Skip to comments.Smear Machine Shifts to Newt
Posted on 11/16/2011 3:51:54 PM PST by Kaslin
RUSH: You know how you can tell that Newt Gingrich is at the top of the slate? You don't need polling data; you just need to look at the media coverage. You just need to look at the media coverage. You move on to the Republican primaries, Newt is rising so fast in the polls that the media is trying to tie him to Freddie Mac. They love Freddie Mac. They've bailed out Freddie Mac. They've done everything they can to keep Freddie Mac going. Executives at Freddie Mac are gonna be paid a hundred million dollars in bonuses while Freddie Mac needs another $6 billion bailout. That's where the Occupy Wall Street crowd should have been all along, but they don't care about that. When government's spending the money they're all for it.
So Newt is now under assault because he has ties to Freddie Mac. The darlings of the media, the darlings of the Democrat Party, the darlings of Barney Frank and Chris Dodd. In fact, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were both left out of the financial regulatory reform bill. There were no reforms instituted against Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. All of these financial regulatory reforms aimed at the financial business, guess what, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac exempted. So Newt consulted for them. And all of a sudden now Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac may as well be guilty of high crimes and misdemeanors. Profound inconsistency here.
Now, for the record Newt has already responded to the accusations about his role in Freddie Mac a number of times. I think he's even mentioned it during the debates. He said that he was hired as a consultant, but that's a crime now. If you look at the headlines, you look at the news stories, Newt being a consultant to Fannie Mae is a crime, even though they love Fannie Mae. Even though they want Fannie Mae to sustain it, they want Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac to stay alive and kicking, Newt consults 'em and all of a sudden Newt's filthy, Newt's dirty, Newt's tainted. And of course what they're really going after is the fact that Newt's a hypocrite because the Republicans think that Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac are problems, put there's Newt taking money from 'em.
Newt says that he told 'em that the housing market was a bubble that was about to burst. He told them that they were making a mistake handing out loans to people who couldn't afford them. Newt says he told them what they were doing wrong and what they needed to fix it and he did get his consultancy fee for it. If all that's true it's a shame they didn't listen to him. Doesn't matter what they paid him; it was good advice. Certainly better advice than what they've gotten from their own wildly overpaid executives. Certainly better advice than they've gotten from Obama.
And then there's this new book. This is from the Huffing and Puffington Post, or PuffingtonHo.com, whatever it is. "New Book Says Newt Gingrich Bought off His Wife to Stay in the Race -- A new e-book on the 2012 election released Friday says that Newt Gingrich went on an ill-timed cruise to Greece this year and spent over a million dollars in jewelry at Tiffany's to buy off his reluctant wife Callista so that she wouldn't object to his running for president." Now, the book doesn't cite named sources, but why should it? The Politico doesn't, either. Anonymous sources, anonymous facts, anonymous details now make up the bulk of reporting in the State-Controlled Media. Now a new one -- an e-book! For those of you in Rio Linda, an e-book is a book that you would read on a Kindle.
That may not help. Uh, it is a book that you would read on an iPad. It is a book that you would read on an iPod Touch. Forget it. I'm talking about reading! What am I doing here? Reading in Rio Linda? I'm sorry, folks, it's a... Anyway, "The book does not cite named sources, and the Gingrich campaign immediately dismissed the sniping from former campaign officials. Several of Gingrich's former top campaign advisers now work for rival candidate Rick Perry. The book, from Real Clear Politics' Tom Bevan and Carl Cannon, raises the question of whether Gingrich's former aides were talking to Perry before they left in June. The Perry aides deny the accusation."
Apparently Perry was trying to siphon Newt's staffers before Newt went on the cruise. The name of the e-book: "'Election 2012: The Battle Begins,' does not offer evidence that current Perry advisers Dave Carney and Rob Johnson left Gingrich because Perry had begun to express interest in running for president himself. But the question lingers." No evidence! No, of course not. There is no evidence. The book doesn't offer any evidence, "but the question lingers." "The vitriol expressed for Callista Gingrich in the e-book is intense. The sentiments have been aired before. What is new is the lengths to which Gingrich's former aides ... go to trash Callista Gingrich. 'She's the single worst influence on a candidate I've ever seen,' one 'campaign strategist' told Bevan and Cannon.
