Skip to comments.Gingrich Says He Was Acting as a Citizen, Not a Lobbyist
Posted on 12/01/2011 2:20:51 PM PST by Lazlo in PA
Newt Gingrich said on Wednesday night that his advocacy with state and federal legislators for policies that would help his paying clients was in keeping with his role as a citizen, and was not evidence that he ever acted as a lobbyist.
Speaking in an interview with the Fox News Channel host Sean Hannity, Mr. Gingrich appeared to be referring to an article in The New York Times on Wednesday detailing how he has made millions of dollars while helping his corporate clients promote themselves to and gain access to state and federal officials.
He referred to a news briefing mentioned in the article in which he joined with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in 2005 to promote a bill co-sponsored by Representative Patrick J. Kennedy, Democrat of Rhode Island, and Representative Tim Murphy, Republican of Pennsylvania, that would have increased the use of electronic medical health records.
You might say to yourself gosh, why would a Newt Gingrich do that? he told Mr. Hannity in the interview on Wednesday. The answer is simple. You want to get a message out in the news media, and you put Gingrich and Hillary together, and Patrick Kennedy with Gingrich, youre going to get huge press coverage.
(Excerpt) Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com ...
Look at all the Republicans in the background with Newt at this rally.
A Clintonian parsing.....
Exactly how stupid does Newt think we are?
Well in this case I believe it had to do with electronic medical records?
Some would say the ability to work with democrats is perceived as a good thing. I’m not saying that but I’m not ready to vilify Gingrich, either.
Can’t keep villifying all these republicans.
Well I guess we bettle just settle for Romney then.
***What message would anyone in their right mind share with Pelosi and Hitlery?***
The free-enterprise point of view!!!!!
Well I guess we better just settle for Romney then.
"Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton, Joseph I. Lieberman, left, and Rick Santorum introduced a bill yesterday on media and child development."
March 10, 2005
I guess it all depends on what the meaning of the word is is.
When newt opens his mouth, the next sound you hear will be a lie.
We should all settle on Bachman, for all of her flaws.
He needs to walk that one back. Pure and utter BS.
In YOUR world democrats only work with other democrats to write legislation, and republicans only work with republicans to write legislation.
In the world of reality, both democrats and republicans are known to write legislation TOGETHER on issues that they DO share a common interest.
But of the three of them, which one looks out of place with that issue? The Orthodox Jew, the devout Catholic or the Godless 60’s radical retread. It looks to me that Hitlery was shoehorning in to appear sensible. Now the Newt pic on the other hand...
As much as Newt is a hypocrit, Bachmann is a liar prone to hysterics.
150 Seconds of Newt Hypocrisy in Action
A MUST WATCH!
FWIW, I am a Herman Cain Supporter
It's quite a world we live in today from all of that bipartisanship. Leftist advocate their issues. Our guys give up their principles to get along. We all sink like a stone under an oppressive Gov't.
Spin it all you want. Three pigs in a poke. You asked the question. What conservative would do a photo-op with Hillary. Answer: Your buddy, Sen. Numbnuts.
Look at you, all happy to parrot the drivel of the nyt!
But not on issues like Global Warming, Amnesty, Health Care Mandates and Freddie/Fannie funding.
Newt needs to stick with consulting with his Lobby friends, RINOS and DEMS.
No to Newt!
See, now, I completely disagree. Repubs DO need to work with Dems on all those issues, and more. When Repubs fail to show leadership on the issues you bring up, then all we have are what the Dems give us. Repubs need to work to change the minds of Dems so that issues of GW, immigration, health care, etc., are moved in the correct direction.
hold it, what did she lie about?
um, you can’t change the minds of leftist ideologues.
What was it about Newt and the gang of 14 or something like that?
What was that about? Anyone know?
CAPITOL GAMES TAQIYYA
Um, not ALL dems are leftist ideologues.
i know, but the ones in the federal government are, and if they aren’t they get whipped into voting with ‘em
Actually . . . . NO! Not all dems in the Fed Gov are leftist ideologues, and NO, they don’t always get “whipped” into voting with the leftist ideologues. You are familiar with Blue Dog democrats, right?
Wasn't this theory put to the test during the Obamacare debate. See Bart Stupak.
It has been proven that all Rats are indeed Leftist.
We’re not as stupid as you think we are, and you’re not as bright as you think you are.
oh boy do I ever, Bart Stupak was my congressman. There is no such thing as a bluedog. They say they are bluedogs in mixed company, but then when in front of their dem buddies, laugh at it and denounce the idea. Oh boy, am I ever familiar.
Don't be fooled. Newt was feeding at the trough.
It was a coup for Hillary and Pat Kennedy to get Gingrich behind the bill.
This was absolutely not a citizen supporting a bill he was strongly in favor of. Believe, there was a big, probably indirect, payoff through the health-related companies he was "consulting for."
He was so slimy that he didn't register as a lobbyist and went around all the restrictions. This "consultant" garbage is typical Newt.
Please don't be fooled.
