Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Since neither John King nor any other reporter has challenged Newt on anything he has said so far, from "Food Stamp President" to his denial of his 2nd wife's allegations, does that mean that the media is in the bag for Newt?
He gets a standing O from an extreme wingnut crowd.I think the media is afraid to ask Newt anything. Every time they do, he bitch slaps them
It's a bit more than that. He gets a standing ovation evey time he bitch slaps them!
Why shouldn't they let it be general admission, where Democrats and Independents could sit in the audience?
This is the same media that aired an interview with Newt's ex-wife 2 days before a crucial primary?
If they aired it two days after the primary, they would have been accused by the Romney camp of keeping it under wraps to help Newt in SC.
The one that reported on his contract with Freddie Mac?
They shouldn't have reported his lobbying, after his claim that he has never lobbied?
He gets a standing O from an extreme wingnut crowd.I think the media is afraid to ask Newt anything. Every time they do, he bitch slaps them
It's a bit more than that. He gets a standing ovation evey time he bitch slaps them!
Why shouldn't they let it be general admission, where Democrats and Independents could sit in the audience?
I think the media is afraid to ask Newt anything. Every time they do, he bitch slaps them
The media is on Romney's side.... Newt stings them back.
Actually, the media is on Obama's side.
This is the same media that aired an interview with Newt's ex-wife 2 days before a crucial primary?
If they aired it two days after the primary, they would have been accused by the Romney camp of keeping it under wraps to help Newt in SC.
The one that reported on his contract with Freddie Mac?
They shouldn't have reported his lobbying, after his claim that he has never lobbied?
Reporting facts that Republicans may not like is liberal. Doing things that Republicans may not like is Presidential.
How dare the news report facts and...stuff! Liberals!
I suspect they are awaiting instructions on how to counter facts with an alternative.
Facts?
"more people have been put on food stamps by Barack Obama than any president in American history." - Newt Gingrich
More were added to food stamps under Bush than under Obama, reports Brooks Jackson: "Newt Gingrich claims that 'more people have been put on food stamps by Barack Obama than any president in American history.' He's wrong. More were added under Bush than under Obama, according to the most recent figures...Gingrich would have been correct to say the number now on food aid is historically high. The number stood at 46,224,722 persons as of October, the most recent month on record. And it's also true that the number has risen sharply since Obama took office. But Gingrich goes too far to say Obama has put more on the rolls than other presidents. We asked the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition service for month-by-month figures going back to January 2001. And they show that under President George W. Bush the number of recipients rose by nearly 14.7 million. Nothing before comes close to that."Of course, you wouldn't know a fact if it pushed your customer out of the way and bit you on the ass.
If they aired it two days after the primary, they would have been accused by the Romney camp of keeping it under wraps to help Newt in SC.
They shouldn't have reported his lobbying, after his claim that he has never lobbied?
Reporting facts that Republicans may not like is liberal. Doing things that Republicans may not like is Presidential.
How dare the news report facts and...stuff! Liberals!
Diversion...and not accurately addressing the real issue we have.
Here is the issue..
Obama was reported this way...
Obama, showing America how he, too, is human, referred to the 57 satates today offering his overworked campaign staff reason to enjoy a much needed laugh.
Perry was reported this way...
Perry, again showed reason to question his knowledge of the three branches of government when he seemed to believe there are only 8 supreme court justices. His campaign staff is running around trying to put out the fires this has created for Perry's campaign.
Enough said.
I suspect they are awaiting instructions on how to counter facts with an alternative.
You mean how to counter Newt hurt Feelings right? Everytime hes asked something he clutches his pearls and says "well, I never"
um...newt played this up because SC is a very right leaning state who already thinks the media is far left. Newt basically jerked over all their faces and the people wanted more of it. You can see it in this thread as well.
In the end the story is this. Newt played it up to the base, they loved it, but he still dodged the question. You can't take one debate in a primary and use it for the rest of the race. If he were to win it would be a different ballgame, so his answer would have to be different.
Or
He could answer it the same and risk loosing the middle more moderate Indies and GOP...