"This same source said that Gingrich bought 'a necklace reportedly worth six figures ... to 'buy Callista off' so she'd acquiesce to a presidential run.' Gingrich's ex-aides said that the former House Speaker from Georgia ignored their advice not to go on a luxury cruise to the Greek islands in late May because he feared damage to, or even the loss of, his marriage to [Callista]. 'In Newt's mind, it was the cruise or his marriage. And he didn't want to get married a fourth time,' said a source identified by Cannon and Bevan as 'a person with knowledge of the discussions.'" So you can tell now that Newt's at the top. It just no evidence. The questions linger. (interruption) The Fanny and Freddy stuff? He has answered for the Fannie and Freddie stuff.
(interruption) He's gotta do better than saying he can...? (interruption) All right. (interruption) Okay, okay, okay, okay. (interruption) Look, I'm not here to defend Gingrich. Do not misunderstand anything. I am your humble reporting digesting all the filth and trash that's out there about all of our candidates. I'm sifting through it and I am then retransmitting it to you. "Next week, another similar project will get off the ground, when the first of four 2012 e-books by Politico's Mike Allen and former Newsweek editor-at-large Evan Thomas will go on sale. Allen and Thomas' book is being edited by former Newsweek editor-in-chief Jon Meacham and is also being published by Random House."
Meanwhile, Newsweek is about 12 pages every issue, and these guys are no longer there. At any rate, okay, so Newt gets a million dollars from Fannie Mae -- to consult -- and he says he told 'em what they were do wrong and they didn't listen to him. (interruption) Well, yeah, that's a good point. I told you all for free. I did. I have been telling Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac everything in the world to do right, nobody's paid me. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac haven't paid me. By the way, a million dollars over eight years was Newt's deal, by the way. (interruption) Boy, you are really sniping. You are really sniping. (interruption) Newt's deal with Freddie Mac was for a million dollars over eight years. Okay, I just warning, for those of you on the phones today, Snerdley's loaded for bear. My guess is if you want to call and talk about Newt, I'll never see you today.
RUSH: This e-book that I quoted, "Election 2012: The Battle Begins," by Perry advisors Dave Carney and Rob Johnson, it really is... I haven't read it all, obviously, but from what I've read it really seems to be a huge hit piece on his wife, on Newt's wife Callista. I always thought that one of the most sacred tenets of modern journalism is you're supposed to leave the wives out of it. Really, and Callista not doing anything. She not inserting herself in any way, she not out there talking about policy, she not talking about arugula and steak and telling lies about food desserts and this kind of stuff. You know, she shows up and smiles, and that's about it, and yet this hit piece, this book is obviously aimed at her; and it's clear, too, ladies and gentlemen, that the target of this smear actually (in terms of voters) is the Tea Party.
That's meaning is they're trying to influence the Tea Party with negative vibes about Newt, and they've got some ammo. If we want to we can go back and get all the stories where Newt has done things which are not conservative. The couch deal with Pelosi, saying, "The era of Reagan is over." Newt was one of the early Republicans to say that, and he eventually retracted it. So that's the reason, but the larger point is: You don't need a poll to tell you who's hot on the Republican primary side. Whoever is hot is hit. It's a full-fledged take-'em-out media approach, and the only guy who is immune to this is Mitt Romney. Mitt is not hit. They're saving that up for later. It was Herman Cain, it was Sarah Palin before Herman Cain, and it was Michele Bachmann when she won the Iowa straw poll. They think they've taken Herman Cain out. They're still hitting Herman Cain, and now they've moved on to Newt -- and if somebody comes along and replaces Newt at the top in the polling data you won't need the polling data to know. You'll just have to see who it is the media's decided to take out among our side next.
RUSH: Say, folks, a quick question: Do we ever get stories on gifts Ted Kennedy bought for his wife over the years? We didn't. Did we ever get stories about what Bill Clinton bought for his wife over the years? Well, in one way, yeah. You could say that it cost Clinton a lot. In fact, Newt's getting off cheap. Hillary got health care. Callista got something from Tiffany. It just depends on your perspective in these things. But my point is, Kobe Bryant, he went out, he had to buy a big, giant ring. You think Newt's the only husband in politics that has ever had to go out and do something like this? And, by the way, what is wrong with buying your wife something from Tiffany? What is wrong with that? Why is that a problem?
