Breaking News: Newt Gingrich's campaign is about to implode

reply to post by Southern Guardian

Did you say Palin? I wondered when her name would pop up.

The whole thing is absurd.

reply to post by jibeho


Well, with respect, I think the poor woman has more than sufficient grounds to be bitter.

Because in the interviews currently airing via the Drudge site, she says that your beloved Mr Gingrich proposed that they enjoy an open relationship (i.e. he wanted to sleep about with everything and anything), that he was drilling some woman on the side and that as soon as his wife contracted MS he dumped her like the proverbial bargepole.

I think she's got every damned right to be bitter.

reply to post by LeBombDiggity


Newt is no Saint and like I said that is no secret. However, I think his ex wife may have spent too many years fine tuning her memory.

This was posted on the last page.

There’s more to the story than you are hearing in the media. Marianne Gingrich is no innocent, and she was the one who broke the marriage and cleaned out the house, via Robert Costa via AP report from 1999 (h/t Burke):

Documents related to the divorce filed Friday in Cobb County Superior Court include a separation agreement signed by the couple and notarized in December 1987. There is no indication it was ever filed.

Gingrich’s divorce attorney, Thomas Browning, said Marianne Gingrich called her husband on his birthday in June 1987 to tell him she was leaving him. Gingrich, he said, came back to Georgia to find his home emptied out.

Browning said the pair maintained separate residences for six years before reconciling in late 1993 or early 1994.

There’s always another side to the story in a divorce. But she’s getting her cameo appearance.

legalinsurrection.com...

It would seem that their relationship has a long history of trouble.

THis is the full article from 1999

news.google.com...,6021695&dq=marianne+gingrich+furniture&hl=en

I want to see Obama face Newt head to head. Newt is the only candidate strong enough in a debate to trounce him and illuminate him for the idiot that he really is.

A little vid relevance:

reply to post by jibeho


This.

And also, he wanted an open relationship? So what, he's not the first and won't be the last to want or have that. Anything to defame Newt methinks.

The republicans got screwed this time - you guys have no one that is viable and an all around a solid choice - the platform of hate is sickening. It's come to the point where many of you are accepting serious character faults in your candidates to "win" a race. This ain't Monday Night Football, this ain't about winning to win, this is about life and death and needs to be taken as seriously as a heart attack.

Originally posted by Southern Guardian

Originally posted by SaturnFX
The nomination will go to Romney. The question is, who will be his VP. I am suspecting he may bring on someone like Santorum, however, it would be tactically interesting if he invited Ron Paul.

Are you predicting what I'm predicting?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Strategically it is the only winning scenario for the GOP as without Paul as VP, no other VP will carry the independant middle and Romney has alienated the middle...and no President wins without them.

That said, Romney will pick who he is told to pick and the folks writing him checks will not pick Paul.

Gingrich History American Voters Should Know!

reply to post by jibeho


So they had a seperation years before the divorce? this is evidence of what?

As I see it, it doesn't defend Newt as it more than likely points to another, so far undisclosed, affair he had while married to her.

Which might explain why Newt has said he won't respond to his X-wifes claims or attack her. He doesn't want the rest of it to hit the airwaves.

Differing versions of Gingrich divorce [CNN 12-27-2011]

Originally posted by Jason88
The republicans got screwed this time - you guys have no one that is viable and an all around a solid choice - the platform of hate is sickening. It's come to the point where many of you are accepting serious character faults in your candidates to "win" a race. This ain't Monday Night Football, this ain't about winning to win, this is about life and death and needs to be taken as seriously as a heart attack.

I am curious, do you really honestly feel like it is you vs. them? Do you really see Obama as "your" man and anyone not Obama as "their" man? Do you get some kind of satisfaction out of cutting down anyone that is not a democrat?

Because it really appears that this is nothing but a game to you, maybe you should take a step back. So much anger in your post, did a republican hurt you somehow? Where is all of this coming from?

*edit* I think you should stop taking who others support as a personal attack on you or your ideals Do you mean to tell me you are 100% on board with every single idea and policy that Obama has? Do you acknowledge that maybe there are things that you disagree with but they are outweighed by the things you do agree with?

