It is more likely that Newt was letting Mitt know that if he wants to fight dirty Newt can hit back. Both of their comments were over the top typical of a campaign season.
Some people can't handle real confidence but these are the people who succeed. It's not bragging when it's true.
Attacking in kind is called defending yourself because instead of saying boo, hoo I'm so sorry for what I did you call out the other guy and make him defend himself. So what do we need here. Obama says to Newt you want to throw granny off the cliff. So I guess Newt's supposed to say (like all our good Republicans do in press interviews). Oh no, I don't want to throw granny off the cliff or does he say, your policies have made granny throw herself off the cliff. I prefer the second answer and that's exactly what Newt will give him.
So what it still makes Obama look like the coward he is. It's a win for Newt either way whether Obama debates or he doesn't debate. It's a chess game and so far Gingrich is ahead of the game. Now all we need is checkmate in 2012.
klaffer......capitalism is capitalism. for you to say one is ok on Romney as a low key jab and the other is not on Newt's reply is just plain wrong....
this is normal tit for tat, point counterpoint, polical sparring. you are applying bias to one side over the other while.... i on the other hand.....am saying it is all fair game.
why don't you just call it for what it is....much to do about nothing.....and move on.
Not a fan of Newt. I had a heated argument with him on the medved show many years a go of Global warming.
Gee, isn't it funny how Krauthammer and the rest of the so called "FOX NEWS ALL STARS" wouldn't go near the S word in 2008 vetting Obama, but its the first thing that comes to mind with a non-establishment insurgent like Gingrich?
Romney is the one who started the attack by stating that Gingrich should give back the money earned through Freddie Mac. Both men were wrong, but Romney is the one who threw the initial bomb. It's funny that no one mentioned that.
No surprise here.... I've noticed that 'educated beyond his intellect' Newt, rarely answers a question. He changes the subject. Sounds just like a the current POS in the Whitehouse
This criticism of each other by the republican candidates has TO STOP NOW, or we will suffer through another 4 years of misery with the Obama regime. The candidates should be focusing on Obamas screw ups (soooo many) and not discrediting each other. When the hell will they wake up?????
Mitt's flailing and when his attack on Newt is turned on its head to remind people of Mitt's record, that further frustrates his campaign and supporters, so I understand how you feel right now. You want to have something to hold onto as hope that Mitt can somehow fool enough conservatives into voting for him by bringing down his competitors.
The problem is that Mitt has allied himself with a long list of RINOs and leftists. It's clear he will do/say anything to get elected. The problem is that Mitt has the wrong instincts, his strategy is flawed, and his lame attacks will continue to blow-up in his own face. I'll bet you $10,000 they will.
By the way, we don't want ANY legislation shoved down our throats, whether from democrats or republicans. Congress should do the will of the people, not the other way around, regardless of which party is in "power".
Everyone has an ego. Kraut is no different. He's met his match intellectually in Newt; in fact, he's been outmatched by Newt on several occasions when the two worked together on Fox News recently. It's rare for Kraut to be outmatched, so it's no surprise that his ego is in overdrive when he's asked to comment on Newt.
Kraut is used to being the smartest guy in the room, but he is intimidated by Newt and has lost his objectivity long ago regarding Newt. When Newt was on the Special Report Panel in the "center seat" a few weeks ago, Kraut revealed pretty clearly his bias against Newt. Check it out for a reminder of where Kraut is coming from:
careful who you blindly support people This is as bad a guy as you will ever know
Q. So, when is a RHINO not a RHINO?
A. When a RHINO like Krauthammer does everything to protect HIS guy.
I don't usually agree with this guy, but Newt didn't defend his position, and looks like a baby whining because someone took his toy away.
Krauthammer seems to want to tear down anyone who is leading in the polls who is not Romney. First it was constant criticism of Herman Cain and now he brings out the big guns of refering to Newts argument as socialist. When in all truth it was Romney who began the socialist argument that Newt should return the money he made as a bussinessman. I believe Newt was being heavily sarcastic in his response basically saying (reading between the lines) "Is this guy nuts? Tell him to give back money he made when he made mistakes as a businessman." I don't think Newt believes for a second that Romney should give back the money he made as a bussinessman but the scary thing is that Romney believes that Newt should. So the socialist dogman that is really being peddled here is that one form of legal money making is better then another form. Somehow Romney should be supported because he took more risk in his endeavors while Newt did not? Newt had no employees working for him when he was working as a consultant? So after years of being a politician he should not be able to outsource this expertise to those that want it with regards to the inner working of Washington? I am an engineer and worked in industry for 15 yrs and now own my own consulting firm assisting those in the same industry that I worked for 15 yrs, is that somehow not risky enough? Am I somehow dirty, or unethical, because of it?
