Skip to comments.ABC News Interview: Gingrich Says He’ll Hit Romney ‘Every Day’
Posted on 01/02/2012 12:34:20 PM PST by Berlin_Freeper
INDEPENDENCE, Iowa No more Mr. Nice Guy. Newt Gingrich will draw a very clear contrast with Romney every day immediately after the Iowa caucuses Tuesday, the former House speaker told ABC News.
Everything we say will have Romneys quote, Romneys videotape, Romneys record; itll all be based explicitly on Romney, Gingrich said in an interview in Independence, Iowa.
Gingrich has said repeatedly that Republicans should aim their attacks at President Obama, not fellow Republicans. But after getting hammered by millions of dollars in negative ads, Gingrich says he will now return fire, targeting Romney over and over again.
(Excerpt) Read more at abcnews.go.com ...
Go Newt but keep an eye on that Santorum guy.
Geez. Why not start today? It would be appreciated by people like me who hate Mittens.
We need a .gif of Newt endlessly punching Willard.
“I will be the nominee.” LOL
Go Newt but keep an eye on that Santorum guy.
Yes Newt watch out for that MORAL CONSERVATIVE. He is winning because he is true to conservative principles and has an incredible marriage. Love it!!!! Go Rick Sanotrum!!! You are without a doubt the MORAL CONSERVATIVE!!!!!
about freaking time!
I want to see Romney driven down into the single digits and then politically burried after Florida forever along with his magic underware.
I guess Newt suddenly remembered that... nice guys finish last.
The Duggar family patriarch traveled with 12 of his children to the Hawkeye State from their home in Arkansas — with the message that voters with “conservative family values have to get behind Rick Santorum for President.”
Santorum in NH, 3.5%.
In SC, 2.7%,
in FL, 1.5%.
It remains to be seen if he will get a bump out of his IA surge.
Praise the Lord!!! It’s time.
Newt is Mitt’s stalking horse, to make it look like Mitt’s nomination is not as planned as it really is.
The only one who beats up any of these frauds on policy is Ron Paul, and everybody knows it.
But hey, not everyone agrees with Paul’s foreign policy strategy, so let’s throw out him nailing the economic salvation of the country, too.
And in the mean time, enable Mittens to get in.
Because Mitt has a foreign policy plan you’re going to LOVE - once you hear about it through the Pony Express, after the economy crashes and the electricity is turned off.
Great plan. Just frickin’ great.
I don’t think so. I think RIck Santorum is way different than George W. Bush. We will see. I have to get going so I don’t have time to go into details between the two but you probably know they are both different.
Successful incredible marriage???
Not to be a jerk but so does Jimmy Carter, Barack Obama, Harry Reid, and Newt Gingrich for the last 11 years.
Geez. Why not start today? It would be appreciated by people like me who hate Mittens.
I wondered the same thing myself - why is he waiting until AFTER Iowa?
That’s over the paygrade of some to grasp. Too hung up on the man’s marriage and not his knowledge or capability to lead. Reagan wouldn’t be moral enough for this crowd. Thank God the pie in the sky voter back then wasn’t as self righteous as they are now.
I thought he'd gotten his libido issues under control.
Dumbest thing ever said on this site (this year). Are you Paultards ever going to grow up or at least graduate college?
Rick Santorum has one big problem with Christian voters. Most Christians don’t believe in endless war and being the policemen of the world. So when Mr. Perfect Conservative Santorum claims to be such a good Catholic he needs to be asked why he goes against the Catholic Church in promoting endless war instead of peace. Wars should be started when they are absolutely necessary. Mr. Perfect Conservative needs to read the Cathecism of the Catholic Church.
Newt Gingrich believes in promoting peace, and if peace fail, then military might is justified. Newt Gingrich has forgotten more than Mr. Perfect Conservative Santorum will ever know. I love the way he likes to say how he has defeated democrats in a democratic state. He always leaves out the little fact that he lost to a democrat the last time he ran for the Senate in PA, because he supported RINO Arlen Specter over conservative Pat Toomey.
Not “hit on” ;)
No because it’s based on Iowa and Iowa only events.
Insular and saturated for weeks by almost 10 candidates leads them to make silly votes. That is why all types of eventual losers won there.
Outside of that place, it’s going to be rapid and not kind to guys without cash.
And lest not we forget, Ricky honestly and prougly said he came to Wash DC because of his daily admiration and education from Newt Gingrich.
“I see dumb people...
... they’re everywhere...
