Skip to comments.Was that it then? Marianne Gingrich interview more damp squib than bombshell
Posted on 01/19/2012 11:59:00 PM PST by Mount Athos
Was that it then? After 24 hours of hype, angst and eager anticipation, ABC News aired its interview with Marianne Gingrich, the former Speaker of the House's second wife. Brian Ross said earlier that he had interviewed her for two hours. About two minutes of that was shown to televison viewers.
There was precious little that was new. The "open marriage" allegation had been playing all day. Not only had it been levelled at Gingrich before but it was clear that the term "open marriage" was Mrs Gingrich's, not his.
Much of the six-minute segment had the air of an attack ad against Gingrich with Brian Ross's portentous voice intoning that Gingrich "regularly expounds on family values the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman"
The "family values" thing is a standard justification for going after conservatives over their private lives while giving liberals a pass. And Ross's phrasing disingenuously conflated personal morality and Gingrich's views on gay marriage.
Marianne Gingrich alleged that she has Multiple Sclerosis when Gingrich told her about his affair with Callista. "And he also was advised by the doctor when I was sitting there that I was not to be under stress," she said. "He knew [she had MS]." But as James Taranto points out her account tonight conflicts with a previous version she has told.
Truth be told, the daughters came across much more sympathetically than the ex-wife.
This bizarre episode might just end up assiting his White House campaign more than it hinders it.
(Excerpt) Read more at harndenblog.dailymail.co.uk ...
‘damp squib’ - medieval slang?
Imagine that. /sarcasm in the extreme.
Interesting how this is turning out. A mighty blow was struck against the MSM tonight in Newt’s debate soliloquy. Let’s hope it catches on. I feel like it has that potential.
damp squib is an explosive you hoped would go off but it didn’t because it was wet. You expected a big loud bomb but got a dud.
In slang means something that failed to meet expectations.
Whenever the Jon Stewart wants to preach about ‘values’ they are hypocrites of the first order.
It will help Newt win SC because they’ll be ticked off at the ridiculous timing of the news. But the media will eventually wear him down, just like they did with Cain, since this story won’t go away so fast.
Newt will have to be very careful and much more disciplined going forth because if he slips and creates an opening, it will be ripped apart. It will be a marathon, not a sprint.
Oh please. You give these hypocrites to much credit. When $4.00 a gallon gas hits far and wide and that gets 'connected' with Pharaoh flipping off Canada's offer to sell us 'oil', values voters are NOT going to be chaffing over a bitter divorce.
a squib has a black powder charge... if it is damp it is a dud
They were able to get him to resign the last time this kind of story broke out.
Thanks, I had absolutely no idea what that expression meant :-)
Hell, it's not THAT old. I knew what it meant. But I did like stuff that went boom.
AND they are regurgitating that same story as if it is 'new'. AND we conservatives learned that we were NOT conservative because of who was in office. The intent was to not just dispose of NEWT, which of course he greatly assisted them in that goal, but to CRUSH conservatives. These perverts of the Jon Stewart are little more than porn addicts that get their yucks off insulting, ridiculing and demoralizing those they identify as 'values' voters. They are sick twisted freaks and are running out of steam.
That was then...this is now. Newt knows just what is at stake. I believe he is the only one that can stand up to the evil MSM at this critical time. They will overplay their hand out of fear and desperation...and Newt is smart enough to make the most of it when they do.
Newt needs our prayers!
Let's not kid ourselves, the MSM and the Rovian establishment fawning over Ritt Momney isn't going to collapse overnight. But IMHO, the viewing public saw a "thing" tonight. They saw an unanswered shot, and it was a bold one. And Newt shut John King up with gusto. And I believe this is a "something" in that in my wildest dreams could be the birth of a meme. By that I mean, Newt kicked the convo off his marital trivia and he turned the "game" via performance. He rose to the occasion. He upped the game. He proved that the media's staged ambush was exactly that, and he showed that it is a crappy deal, it was a cheap shot, it has soiled the debate and turned the political contest into a farce. And it also showed he can get right up in someone's face and grind them. And at some level, I believe the American people have an innate understanding that they need a scrapper at this juncture, and I also believe they believe but may not be conscious of the notion that the MSM is not serving them by acting like 3rd graders on a school playground. Indeed, the MSM is treating the American people like a bunch of kittens and it holds the laser pointer. Now, they might not like Newt as their contestant and that is why I am isolating Newt and his candidacy from (my point; which is) Newt's very effective refutation of the media attack. The GOP is and has been paying too damn much of a continuous price being distracted by these kinds of attacks. I don't know what or even if Newt "won" anything tonight wrt his candidacy, but I think he showed a way that a powerful and insidious weapon can be countered.
I hope I am conveying my drift. This may mean nothing in the grand scheme of things. But I thoroughly enjoyed the John King smackdown and the value I place on that event is that IF we are going to win this election, this constant harping by a wildly biased and generally puerile press MUST be eliminated. This was a fine opening blow.
I just want to see more stability and consistency from Newt.