We/They are not Gingrich, Bush, Cheney, Romney or Santorum. If you want to hate someone, hate the characters that are elected and represent the party. Don't hate your fellow citizens because they have a different opinion on life and politics.

Just my opinion and advice, take it how you want.

reply to post by sputniksteve


Sorry if I scared you. But that's the point. It's not a game, but is treated as such by many people. When good folks are forced to accept serious character flaws in candidates just to win, then you know what? Houston we got a problem.

Edit on your edit: I do not like everything Obama does, of course not. But, he came with nowhere near the baggage the current republican crop has... I'll make a prediction right now. If Gingrich gets the nomination, not only will Obama slaughter him, the democrats will take the "family values" platform away from republicans who will have demonstrated they cannot be stewards of such high ideals.

Originally posted by sputniksteve

Because it really appears that this is nothing but a game to you, maybe you should take a step back. So much anger in your post, did a republican hurt you somehow? Where is all of this coming from?

I assumed he was a Conservative, not a Democrat. Any Democrat is tickled pink by the idiot parade of tax cheats, philanderers and flip-floppers that is the GOP line-up, only a conservative would be angry at his own party for putting forth so many really bad choices during a critical election.

Originally posted by Jason88
reply to post by sputniksteve

 

Sorry if I scared you. But that's the point. It's not a game, but is treated as such by many people. When good folks are forced to accept serious character flaws in candidates just to win, then you know what? Houston we got a problem.

Amen, I don't want to vote for a devil. It seems many people here don't care who it is as long as it isn't Obama. You can get worse.

reply to post by hadriana


No it's silliness to equate my answer is which is about an abstraction, what history says about how and why people vote, to your personal choices. Your personal choices may be different than the a lot of people's, but that's irrelevant.

History is pretty clear.

reply to post by curious7


It matters in Newt's case because a good portion of his political platform relies on preventing same sex couples from marrying to "preserving the sanctity of marriage"

What a scumbag.

We're all used to politicians being hypocritical scumbags. But thats no excuse to throw support behind someone who literally contradicts himself on a fairly consistent basis.

in my opinion only one person running for the job is qualified to be POTUS, and it isn't Gingrich.

While we're on the subject of political theater, does anyone else find it hilarious how the media instantly started touting Santorum as being the real winner in Iowa to help push him into third in SC? All this in the same day that Perry had to bow out and back Gingrich, so old Newty could keep his supporters.

In all Honesty I think this theater is playing out to keep the attention of Ron Paul.

Originally posted by Jason88
reply to post by sputniksteve

 

Sorry if I scared you. But that's the point. It's not a game, but is treated as such by many people. When good folks are forced to accept serious character flaws in candidates just to win, then you know what? Houston we got a problem.

Edit on your edit: I do not like everything Obama does, of course not. But, he came with nowhere near the baggage the current republican crop has... I'll make a prediction right now. If Gingrich gets the nomination, not only will Obama slaughter him, the democrats will take the "family values" platform away from republicans who will have demonstrated they cannot be stewards of such high ideals.

edit on 19-1-2012 by Jason88 because: (no reason given)

Nah you didn't scare me, I saw republicans say the exact same thing you are saying today when Obama was running for office. You all are failing to see this for what it really is. There is a cycle here, and you are playing your part perfectly.

I asked some pretty personal questions, I didn't really expect any answers to be honest. I just wanted to ask them anyway.

*edit* Also I just wanted to say, I call my self a conservative as far as anyone needs a definition of what I believe, but I would vote for Obama over Gingrich or Romney in a second. I really do believe he is better than any of these d-bags. I really was just curious about your "us vs. them" attitude. I hope you can evolve to see past that, I think you will be much happier and less stressed.

Got too emotional - deleting this post.

reply to post by sputniksteve


We need to end the two party system. Not enough choices.

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by SaturnFX

 

You must be kidding?

He led the charge to have Clinton impeached over Monica.

Just for the record, he was impeached for lying under oath about Monica.

reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus


No kidding.