This is political double speak and Krauthammer is more then guilty enough of trying to shape the outcome of the GOP race more then anyone else--beware his arguments.
Dismantling Newt is a hacker's dream pet project. The man has been speaking in public for as long as I can remember and I am not a spring chicken. There are plenty of resources available for a hacker to distort and apply out of context.
We are truly on the train to Stupidville. Capitalism and free markets are what we need to save this economy. Companies lay off people, the hire people, and they fire people. That's part of the Capitalism! Capitalism is not the enemy. Barack One-bama and his Socialist administration are the enemy.
Newt is sounding like OWS now. Is he that desperate? Newt can't afford to go negative because Newt has plenty of negatives to hide. Newt was a lobbyist for Fanny and Freddie which proves he is all about profits over principles. Newt is running his mouth and it will be his undoing.
I see a very big pattern here during this republican race. Anyone who threatens Romney is trashed by both sides of the media. Those thinking they wouldn't find some serious 'skeletons' in Ron Pauls extensive political life which may well scupper his campaign if he became the not mitt candiate is deluding themselves.
First it was Palin even though she hadn't even declared she was running,shows to me the establishment saw her as the greatest threat physically attractive charismatic ,strong conservative principles able to achieve a mass following a rabble rouser they had to bring her down , then Bachmann , the perry then cain,and finally Newt. Newt seems to really worry them ,because he has confidence to the point of arrogance and is tough as hell so they are really going for broke. Every single major conservative commentator is trying to destroy newt ,coulter, malkin and now Krauft hammer.Michael savage is even offering him a million to not run. Savage's main reasoning seems to be that he finds Obama physically attractive and Newt isn't his type being old white and fat. Savage seems to prefer darker skinned men.
Savage qualifys this by saying Obama is younger ,slicker etc etc.Well if you want to go off appearance.Newt to me APPEARS like that kind grandad who gives you toffee when you were young ,making you feel safe. Iam not sure Savage is right at all that the public will percieve him as a doddery old fool. Especially when he tears Obama apart in a debate.
Well Iam sick of it frankly. How can so called conservatives want Obama to have yet another term? Because Romney to me looks like he has been cloned in some lab and when he loses his cool and 'malfunctions' in a tame interview on fox with brett bier , how the hell can he be the republican nominee and face what is predicated to be a very negative election,by an incumbent president who has a huge warchest and support by the majority of the media and hollywood? If he becomes the nomineee you watch how the media turns.
As a conservative with a very large C, Iam not happy with some aspects of newts political past but in my view he far surpasses anyone currently running.,who has a decent chance in the general election If Palin was to get in the race,that may well change. And I love how the media is ranting about first cains and now his personal life. I think there is bigger concerns for the US, than infidelity. They ignore the mess Obama has made and go on about that. I couldn't care if Newt or any other candidate was sleeping with multiple women in a sex orgy wearing a goat blood stained cowl in his personal life if he could beat Obama.
I notice all those against Newt (not necessarily you) never quote his 90% conservative rating in Congress. It's pretty frickin hard to get a 90% conservative rating while being a progressive and he's even more conservative now.
You know what I don't mind, I don't mind someone spouting off about something if it's the truth. PC crap is all we have shoved down our throat. We live in a free country with freedom of speech where you have to watch every word you utter. Doesn't anyone think this is insanity besides me.
The Bains are the ones who stick the money into the pockets of the Gingriches. Both of them are crony capitalists.
This is stupid already. Gingrich AND Romney are both very capable, intelligent, impressive men in many respects. Neither would be my choice for the GOP candidate (I prefer a conservative), but it sure looks like one of these two men will be at the top of the ticket in Nov. 2012. Accept it. Both men are FAR superior to Obama (no matter what Glenn Beck thinks). Tearing them apart only helps the Dems.
It won't help the Dems unless we let this quarrel carry over after the nomination. If we come together after we have our nominee we'll be fine.
If we're going to squabble and disagree now's the time to do it. Beck and the other talking heads think they're invincible and that may be so as far as liberals go but when they start messing with their own audience they better use a little common sense.
It's funny the Newt worshipers see no problem with hypocrisy. Thank God we have you guys. Between you folks and the Obama people, America is completely screwed...
Ever hear of self-fulfilling prophesies?
I'm so tired of the "America is completely screwed" crap from my fellow conservatives. Do we have big problems that look insurmountable? Sure. But so does everybody else. China has a housing bubble that makes ours look positively good--they have entire cities filled with high-rises that are empty. The country is chock-full of problems, from catastrophic environmental degradation to terrible demographics due to the one-child policy. Meanwhile, their GDP per capita is less than a sixth of ours, right around there with Albania and Ecuador. The EU is about to implode under the weight of a moronic single currency and endless attempts to reinforce it that everybody from conservative economists to Paul Krugman say are counterproductive. Russia is declining in population by the day, with its most brilliant people leaving to the West in droves, the remaining ones not having kids while dying off quickly from alcoholism. Who exactly is doing well right now among major powers?