The only difference is Newt bought it with his own money. Democrats never do it with their own money; they always use ours. But why is there a guilt trip here to be associated with going out and buying your wife something at Tiffany & Company? Or taking her on a cruise? What is the crime there? (interruption) Well, I know, the "timing" of the cruise because it was middle of a presidential campaign and so forth, but I just think all of these double standards that exist, these efforts here to criminalize things when in fact what everybody ought to be looking at is -- in all candor -- this Occupy stuff. We're witnessing a nation in great decline. The Sandusky stuff at Penn State, too.
Everywhere you look, folks, you see things that make you queasy, angry, filled with apprehension, angst, unease, whatever. This Occupy stuff, that's directly traceable to the White House. The White House and Obama personally, personally, not just orchestrated these things, he created the mind-set: All of this class envy, running around, creating all this hatred in people's minds for the achievers in our society, the successful in our society. I think all of this -- the shootings, the drugs, the squalor, the filth, everything -- associated with Occupy Wall Street you can trace it right back to the White House. They got what they wanted. Barack Obama was the inspiration for the Occupy movement.
The difference I can see in Smear Machine 2.1 is that, in this version, they have less to make up.
It’s not a smear if it’s true.
Either Romney is behind all these smears or Obama really want to go up against Romney, since that is probably his only hope of getting re-elected.
"That's meaning is they're trying to influence the Tea Party with negative vibes about Newt, and they've got some ammo. If we want to we can go back and get all the stories where Newt has done things which are not conservative. The couch deal with Pelosi, saying, "The era of Reagan is over." Newt was one of the early Republicans to say that, and he eventually retracted it."
Then, watch, you'll see wives coming out of the woodwork!
Praying the electorate ignores the media and votes their conscience!
In the last 2 or 3 months the media has produced more information about the republicans seeking the nomination than they have produced on President Obama in all the time since he declared his candidacy in February 2007 - more than 4 1/2 years ago.
LOL!!!!!!!! Ain't that the truth.
The really important aspect from a candidate is this....is he/she telling the truth? We need honest politicians.
Will the candidate tell the truth in the future? Has the candidate told the truth in the past?
I will never depend on one media organization or reporter to give an objective opinion. I don’t trust the US media. They have their own mission.
But - if I ever get a gut sense that there is untruthfulness going on, the candidate will never get my vote. Honesty means everything to me and politics is a distant second place to honesty.
The PuffingtonHo.com board room.
I go for the second option. All I've heard for the past 8 months or so is that the Bama has been planning his campaign against Romney.
Cain deprives him of the race card, so he had to be taken out early, Newt will make him look like the teleprompter reading marxist fool that he is, so he'll need to be bloodied before the general heats up. Mittens sent advisers to the White Hut to show them how to do 0bamacare, plus he's been caught in some major flip flops so the MSM will be able to highlight these while ignoring any faults Hussein may have.
People ask, how can this epic failure of a president, who's presiding over an economy in tatters, with Carter-like unemployment numbers and inflation heating up, possibly win a second term? It's never been done. I was of the same mindset, but in the past two weeks it's been looking more and more like a reality. I, for one, am very worried about this next election.
P.S. Regarding 0bamacare: Has anyone else been wondering why it's being thrown to SCOTUS right during the height of campaigning in the general? Call me paranoid, but I believe the fix is already in. Now excuse me while I remove my tinfoil hat ;)
What about the race in NY 22nd district? Newt pretty much threw the election by supporting the RINO, who eventually came out for the liberal democrat. If Newt's the nominee, I see a rough election ahead of us.
I think this will be a cinch for the media. There is so much to report. The only problem for the media is where to start. I think the marriage disaster that is Newt should be where they start. He does not know how to stay married and he cheats on the women that he is married to. That is a VERY bad character flaw.
“Its not a smear if its true.”
And can admitting one’s mistakes and working to avoid repeating them be true too?