... they walk around like everyone else...
... they don’t even know that they’re dumb...
Some of them... the Paulnuts
...THEY POST HERE”
Good! I think Gingrich, to his credit, tried to handle the race on ideas alone. Romney, of course, doesn’t have any ideas and the few he has had in the past are probably to the left of Obama, so he doesn’t want that examined and he used his mega-bucks to launch a personal attack campaign against Gingrich. So Gingrich is going to have to respond to it.
I think he will do so effectively, if only because he has experience with this. Gingrich has always been hated by the establishment GOP and was basically dumped by them when he was Speaker because they were embarrassed by his success in getting the Contract with America through. Nothing has changed, and they still hate him.
For the win!
A nasty little man prone to tantrums. How dare we
Don’t get his lectures.
Gingrich will come off as the one person in the GOP who has actually accomplished something within our lifetime.
I oppose Newt in the primary precisely BECAUSE of concerns about "knowledge or capability to lead". Newt embraces liberal garbage like man made global warming because he wants to seen as an intellectual, enlightened conservative and get favorable press coverage. Clinton ran circles around this guy during the brief time Newt was given a leadership job, notwithstanding the history revisionism of his supporters. I remember the late 90s and it was NOT good for our side.
We need a strong contrast between the Marxist in the Whitehouse and our candidate. Romney will be on defense because Zero will mock him for supporting Obamacare. Zero wants to run against Romney because the Conservative base will shun Romney. SHUN on record levels.
A President GIngrich presidency will create jobs.
Gott’a love you single issue guys.
Newt wins and as Newt fine tunes honest critiques against Romney, Romney won't know what hit him. Newt approached the debates with a focus on Zero. But if Romney wants him to focus his articulate sound bytes on Romney, then he asked for it.
Must See TV at next debate because Newt will focus his debate at Romney with honest critiques.
When Santorum falls out, and I would suspect it be after
SC, he’ll get behind his self-professed “mentor”
Newt Gingrich. No way he supports the liberal Romney.
As a matter of fact all of the contenders will end up
supporting Gingrich over Romney, or be the laughing stock of their state when they go back home.
So true....we just have to watch them all fall behind Newt as time moves forward. He'll be just fine and knows how this game is played....so does Santorum...they'll all ride the waves until the sea calms.
Go Newt Go!
Yes. All the other candidates saying they are entitled the Christian vote merely because they self-identify as "Christian" want to pretend they are the only Christian running for President.
>> Most Christians dont believe in endless war and being the policemen of the world. <<
By any chance do you go to ANSWER rallies and hang out with Cindy Sheehan? You seem to have their talking points memorized. Just start calling Rick Santorum a "chickenhawk neo-con" and you're all set.
>> So when Mr. Perfect Conservative Santorum <<
Neither Rick Santorum nor his supporters claim he is a "Perfect Conservative". The only people who use the phrase "Perfect Conservative" are supporters of other candidates who whine "you're a PURIST!! you want PERFECTION!!" when we point out their candidate has a lousy track record, stands little chance of "beating Obama" and is overall a terrible nominee. The fact we would prefer a decent and respectable candidate with a reliable track record doesn't mean we are demanding "perfection" except in the minds of bitter Rick Perry, Newt Gingrich, etc., supporters.
>> claims to be such a good Catholic he needs to be asked why he goes against the Catholic Church in promoting endless war instead of peace. Wars should be started when they are absolutely necessary. <<
Allow me to quote the Pope himself on what the "Catholic Church" says about just war:
"Not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion. While the Church exhorts civil authorities to seek peace, not war, and to exercise discretion and mercy in imposing punishment on criminals, it may still be permissible to take up arms to repel an aggressor or to have recourse to capital punishment. There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war"
>> Mr. Perfect Conservative needs to read the Cathecism of the Catholic Church. <<
What part would you like him to read? The part about grounds for a just war? As I just noted, the Pope himself said there is a wide variety of ways to intrepret whether a war is just and you can be a good Catholic if your intrepetation is different from the Pope's. Do you think the Catholic Church is a pacifist organziation who opposes taking out Islamic extremists? That would be news to the crusaders who decided to engage in "endless war" because the Pope called for it. It seems you are confusing the Cathecism of the Catholic Church with the latest Ron Paul manifesto.