I suspect they are awaiting instructions on how to counter facts with an alternative.
Facts?
"more people have been put on food stamps by Barack Obama than any president in American history." - Newt Gingrich
More were added to food stamps under Bush than under Obama, reports Brooks Jackson: "Newt Gingrich claims that 'more people have been put on food stamps by Barack Obama than any president in American history.' He's wrong. More were added under Bush than under Obama, according to the most recent figures...Gingrich would have been correct to say the number now on food aid is historically high. The number stood at 46,224,722 persons as of October, the most recent month on record. And it's also true that the number has risen sharply since Obama took office. But Gingrich goes too far to say Obama has put more on the rolls than other presidents. We asked the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition service for month-by-month figures going back to January 2001. And they show that under President George W. Bush the number of recipients rose by nearly 14.7 million. Nothing before comes close to that."Of course, you wouldn't know a fact if it pushed your customer out of the way and bit you on the ass.
Did you even read this?... what a spin.. it's Bush's fault for the recipients added during his admin, but somehow not so for Obama because he inherited a mess? Not to mention in a mere 3 years, Obama has added only a few hundred thousand less than under Bush's 8?
Priceless.
Reporting facts that Republicans may not like is liberal. Doing things that Republicans may not like is Presidential.
How dare the news report facts and...stuff! Liberals!
Diversion...and not accurately addressing the real issue we have.
Here is the issue..
Obama was reported this way...
Obama, showing America how he, too, is human, referred to the 57 satates today offering his overworked campaign staff reason to enjoy a much needed laugh.
Perry was reported this way...
Perry, again showed reason to question his knowledge of the three branches of government when he seemed to believe there are only 8 supreme court justices. His campaign staff is running around trying to put out the fires this has created for Perry's campaign.
Enough said.
So you want the news to do an in depth fact finding mission to determine if Obama has been to 57 states and that would be fair since Newt said he never lobbied?
Diversion...and not accurately addressing the real issue we have.
Here is the issue..
Obama was reported this way...
Obama, showing America how he, too, is human, referred to the 57 satates today offering his overworked campaign staff reason to enjoy a much needed laugh.
Perry was reported this way...
Perry, again showed reason to question his knowledge of the three branches of government when he seemed to believe there are only 8 supreme court justices. His campaign staff is running around trying to put out the fires this has created for Perry's campaign.
Enough said.
So you want the news to do an in depth fact finding mission to determine if Obama has been to 57 states and that would be fair since Newt said he never lobbied?
Immature diversion from the point I was making.
Guess you just didnt have anything better to respond with.
I suspect they are awaiting instructions on how to counter facts with an alternative.
You mean how to counter Newt hurt Feelings right? Everytime hes asked something he clutches his pearls and says "well, I never"
um...newt played this up because SC is a very right leaning state who already thinks the media is far left. Newt basically jerked over all their faces and the people wanted more of it. You can see it in this thread as well.
In the end the story is this. Newt played it up to the base, they loved it, but he still dodged the question. You can't take one debate in a primary and use it for the rest of the race. If he were to win it would be a different ballgame, so his answer would have to be different.
Or
He could answer it the same and risk loosing the middle more moderate Indies and GOP...
Those would be 'moonbats'.He gets a standing O from an extreme wingnut crowd.It's a bit more than that. He gets a standing ovation evey time he bitch slaps them!
Why shouldn't they let it be general admission, where Democrats and Independents could sit in the audience?
curious...
Do you see the audiences at a democratic debate as an audience of extreme wingnuts?
Why was Reversible Mittens booed at the last debate? For hiding money in the Cayman Islands. Wingnuts usually love that kind of stuff.The media is on Romney's side.... Newt stings them back.
Actually, the media is on Obama's side.
This is true, but, bear in mind they want Romney to win so they can slay the evil rich greedy White Republican. never forget that.
So you want the news to do an in depth fact finding mission to determine if Obama has been to 57 states and that would be fair since Newt said he never lobbied?
Immature diversion from the point I was making.
Guess you just didnt have anything better to respond with.
Just saying Diversion doesnt work anymore.