In 1981, we had a lot of problems too. Carter just aided the creation of a virulently anti-American force in the Middle East. Inflation was high, unemployment was high, national morale was low. 8 years later, we had almost won the Cold War, we were prosperous and about to enter the most prosperous decade in human history.
Reagan would probably be seen as unacceptable by some people in the right-blogosphere--after all, he signed an abortion legalization law in California, he greatly increased the national debt, even raised taxes at a few points, and gave an amnesty to illegals. Glenn Beck would have called him a progressive--after all, he was also an FDR Democrat.
Instead of embracing a conservative with a positive vision and a fighting spirit who has delivered successes in the past, we're stuck in some kind of sky-is-falling Chicken Little routine, with a rump of the party thinking that it's both possible and desirable to return to 1789 and rejecting everybody who doesn't meet their bizarre test of ideological purity.
We have a choice. Do we do the best we can to promote a conservative America, knowing that the battle will be arduous, that it will be full of disappointment, that we will take a step back for every two steps forward? Or do we seek to show that we are morally pure, even if that entails losing and the destruction of America by the left, so we can say "we told you so"? If you have faith in America, in our people, and in our God-given destiny, you will choose the former.
To quote FDR (I'm sure some nitwit is going to brand me a progressive, with some obscure Beckian references to random socialists), the only thing we have to fear is fear itself.
So, because things are going badly in the world, I can't make frivolous comments about how I'd rather pay attention to an attractive woman's appearance rather than her populist tripe?
Suggest you Google ''the Roosevelt Myth'' by Murray N. Rothbard
which is a white paper that goes indept on Reagan his origins in FDR. Good read
with alot of facts.
I watched the Glenn Beck cover my butt show and almost turned it off but made it though and it was exactly what I thought is would be. Glenn knows he is in alot of hot water and is trying to cover his butt by running a history leson (which I found many of his facts are not facts) and mixing it with mush opinion back track to Tea Partiers, distortions, and humor. In other words, he was smoke screening all he could to exhonorate himself as the defender of the faithful.
Didn't work with me because he started off with his guilt by association arguement that really soured me for the rest of the show. He also distorted what was said in his interview with Newt and conveinently never played any of the audio because Newt did not fall for his gotcha setups. (I thought that was funny because he had no audio to hit Newt)
Next I am sure he will be playing the hack video clip posted at the front of this thread which is a cut and paste of Newt talking about FDR. But that is for the next show.
I also fired off an email to him asking him to answer some of the quesitons I have raise here on TheRightScoop.
I doubt he will reply.
I'm amazed that they're using that kind of attack on a candidate like Newt. I don't like Newt all that much, but it shows that they're pulling for the establishment [Romney], whatever it takes. Calling someone a socialist, when many in our own party have hesitated to even use similar verbiage with regards to Obama is disgusting. GOP/Republican Party/RNC....they're all trash. We're doomed-
Edit: They're pushing conservatives into a third party. They want big government just as much as the Dems, and they're willing to sacrifice the country to let the Dems take the fall.
I don't get why. Romney and Huckabee were bitterly opposed to each other in 2008. It definitely got personal.
That's simply not true. She criticizes American law on the matter for not being liberal enough.
Skip to 1:57-2:30 in the video at the bottom of the article. She says the US is in the dark ages compared to those other progressive countries. The poor schmuck she's interviewing disintegrates like wet toilet paper, of course, afraid to stand up to the feminist-socialism.
Jon Stewart was right. She was a hypocrite. When the man's right, he's right.
Still, Megyn looked mighty fine. The elegant hint of decolletage--wonderful!
Oh, she's a smart girl, she was a lawyer at Jones Day after all. I just find her to be full of the mindless populism so prevalent at Fox News, so whereas I'd get angry or annoyed at O'Reilly, it's just easier to tune out and enjoy the sight with her.
She rants against big government, yet complains our laws on mandatory maternity leave aren't expansive enough. Jon Stewart called her out on this; broken clock, twice a day sort of thing for him.
Yep....Newt skewered him....but I think Newt could have used a better choice of words because they are being misinterpreted even though they are factually correct for a point counter point 10 second response.
They will always be misinterpreted. In fact anything any Republican candidate says will be misinterpreted. It's called making them shut up and sit down. This is what PC is about and this is what the racism charge is all about. The left and others will only be happy when we shut up and sit down. How's that working out for them?
Uh Oh GINGRICH IS NOW TOAST thanks to andrew breitbart EPIC