There is nothing gotcha in these allegations since they’ve been out for a while. Cain was different. He was not prepared to answer the last allegation when his wife claimed she didn’t know anything about the woman who accused him. It shows his team’s inexperience in intense political campaign.
Bravo ASD! You encapsulated my thoughts VERY well!
Gingrich fought back last night, and that’s what excites the Republicans. We are SICK AND TIRED of the namby pamby Boehner-esque Republicans just taking their licks and going home. It’s about damn time we stand up against the likes of the MSM and the globalist idiots to say, “We’re Americans, we stand for something, get the hell out of our way, or we’re going to steamroll your ass!”
If a man’s wife can’t trust him how can I? - Harry Truman
It would be great if politicians were paragons of virtue, but nearly all are not. Some people don’t understand that hypocrisy isn’t always bad. For example, consider a school teacher who happens to be an alcoholic. What would the hypocrite hunters on the left prefer? Would they rather have the teacher teach binge drinking or abstinence?
Oh, but it’s hypocrisy to do something in private that one speaks against in public, right? Well, if those private practices are culturally destructive, like adultery, then I’d rather have an adulterous hypocrite who speaks against adultery and enacts policies encouraging faithfulness. That may not help him or her, but it’s a good thing for society.
True virtue is best. Hypocrites who are publicly virtuous are next best. Immoral leaders who refuse to speak against immorality for fear of being hypocritical are the worst. Think Democrats.
Adults know hypocrisy is not necessarily a bad thing. Should parents who used drugs or had sex in their youth look the other way, for example, if their children are using drugs or having premarital sex? Most sane people would say, “No!”
Marianne came across as classless and stupid, almost in a trailer trashy way. Perhaps the interview was cut short because the idea and hype of it couldn’t match the reality. I, as a woman, came away from it thinking, “if I were Newt, I’d have wanted to divorce her too.” Doesn’t excuse Newt’s bad behavior, because bad behavior it was, but she did not elicit my aympathy.
Newtie is a livewire. Lib media is on notice. Interrogate him at your own peril. Ask relevant questions, not your got'cha bullshit or Newtie just might reach out and discipline you
Well I sure am 'hoping' he does not short circuit, as the raving dogs are sure NOT going to cut him any slack. It is really twisted to read one day there is the expectation of gas prices reaching $4.00 a gallon in the Spring and by Summer $5.00 a gallon in some cities. Then lo and behold as if to poke US in the eye their dear leader flips off our neighbor to the North with an offer to sell US 'oil'. AND that immoral gutter tramp Ross wants to use a sick woman to regurgitate old news with the stated purpose of ending the ex's political career.... Job killers from bottom up to their stinking top.
As far as I can tell, that is a Ross Perot quote. Multiple books quote him saying things like that during the 1992 campaign and that is supposedly the standard he applied to executives at EDS and said he would apply in his administration. I'm not sure if he was also referring to Clinton. A lot of people think this quote originated with Truman, but it's hard to figure out when Truman would have said this.
Didn’t she have an affair with him while he was married to his first wife?
Marianne Gingrich got pwned by ABC news into thinking she is a major player in history.
If she is again publicly humiliated, ABC bears the responsibility for the consequences.
Marianne was also having an affair with a married man when Newt met her.
No one here is a saint.
if I were Newt, Id have wanted to divorce her too.
No kidding. She justified his reasons in my mind. Can you imagine what she must have been like to live with if she can hold on to such anger after all this time. She came across as vindictive, punitive and someone that should be on the Jerry Springer show.
I think Newt knows that Obama is out to DESTROY this country and he’s stepping up to the plate to SAVE America. Clinton wasn;t out to DESTROY America, just to get the girls. It’s a LOT more SERIOUS now, and I think Newt understands that.
Agree with both. Let me revise and extend:
The Republican candidates, reflecting the Republican voters and their elected officials, are trying to play by the old rules, the rules that existed from 1788-1856 and again from 1880-1988. They act as if, probably because they believe it, that they are in a fair contest where the main action is WITHIN the political system, and the outcome determined by persuasion of voters BY THE CAMPAIGNS/CANDIDATES, with the activity OUTSIDE the system as a distraction or sideshow.
They also, for the most part, believe that “after it’s over out there, we’re all on the same team”.
Unfortunately for them, their beliefs about this are false. The Democrats have moved from opposition WITHIN a system to SUBVERSION, even to revolution, OUTSIDE the system.
In 2012, being able to answer John King, Jon Stewart, and even Lady GaGa will be of equal or greater importance to being able to answer “Barack Obama”, who, after all, is simply reading a script that doesn’t even scan properly.
What we saw last night was the single candidate who (perhaps) can extend his field of fire to engage the revolution on its own terms.
A man who has such self loathing
as John Liebowitz ( aka Stewart) who hides
His Jewish heritage and pals around with
Huge anti Semites like Soros and his puppets
In the WH reflects how sick and twisted he is .
Now I'm supposed to be shocked, offended, & disgusted by a candidate who has been through two divorces ???? Only against a Republican would ABC try to make that case. Complete BS from ABC !
