Newt hammers CNN about acting like a tabloid outlet

[code1211]

good boy. Spoken like a Clinton supporter circa 1998.

Except that with Clinton, we weren't talking about fifteen years earlier. We were talking about who he boinked last week, in the Oval Office, and then suborned perjury from. (For the liberals among us, that last part would be what mattered.)

He wasn't actually convicted of any crime, but, of course, that detail doesn't matter to the Right.

The only detail that does matter is what "is" is.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

All of the media (including the left) is saying that CNN threw a fastball at Newt and Newt hit it so hard it took the head right off the moderator. That he handled it masterfully.

The attack was on Newt but he turned it perfectly into an attack on the media. Some have compared it to Reagans "I paid for this mic!" Moment.

I can just feel the skin crawling on the left.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Gingrich Outraged at Debate Host For Asking About Ex-Wife's Claim That He Wanted an "Open Marriage" - YouTube

Completely personal bullshit that has nothing to do with politics. I bet CNN takes a hit in the ratings after this.

Were in the middle of a war. Our economy is very frail. Iran is rattling their swords. UE is through the roof. Our debt is crushing us.

And the first fucking question is tabloid style sex crap.

Newt is a petulant child in the body of a 68 yo man. He's suffering what he probably considers shameful treatment due to his own ignominious behavior. Repeated behavior, I might add.

Here's a question Americans might want to ask themselves: Do you want a first lady who acknowledges having had an extramarital affair with a married man for six long years, even if they are now married?

Didn't we have this argument as a nation in the 90's?

The questions of morality that are germane to this discussion should revolve around how we think the leader of the nation should feel about spending, debt, the next generation and the extent of control the government exerts over the individual.

The candidate I support is the one that will shrink the reach and control of the Federal Government. The candidate I will oppose is the one that will expand and strengthen the reach and control of the Federal Government.

I already know which one i oppose.

Exactly. There's a huge difference between personal character and national character. A man can be the best husband and friend and business partner and boss and whatever else in the world in his personal life, but if he's President and runs around making decisions and giving speeches presenting the United States as a bad, weak, immoral country, then he doesn't have the character that matters to be President.

I don't know why people don't seem to get this, but we're trying to elect a President, not choose a date or appoint a church deacon. I need the President to obey the law, uphold the Constitution, produce effective diplomacy with other nations that strengthens America, and sign bills into law that help us to be more prosperous. Whether or not he's a good husband has no effect on any of that, and is his wife's problem, not mine.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Except that with Clinton, we weren't talking about fifteen years earlier. We were talking about who he boinked last week, in the Oval Office, and then suborned perjury from. (For the liberals among us, that last part would be what mattered.)

He wasn't actually convicted of any crime, but, of course, that detail doesn't matter to the Right.

Hmmm, and wasn't it your party that said lying about sex didn't matter, and the sex itself mattered even less? No, I'm afraid your side set the standard.

You let other people, especially people you disagree with, set YOUR standards?

lol

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

He wasn't actually convicted of any crime, but, of course, that detail doesn't matter to the Right.

Hmmm, and wasn't it your party that said lying about sex didn't matter, and the sex itself mattered even less? No, I'm afraid your side set the standard.

You let other people, especially people you disagree with, set YOUR standards?

lol

On the contrary. I think she is attempting to hold you to yours. Hypocrisy and all that jazz.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Hmmm, and wasn't it your party that said lying about sex didn't matter, and the sex itself mattered even less? No, I'm afraid your side set the standard.

You let other people, especially people you disagree with, set YOUR standards?

lol

On the contrary. I think she is attempting to hold you to yours. Hypocrisy and all that jazz.

Why am I hypocritical? Don't make up shit about me.

 

[paulitician]

Don't worry about all these disingenous Democrat Dummies. These are idiots who wish they were wearing Lewinsky's dress when their beloved Slick Willy spewed his seed. They're demented hypocrites. So fuck em.

 

[midcan5]

I am APPALLED you would bring up family values in a Republican debate!

Yep, family values only matter when it is the opposition's family. Curious how easily the religious and moral right wing forgives the failings of its own sinners. The best part was he was cheating on his wife of for better for worse for richer for poorer while impeaching Clinton because of lying about his own escapades.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/humor/199322-the-40-nicest-things-about-newt.html

 

[paulitician]

I am APPALLED you would bring up family values in a Republican debate!

Yep, family values only matter when it is the opposition's family. Curious how easily the religious and moral right wing forgives the failings of its own sinners. The best part was he was cheating on his wife of for better for worse for richer for poorer while impeaching Clinton because of lying about his own escapades.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/humor/199322-the-40-nicest-things-about-newt.html

Yeah and your beloved Ted Kenendy murdered a poor young girl and got away with it. So what's your point? Why are you Democrat Dummies pretending you have a problem with Gingrich? You're degenerate scum for the most part, so how can you idiots have a problem with Gingrich? Stop being hypocritical douchebags. Get a life.

