Please. Gingrich is the frontrunner and the frontrunner always gets the most negative attention.
Instead of complaining that these stories are out there — which should be of no surprise to anyone (in fact, there will be many more coming) — why not spend energy defending Newt for repeatedly saying what Harry Reid said about President Bush — that President Reagan, his administration and his foreign policy was a complete failure.
There's a lot of truth to that statement, but it's also obvious if you've been paying any attention to the Drudge Report that Matt Drudge is intensely anti-Newt. He has been flooding his page with anti-Newt stories non-stop. There have been several other candidates who been out in the front at various times and none of them have received this kind of over-the-top hostile propagandizing from Drudge.
Oh? And Mr "Inevitable" Romney hadn't been the frontrunner for months and months? Yes there were surges by other candidates but Romney was always at or near the top. So where were the avalanche of hit pieces aimed at him? Let's face it, the only frontrunners heavily attacked on a consistent basis are those perceived as spearheading the conservative effort, never those viewed as leading the moderate movement.
Palin. Bachmann. Cain. Gingrich. Whoever is seen as an up-and-coming conservative threat to the establishment is always subjected to a "shock and awe" bombardment. Is there really any comparison between the coverage the ones mentioned above have received and Romney?