>> Newt Gingrich believes in promoting peace, and if peace fail, then military might is justified. Newt Gingrich has forgotten more than Mr. Perfect Conservative Santorum will ever know. <<
Perhaps Newt Gingrich should read the section of the Cathecism of the Catholic Church that talks about how life begins at conception. Your hero Newt the "good Catholic" got that wrong just a few weeks ago when he said life begins at implantation, directly defying Catholic teachings. Of course, Rick Santorum didn't join the Catholic Church because he was a Georgia Baptist who was banging some Catholic staffer 20 years younger while married to someone else. It seems there's another "Catholic" candidate for President who "found" Catholicism that way.
>> I love the way he likes to say how he has defeated democrats in a democratic state. He always leaves out the little fact that he lost to a democrat the last time <<
I love the way Newt supporters like to say he was "removed" from Congress by a "coup" lead by "RINOs". They always leave out the little fact the actual coup against Newt in 1997 failed because the RINOs were on his side, and that Newt resigned suddenly in 1998 after the GOP lost five seats under his "leadership", leaving the House Republicans in disarray as they scrambled to find a new Speaker before finally settling on Hastert after Bob Livingston wouldn't take it. I guess the facts don't go well with their "Newt was such a terrific conservative leader until RINOs removed him" history revisionism.
>> he ran for the Senate in PA, because he supported RINO Arlen Specter over conservative Pat Toomey. <<
Yet you, like all Newt supporters, apparently have no problem with Newt backing the even more liberal Dede Scozzafava over the conservative Doug Hoffman. Newt did that on his own as a private citizen. Why is it OK when Newt endorses someone to the LEFT of Arlen Specter? Interesting double standard you have.
You have got to be kidding....Ron Paul? Who cares or listens to what he has to say about any candidate....he can't lift a candle to a one of them and is only there to cover Romney's back. Hasn't accomplished a dang thing in congress despite his bellowing what he wants...he flatlined every time with any of his purposals.
Paul's worse than a traitor to this country because he hides his real intentions by using the constitution as his mask....and his supporters buy it hook line and sinker....even after Pauls been clearly exposed they still cannot "see" thru the veil of deception Pauls's created for them to see thru....nor that the Obama administration is fully supportive of Ron PAul...Obama would love nothing else then creaming Paul in the Presidential debates...and he would be successful at doing just that...piece of cake
The Troll (Newt) stepped in it again by claiming to be “Romney Boated.” For my part, I gave more to the honorable Swiftboat Veterans for Truth than all other GOP candidates combined in 2004 and I an insulted, no enraged, that the Troll would coin an insult based on these patriots. He is a liberal asswipe and deserves no consideration.
Doug Hoffman has come right out and stated nobody should hold that against Newt...and even he doesn’t....so your arguement is baseless in that respect. He understood why Newt did that and Newt has addressed his reasoning clearly for doing that. It’s dead wood. Nothing there....Hoffman put it to rest and so should you.
This is a horse race and flushing out those along the way to see how they’re going to run seems to be on the front burner now and in the days ahead.
Newt needs to go after Romney.....as I ‘m afraid Bachman’s going to get behind Romney as suspected from the beginning of her run. She’d be a fool doing so but she seems to be doing foolish things along the way with frequency. So too will Ron Paul as his numbers fade out.. so Newt’s focusing on Romney is the way to go in the next round.
Imagine if it were to come down to Newt...Santorum and Romney!
Well he was Romney Boated....calling it what it is makes perfect sense. It was the same 'play' Swift voters took out Kerry.....not the first time copies are made of what works.
Political races are not a place to be overly sensitive...BTW.
The putrid little Troll specifically referred to being “Romney Boated” as a reference to unethical or unfair tactics. That is what he meant and what he said and I stand by my opinion:
The Troll (Newt) stepped in it again by claiming to be Romney Boated. For my part, I gave more to the honorable Swiftboat Veterans for Truth than all other GOP candidates combined in 2004 and I an insulted, no enraged, that the Troll would coin an insult based on these patriots. He is a liberal asswipe and deserves no consideration.
Now your remark is just plain stupid. Newt was asked if he was “Swift Boated”. He said he was “Romney Boated”. Two completely different things. Apparently your reading comprehension skills are severely diminished if you cannot see the difference. You are the troll.
“That is what he meant and what he said and I stand by my opinion”
First part of your sentence implies factual knowledge, followed by an admission of opinion...Which one is it?
You’ve got to lighten up a little....
Guy goes to a doctor and says, “What’s the matter with me doc?” One moment I think I’m a wigwam and the next moment I think I’m a teepee. The doctor thinks for a moment and says, “You’re two tents”.