 

[candycorn]

All of the media (including the left) is saying that CNN threw a fastball at Newt and Newt hit it so hard it took the head right off the moderator. That he handled it masterfully.

The attack was on Newt but he turned it perfectly into an attack on the media. Some have compared it to Reagans "I paid for this mic!" Moment.

I can just feel the skin crawling on the left.

I wonder if you can hear me laughing at how easily you all are impressed. He's been doing the same thing for a lot of the debates: bashing the media. One would think you guys would be used to it.

 

[J.E.D]

Do you understand the difference between "now" and "fifteen years ago"?

SO, it was fair 15 years ago, but not now? Man, you people are funny

Jesus Christ, could you be any more ignorant without elective surgery?

It was relevant - marginally - fifteen years ago. It's nothing at all now, fifteen years later. I don't give a good goddamn what anyone was doing in their personal lives fifteen years ago. I don't much care what they do in their personal lives NOW.

Learn to understand English, or don't fucking bother me. I have neither the time nor the inclination to diagram sentences for your stupid ass.

If it wasn't important 15 years ago, then why are you bringing it up, you stupid little twit? Give me an honest response instead of deflecting, and then your dumb ass won't have to be bothered by me.

 

[J.E.D]

SO, it was fair 15 years ago, but not now? Man, you people are funny

You are presuming she isn't lying. From all the sources I've heard she was a hateful demanding person when they were married. If that's also possibly true then do you blame Newt? Who wants to live with a hateful person?

You guys are so quick to judge what you don't even have all the facts on.

I'm thinking the operative point is that IT WAS FIFTEEN YEARS AGO, and has nothing whatsoever to do with now. It frankly didn't have much to do with THEN, to be honest.

Yet, you bring it up. What a whiny little bitch.

 

[Katzndogz]

The only ones who care about Gingrich's infidelities is the left, who keep bringing it up to the right like it should mean something more than knocking obama off his perch.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

All of the media (including the left) is saying that CNN threw a fastball at Newt and Newt hit it so hard it took the head right off the moderator. That he handled it masterfully.

The attack was on Newt but he turned it perfectly into an attack on the media. Some have compared it to Reagans "I paid for this mic!" Moment.

I can just feel the skin crawling on the left.

I wonder if you can hear me laughing at how easily you all are impressed. He's been doing the same thing for a lot of the debates: bashing the media. One would think you guys would be used to it.

You must be speaking, my ears are bleeding.

 

[Cecilie1200]

SO, it was fair 15 years ago, but not now? Man, you people are funny

Jesus Christ, could you be any more ignorant without elective surgery?

It was relevant - marginally - fifteen years ago. It's nothing at all now, fifteen years later. I don't give a good goddamn what anyone was doing in their personal lives fifteen years ago. I don't much care what they do in their personal lives NOW.

Learn to understand English, or don't fucking bother me. I have neither the time nor the inclination to diagram sentences for your stupid ass.

If it wasn't important 15 years ago, then why are you bringing it up, you stupid little twit? Give me an honest response instead of deflecting, and then your dumb ass won't have to be bothered by me.

Well, that answers my question. You could NOT get dumber without elective surgery. Run along, because I don't have the time or the inclination to explain the whole fucking conversation to you all over again. You're wasting perfectly good screen space that could be used by someone with more than two brain cells, huddling together for warmth in the vast, howling wasteland of your skull.

 

[paulitician]

Whoopi Goldberg's nasty farts are smarter than the Democrat Dummies who frequent this Board...

 

[J.E.D]

Jesus Christ, could you be any more ignorant without elective surgery?

It was relevant - marginally - fifteen years ago. It's nothing at all now, fifteen years later. I don't give a good goddamn what anyone was doing in their personal lives fifteen years ago. I don't much care what they do in their personal lives NOW.

Learn to understand English, or don't fucking bother me. I have neither the time nor the inclination to diagram sentences for your stupid ass.

If it wasn't important 15 years ago, then why are you bringing it up, you stupid little twit? Give me an honest response instead of deflecting, and then your dumb ass won't have to be bothered by me.

Well, that answers my question. You could NOT get dumber without elective surgery. Run along, because I don't have the time or the inclination to explain the whole fucking conversation to you all over again. You're wasting perfectly good screen space that could be used by someone with more than two brain cells, huddling together for warmth in the vast, howling wasteland of your skull.

I understand quite well. Clinton sex scandal - bad; Newt sex scandal - who cares? You can't get out of your hypocrisy, so you deflect and change the subject like a good little hack. What a dumb ass.