You're not serious, right?
It was Perot’s saying.
Never heard anything like that during HST’s presidency.
This administration has accomplished everything and much more that the Clintons attempted. Even during the Clintons the 'establishment' Republicans were NO fans of the Republican House. Remember the hoax of the Clinton impeachment proceedings... First thing that comes to my mind was old Spector injecting 'Scottish law'? That day a person whom I had admired and thought he was upstanding became a complete and total joke. The majority of people polled day in and day out was nearly 66% percent approval fed by a continuous stream of media junk. AND that DEMOCRAT preacher Billy Graham passing over the vile mentally deranged president.
This administration has NOT accomplished anything different than what was plotted/planned and attempted under the Clintons.... we can know this by who from the Clintons administration have nearly broken their necks lining up to fill all existing vacancies plus the only 'real' job creation there has been since the last presidential election. Hillary Clinton who was co-president has NOT been itching, whining, or undermining any of this administration's accomplishments in downgrading US to a banana Republic.
Now of course this is my opinion from observations as these years have come and gone. My opinion of Newt was that of a passionate 'history' professor, who got caught up in the making of history. I think because of all the constant 'ridicule' spewed at him and about him, he 'needed' to be liked. AND the only way to get that out of these raving lunatics is to compromise. I do not think he has an 'evil' bone in his body, but because he is human he sometimes forgets to keep focus on the BIG picture.
Hopefully, he has learned that female liberals have the same scorpion sting as liberal males. But more than anything I hope his present wife is comfortable in her own skin and is NOT a Hillary type personality. I mean really I do not need any more ragging out of Miss Meggy McCain about morals.
I am sorry this is so long, you would not believe how much more I did not write that charged through my brain when I think about all this muck that got dredged up given the literal condition this nation has been deliberately placed in by liars and cheats and thieves.
I use the phrase Jon Stewart media, because 99.9% of the media appear to be competing to replace Jon Stewart. In liberalville the ends justify the means and Larry Sinclair is NOT relevant to their mission.
Actually I know little about Jon Stewart's mental status. Politically I know he is a liberal. I do not watch him, I learned about him from my children while they were in college and they talked about his 'show'. (Early 2000 time frame.) I saw one segment of his show posted here on FR a couple or so years back. It was from that segment that stuck me how much nearly every reporter on every news show cable or otherwise seemed to emulate him in their reporting as if they were competing to replace him. Those Sunday morning secular 'NEWS' shows in particular come to mind. Kinda like those that lined up to replace Johnny Carson. News reporters consider themselves as much celebrities as any 'star' that works in television or on the big screen or on any stage around this world.
Their liberal mindset is against first and foremost what has been labeled 'values' voters. Ridiculing them, and shocking them is their aphrodisiac.
Artfully stated, Jim!
The Republicans are trying to be “gentlemen” about the whole thing. The Democrats arguably never were.
Meanwhile we have avowed and openly-stated Communists in office in DC, and we’re sitting here blathering about Newt’s personal affairs. The man would be a superb president and would probably be the first heavyset president in office since FDR. The only reason I mention his weight is that FDR was responsible for changing the entire landscape of US politics for decades. Let’s hope Newt can do the same thing! While he doesn’t have to worry about putting forth aires about his health, he can concern himself more with the business of our great nation.
It is what the movie industry calls those little packs that go 'pop' in an actor's clothing to make it look like they've been shot.
She came across as the angry and bitter drunk that she is. ABC is a total tool for trying to use her to get to Newt. ABC, Anything But Conservative.
“I just want to see more stability and consistency from Newt.”
I hear ya. Me too. But at the same time, let’s consider *from strictly the tactical viewpoint* that Repubs have this “reaction time” thingy and that’s kind of aligned with my thinking on the “rise to the occasion/upping the game” notion. I suspect you would agree; but regardless, it’s inarguable that libs and Dems have this tired, repetitive, playground-level bag of insults they happily hurl at the slightest opportunity. For example, how many times has the dirtbomb term “racist” been thrown? And wow, what a pedigree the term has, the libs own it, and it automatically applies only to Republicans. Doesn’t it? And why is that? Because dammit, most of the time it works! We know that it is getting tired, but nobody thinks we have seen the last of it. Or “the rich”. How brain twisting is it that you know and I know that “the rich” are by a country mile far more liberal than conservative or even Republican. But someone says “racist” and the world knows they are talking about Republicans and someone says “the rich” and the world knows they are talking about Republicans!! Who quitclaimed title to these terms off to a bunch of FSA drones? When and how did that transaction take place?
Repubs have this thing where they do not want to react with too much peceived “violence” (far too strong a word but I will keep it) to stupid, puerile lib attacks. We don’t want to seem like we are descending to their level nor purely playing defense.
So this is what I am applauding here, the potential defeat of the *tactic*. Does it elect Newt or [insert your non-0bama candidate’s name here]? I can’t say, and to be sure, “elevating the level of political discourse” may be a fine goal but it doesn’t stop us from careening over the socialist cliff, but it’s a promising first step.