Newt is a snake-oil salesman, the ultimate insider and totally corrupt.
the more I learn about Newt, the more I feel we are giving up the most important part about being Conservative. Principle. I believe Newt’s past is too damn much, but, at least I know what I’m getting if he continues to be the front runner. I can fight for him, I cannot fight for a non-fighter like Romney. and that’s the difference...
I am, of course, talking about Newt Gingrich. I am, quite frankly, in a state of shock at the stupidity of support for him. He is a mean, insufferable, arrogant, pompous Rockefeller Republican, an ethanol-subsidizing global-warming crony-capitalist ludicrously hypocritical pretend conservative.
Here is just the start, just a hint, of his anti-conservative actions (provided by a friend):
04/02/1987 - cosponsored the 1987 Fairness Doctrine
10/22/1991 - voted for an amendment that would create a National Police Corps.
03/--/1993 - voted for sending $1.6 billion in foreign aid to Russia.
1/27/1994 - supported the GATT Treaty giving sovereignty to the U.N.
08/27/1995 - suggests that drug smuggling should carry a death sentence.
04/25/1996 - voted for the then single largest increase on federal education spending ($3.5 billion)
04/10/1995 - supported federal taxdollars being spent on abortions.
06/01/1996 - helped a Democrat switch parties in an attempt to defeat constitutionalist Ron Paul in the 1996 election.
09/25/1996 - introduced H.R. 4170, demanded life-sentence or execution for someone bringing 2 ounces of marijuana across the border.
01/22/1997 - Congress gave him a record-setting $300,000 fine for ethical wrongdoing.
11/29/2006 - said that free speech should be curtailed in order to fight terrorism, called for a "serious debate about the 1st Amendment."
02/15/2007 - supports Bush's proposal for mandatory carbon caps.
09/28/2008 - says if in office, he would have reluctantly voted for the $700B TARP bailout.
09/30/2008 - releases his book A Contract with the Earth which embraces man-made global warming.
12/08/2008 - paid $300,000 by Freddie Mac to halt Congress from bringing necessary reform.
03/31/2009 - says we should have Singapore-style drug tests for Americans.
11/15/2010 - defends Romneycare
01/30/2011 - lobbies for ethanol subsidies.
01/30/2011 - suggests that flex-fuel vehicles be mandated for Americans.
02/13/2011 - criticizes Obama for sending less U.S. taxdollars to Egypt.
03/09/2011 - blames his infidelity to multiple wives on his passion for the country.
03/15/2011 - says that NAFTA worked because it created jobs in Mexico.
03/19/2011 - has no regrets about supporting Medicare drug coverage. (now $7.2T unfunded liability)
03/23/2011 - completely flip-flops on Libyan intervention in 16 days.
03/25/2011 - plans to sign as many as 200 executive orders on his first day as president.
04/25/2011 - admits he is a paid lobbyist for federal ethanol subsidies.
07/15/2011 - his poorly managed campaign is over $1 million in debt.
08/01/2011 - hires a company to create fake Twitters to appear as if had a following.
11/16/2011 - revealed he actually received $1.6 million lobbying for Freddie Mac, vs. his previously stated $300,000
This list could go on and on. Here's more. Further, he has no executive or private business experience whatever. Until he cashed in with lobbying contracts after he resigned from Congress in 1999, he never worked a day in the private sector. Like Zero, he taught at a state school (University of West Georgia) until becoming a professional politician (Congressman from Georgia 1979-1999). He is an ultimate Washington insider.
I’ll have to come back and read this later devolve. Dinnertime here.
A Newt lover from Drumrass
Rose to the head of the Rino class
By reciting quite bright
And sleeping at night
With his tongue up the SPEAKERS A**!
Newt left the House in 1995. The Gang of 14 did their thing in 2005.
If you see a connection, please enlighten us.
Problem is those "common interests" are always antithetical to our freedoms.
Tis why we call them RINOS!
Neat. Newt’s even wearing the du rigeur, ‘Democrat Blue’ shirt. Nice touch.
Is the bright light of truth hurting your eyes, friend? Look away if you must, but many of your compatriots welcome that spotlight.
It was McLame! My bad. Should have done a search first.
What common interests do Democrats and Republicans share, pray tell?
And, if they do, are you suggesting that we support those Republicans who share such common interests with Democrats?
Something to think about....nope, no vote for Newt.
Yous, listen up. Freddie Mac is a model organization. Please don’t increase oversight from Congress because you might find out how badly we are distorting the housing market while we pay ourselves massive amounts of money.
Maybe, but the only Dems who get elected to public office are leftist ideologues.
There's no such thing as working with Commies. There is only victory or defeat.
blue dog Democrats?
They will run over a dog to vote leftist, right?
Ours, Herseth-Sandlin, (now replaced by REPUBLICAN Christie Noem) used to vote with the Republicans...but only when Nancy had enough votes to not need hers.
She, and the other Blue Dogs ALWAYS got Pelosi's permission to "break with" the party on votes; otherwise, they toed the Leftist line.
It was a sham to give them reelction "conservative" street cred at home, while not hurting the party's agenda.
A Dem is a Dem is a RINO, is a Dem.