. He left office in 1999.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:28 PM

The check still hasn’t cleared. Second notice. Standard stuff for deadbeats. He’s a balanced budget guy though.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:27 PM

He’s a slash-the-budget guy. The US budget is rather far from balanced and won’t get there quickly.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:29 PM

Yes, it’s just so unbelievable that some of us meant it when we said we wouldn’t vote for Romney.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:28 PM

Chances of me voting for Romney as the Republican Nominee for President 0.000000000000000000^2706. I’m with you on this.

astonerii on April 10, 2012 at 7:30 PM

Except the budget wasn’t balanced until fiscal 1998 and it was balanced until 2011. He left office in 1999.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:28 PM

and I didn’t say he balanced the budget. I said he held down federal spending. He did. And his Congress is responsible for the eventual surplus, per Cato.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:31 PM

He’s a slash-the-budget guy.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:29 PM

I see no evidence of that. I saw his proposal to increase the State Department by 50%.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:31 PM

From my link:

Arguably, Gingrich’s finest hour as Speaker came in March 1995 when he rallied the entire Republican House caucus behind the idea of eliminating the deficit within seven years. Skeptics said it could not be done in seven years. The GOP did it in four.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:32 PM

and I didn’t say he balanced the budget

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:31 PM

That’s fair. Unfortunately Newt keeps saying he did four years in a row — which is a lie.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:33 PM

I see no evidence of that. I saw his proposal to increase the State Department by 50%.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:31 PM

I’m sorry you can’t see the forest for the trees.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:33 PM

Looks like Gingrich’s polling went up by about 0.0000000000001% today.

crosspatch on April 10, 2012 at 7:33 PM

“When I was speaker, we had four consecutive balanced budgets.”

Newt. Tampa debate. January 23. Lie.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:34 PM

I’m sorry you can’t see the forest for the trees.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:33 PM

I’m sorry you’ve starting speaking in metaphors.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:35 PM

Newt. Tampa debate. January 23. Lie.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:34 PM

Ok. So are you going to fact check everybody else’s debate statements as well, or is this yet another metric that applies to Gingrich and no one else?

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:36 PM

Newt looks like a grouper in that picture.

taternuggets on April 10, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Ok. So are you going to fact check everybody else’s debate statements as well, or is this yet another metric that applies to Gingrich and no one else?

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:36 PM

Is that the everyone-does-it defense? I don’t know. It seemed appropriate to the discussion at the moment. Should I answer your comments on Newt’s budget with an analysis of Mitt Romney’s hair?

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:38 PM

I’m convinced many of you are paid axlefraud mobys.
1984 in real life on April 10, 2012 at 7:26 PM
Yes, it’s just so unbelievable that some of us meant it when we said we wouldn’t vote for Romney.
alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:28 PM

Why are you still here then? Huffpo and kos should be much more to youre liking. I’m serious, they also don’t support Romney and sound exactly like you. Take your rabid anti Romney crap over there and embrace your newfound love for Obama.

Obama – the only true conservative choice left! – ABR’s/

1984 in real life on April 10, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Its over, and its time to focus on defeating Obama. As much as it pains me to say this, MITT ROMNEY 2012.

Lawdawg86 on April 10, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Is that the everyone-does-it defense? I don’t know. It seemed appropriate to the discussion at the moment. Should I answer your comments on Newt’s budget with an analysis of Mitt Romney’s hair?

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:38 PM

We had been talking about Newt’s record in the 1990s, until you went off on a tangent about how he lied in a debate this year. And yes, I’m pretty sure every candidate has been caught in a debate lie this go round.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Why are you still here then?

1984 in real life on April 10, 2012 at 7:38 PM

Call it the Christine O precedent.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:41 PM

We had been talking about Newt’s record in the 1990s, until you went off on a tangent about how he lied in a debate this year. And yes, I’m pretty sure every candidate has been caught in a debate lie this go round.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:41 PM

Yeah, Newt’s words on his record in the 1990s is really off on a tangent from a discussion on Newt’s record in the 1990s. You’ve lost this one. Just move on. Say you survived. Whatever.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:43 PM

Yeah, Newt’s words on his record in the 1990s is really off on a tangent from a discussion on Newt’s record in the 1990s.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:43 PM

Actually it is. And I am still correct: Newt’s house from 1994-1998 held down the federal budget, a feat not replicated before or since. Your whining about it doesn’t change the fact.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Obama – the only true conservative choice left! – ABR’s/

1984 in real life on April 10, 2012 at 7:38 PM

I am guessing that in their case “ABR” means “anybody but Republicans”.

crosspatch on April 10, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Tina, can you please use another photo Newt? This one
is funny. But there must be funnier ones.

Rusty Allen on April 10, 2012 at 7:45 PM

I am guessing that in their case “ABR” means “anybody but Republicans”.

crosspatch on April 10, 2012 at 7:45 PM

If Republican=Romney, then yes, I’m gone. The party doesn’t matter to me. Conservatism matters to me, and he won’t promote it.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Actually it is. And I am still correct: Newt’s house from 1994-1998 held down the federal budget, a feat not replicated before or since. Your whining about it doesn’t change the fact.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:44 PM

Whatever.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:47 PM

and he won’t promote it.