Exactly...recall how McCain was the darling of the NYT and the media, until he won the nomination.
Sad but true. There is one thing they can't fix, though.
MSM = Main Smear Machine
A goodly dose of Rush sarcasm mixed in today!
Yep. But that distinction is lost on lots of folks.
If they don’t want to hear it, it’s a smear!
Seems that many people did not catch the somewhat subtle humor Rush was using today. Hmm.
Hmmm....isn’t Rush on wife #4 now? I think it’s going to be hard to make much of a “smear” out of being married more than once. Ronald Reagan was married twice (Nancy was his second wife). Obama, on the other hand, has been married only once...but that’s hardly a recommendation of Obama.
Ignore their attacks on our candidates...ignore them as you would Germany's, Japan's, or Italy's attacks on America in the 1940's.
Cheese and crackers...ignore the enemy's attacks on our righteous leaders.Ignore the MSM...it is aligned with the enemy. Ignore it!
Yes, Rush loves to get stuff out there by “speaking” it out of other people’s mouths. No fingerprints!
The purpose of the lame stream media is, to get that arrogant lazy, lying pos occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Ave reelected, no matter who our nominee is
Jimmy Carter probably was the most “scandal-free” President we’ve ever had...and he sucked.
But if one’s mistakes show that one’s instincts regularly lead to actions that undermine the conservative cause, that’s a much more fundamental problem than just behavior slip-ups.
Since Nov 2, 2011
26 posts total, 25 of them negative toward Newt and those 25 post are from today and yestrday.
Did you sign up for any specific agenda?
This exactly why we must make it clear to the GOP not to let the LSM choose the nominee for us
I am so sick and tired of using Reagan for an excuse to drop our principles. First of all half the people on Free Republic were to young to vote for Reagan. Second, he was divorced 100 years before he was running for President. There was no cheating involved at all. To compare Gingrich the slut with Reagan is disgusting. Your right Obama takes marriage more seriously than Gingrich. That is the saddest part of all. NO to Newt!!!!!
He wasn’t scandal free.
Inviting freepers to join the CFS.
I’m sure he wasn’t, but at least that’s the public perception.
“He does not know how to stay married and he cheats on the women that he is married to. That is a VERY bad character flaw.”
As someone who has been married to the same woman for 43 years... Your full of $hit! My mom, although not one of the most distinguished thinkers of the last century, use to say - “it takes two to tango”. She’s right of course... When a marriage breaks up it’s NEVER just the fault of one person.
He has converted to Catholicism and has proclaimed that he has sinned and has ask forgiveness. The question is do you deign to know what is in his heart. I have never cheated on my wife but I certainly have committed many sins in my 64 years and have been in need of and received forgiveness in the past. I cannot refuse it to anyone who asks...even Newt Gingrich.
The commie piggies on Yahoo’s homepage have started slinging their arrows at Gingrich. Newt took money from Fannie and Freddie instead of doing what their boy Barry does and get it from foreigners. Still no attacks on the mother and father of Fannie and Freddie. Bahney Fwank and Chissy Dodd. The Yahoo yahoos are hypocrites.
How true my mom said the same to me. One of Newts divorces wasn’t instigated by him. The infamous hospital divorce that never happened was brought about by his then wife.This is according to his daughters!!!
Great. Hope to see him and you up in Heaven. However that does not have anything to do with the Presidency.
The public perception was that up until now he was the worst president.
Yes, but it wasn’t because of any particular scandals, he just plain sucked.
It is ridiculous. If the media had spent 1/10th the time expose real facts on the marxist quisling Obama, we wouldn’t have the cretin.
Anyway, we need to get commitments from all our candidates that they will get rid of Congressional Insider Trading protection, The Obama destroy American “healthcare” bill, and slash federal spending back to pre-911 levels.
They need to do it in the first year. Not over 10 imaginary freakin years.
What does him being divorced have to do with the Presidency!!
Comparing Gingrich’s conduct to Ronald Reagan’s is a filthy thing to do. There was NO hint of Reagan being unfaithful, and he didn’t want the divorce.
People of integrity don’t cheat on their spouses.
He was CHEATING ON HER. I guess you think she should have just sat and taken it?