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:46 PM

/smirk Sure he will… Severely like!

astonerii on April 10, 2012 at 7:48 PM

alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:46 PM

Oh please. You wouldn’t be supporting Newt then. Romney hasn’t done anything that Newt hasn’t backed at one time or another.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:50 PM

I am guessing that in their case “ABR” means “anybody but Republicans”.
crosspatch on April 10, 2012 at 7:45 PM
If Republican=Romney, then yes, I’m gone. The party doesn’t matter to me. Conservatism matters to me, and he won’t promote it.
alwaysfiredup on April 10, 2012 at 7:46 PM

I would have sucked it up and voted for Santorum or Newt to help take out Obama. Youre just being a crybaby and a sore loser. Whatever, I’m sure Obama is happy to have your vote.

1984 in real life on April 10, 2012 at 7:52 PM

“It doesn’t matter what I do. People need to hear what I have to say. There’s no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn’t matter what I live.” — Newt Gingrich

“I’m not a natural leader. I’m too intellectual; I’m too abstract; I think too much.” — Newt Gingrich

“Give the park police more ammo.” — Newt Gingrich (in response to a question about what should be done about the homeless after a federal park police officer shot a homeless man)

“I have enormous personal ambition. I want to shift the entire planet. And I’m doing it. I am now a famous person. I represent real power.” — Newt Gingrich

“You can’t trust anybody with power.” — Newt Gingrich

crosspatch on April 10, 2012 at 7:58 PM

Newt and vows — not really one of his selling points.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:06 PM

True.

Both Romney and Gingrich have a major issue of the electorate not fully trusting them… and for good reasons. Different reasons, but still.

ITguy on April 10, 2012 at 8:03 PM

crosspatch on April 10, 2012 at 7:58 PM

You know who else would have said things similar to all those… The first President.

astonerii on April 10, 2012 at 8:06 PM

crosspatch on April 10, 2012 at 7:58 PM

Yup, there’s the guy that now thinks he’s going to somehow rally the conservative movement and become the nominee.

Swerve22 on April 10, 2012 at 8:10 PM

You know who else would have said things similar to all those… The first President.

astonerii on April 10, 2012 at 8:06 PM

LOL

Swerve22 on April 10, 2012 at 8:17 PM

Except the budget wasn’t balanced until fiscal 1998 and it was balanced until 2011. He left office in 1999.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:28 PM

Unfortunately Newt keeps saying he did four years in a row — which is a lie.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:33 PM

“When I was speaker, we had four consecutive balanced budgets.”

Newt. Tampa debate. January 23. Lie.

Ronnie on April 10, 2012 at 7:34 PM

I’ll be transparent. There are several things that bother me about Newt, including:
1) Two affairs (that we know of), two divorces, third wife.
2) His endorsement of Dede Scozzafava over Tea Party candidate Doug Hoffman
3) Appearing to buy into the AGW crap and sitting on the couch with Nanzi Pelosi
4) This claim of four consecutive balanced budgets.

I dare say that the average voter consideres a “balanced budget” to be one in which you do not acquire any additional debt. Do you know the last time our national debt didn’t go up from one Fiscal Year end to the next?

The last Fiscal Year that decreased, rather than increased our total national debt was…

Fiscal Year 1957.

It bugs the hell out of me when Newt claims that he balanced the budget for four straight years. Our total National Debt grew every single one of those years. Now, I realize that there may be some Washington-speak where the “budget” was supposedly balanced but some other factors increased our debt, but I think that’s really disingenous. Voters can’t play those games in our personal finances, so don’t be coy with us about it.

Gingrich should instead report how much the National Debt grew during his four years as Speaker and compare that to how much the National Debt grew during Pelosi’s four years as Speaker. That would provide a very clear contrast between Republican-led bugets vs. Democrat-led budgets. And it would make the point without falsely claiming that the budget was “balanced” for four years while simultaneously increasing the national debt.

ITguy on April 10, 2012 at 8:35 PM

Newt’s disorganized and dysfunctional campaign is 4.5 millions in the hole. His health care consulting group has declared bankruptcy with 10 millions dollars in debt. Yes, he is the one to manage the country, especially at this juncture.

But his tiffany bill is paid.

lol

gerrym51 on April 10, 2012 at 8:54 PM

The last Fiscal Year in which the national debt actually decreased was 1957.

Source: http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/pd/histdebt/histdebt.htm

Gingrich was speaker from January 4, 1995 to January 3, 1999, so he was speaker when the FY 1996 to FY 1999 budgets were passed. The total increase in the national debt from those 4 fiscal years (October 1, 1995 – September 30, 1999) was $682,288,000,906.04 ($682 Billion).

Nancy Pelosi was speaker from January 4, 2007 to January 3, 2011, so she was speaker when the FY 2008 to FY 2011 budgets would have been passed, if they had been. The total increase in the national debt from those 4 fiscal years (October 1, 2007 – September 30, 2011) was $5,782,686,956,294.62 ($5,783 Billion, or $5.783 TRILLION).

Both Gingrich and Pelosi served as Speaker for 4 years, but Pelosi accumulated EIGHT AND A HALF TIMES MORE DEBT!

Gingrich never “balanced the budget” or created a “budget surplus”, but I’d still take the FY 1999 deficit of $130 Billion over the FY 2009 deficit of $1,885 Billion ($1.885 TRILLION) any day of the week!

ITguy on April 10, 2012 at 9:23 PM

Gingrich on Fox with Bill Hemmer this morning. The guy is HOPELESSLY out of touch at this point. It’s embarrassing. You’d think somebody in his personal life would care enough about him to pull him over and get him the mental health eval he appears to need.

Wow. You hate to see something like that.

Murf76 on April 11, 2012 at 9:21 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3