Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gingrich: ‘I’m taking Santorum’s advice’
Wash Times ^ | 3-4-12 | Elridge

Posted on 03/04/2012 8:16:24 AM PST by VinL

Newt Gingrich cited Rick Santorum's come-from-nowhere campaign wins last month as justification for plowing ahead with his own flagging presidential campaign.

"I'm taking Rick Santorum's advice," Mr. Gingrich, a former House speaker, said Sunday on CNN. "He stayed in, he was running fourth in every single primary, suddenly he very cleverly went to three states nobody else went to, and he became the media darling and bounced back."

Mr. Gingrich said he is optimistic two days before Super Tuesday, when voters will go to the polls in 10 states, including Georgia, where the former congressman's political career began.

"I'm very confident in the largest state that will vote on Tuesday, Georgia, which has more delegates than any other state, we're going to win a very decisive victory. We're going to do well in Tennessee, Oklahoma and Ohio, and many other states. I'm happy to continue."

Mr. Gingrich brushed aside host Candy Crowley's questions about the controversy surrounding radio personality Rush Limbaugh, who apologized Saturday for using inappropriate language to describe a student who testified in a congressional hearing in support of the Obama health care act.

"The Republican Party has four people running for president, none of whom is Rush Limbaugh...

He said Mr. Limbaugh's apology was appropriate, but Mr. Gingrich continued his criticism of an apology that President Obama issued to calm anti-American riots that erupted after the inadvertant burning of Korans by U.S. forces at an Afghanistan base.

"I don't believe the president saved lives by what he did," Mr. Gingrich said.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: gingrich; newt2012
Everyone knew Feb would be a tough stretch for Newt. Now, he's getting into a window where he can gain some momentum. Stay the course.

Newt will rise again.

1 posted on 03/04/2012 8:16:27 AM PST by VinL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: VinL

The Bulldog 2012


2 posted on 03/04/2012 8:18:05 AM PST by ronnie raygun (B B)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VinL
Everyone knew Feb would be a tough stretch for Newt. Now, he's getting into a window where he can gain some momentum. Stay the course. Newt will rise again.

Let's hope sanity prevails and we pick the best conservative candidate instead of settling for another milquetoast. Too many, normally sane Freepers seem ready to settle despite all the past rhetoric about doing just that.

3 posted on 03/04/2012 8:19:15 AM PST by trebb ("If a man will not work, he should not eat" From 2 Thes 3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VinL
he became the media darling

A 'problem' Gingrich will never have.

If anything, they will skewer him worse than the Romney/Paul/Santorum ads did, should he happen to squeeze out the nomination.


4 posted on 03/04/2012 8:23:26 AM PST by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trebb

I just filled my gas tank and sent the differnce of what I would have saved if it was $ 2.50 per gallon to Newt.

I hope people wake up to what a catastrophe rising gas prices are for our economy. This one issue, Energy, drives the price for everything we buy. If we are serious about gaining energy independence, creating millions of jobs, and keeping our economy from being destroyed by the Obama/Chu 999 Plan of $ 10.00 per gallon gasoline, we’d better elect Newt Gingrich. Otherwise, we may be moving to Venezuala to improve our standard of living.

This issue is so serious that I don’t understand how those not voting for Gingrich are going to rationalize that they helped bring about the destruction of our economy.


5 posted on 03/04/2012 8:37:04 AM PST by conservativejoy ("Where there is no vision, the people perish." Proverbs 29:18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: VinL

I wish he would have spent more time in Michigan and been more competitive there.


6 posted on 03/04/2012 8:37:32 AM PST by Netizen (Path to citizenship = Scamnesty. If you give it away, more will come. Who's pilfering your wallet?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trebb

Well Santorum won 3 states and that is why he stayed in the race. Gingrich needs to win 3 states on Super Tuesday to stay in the race. Let’s see if little Newt can achieve that. Winning Georgia is not enough. 3 state or out Newt. That is what Santorum achieved.


7 posted on 03/04/2012 8:44:26 AM PST by napscoordinator (A moral principled Christian with character is the frontrunner! Congrats Santorum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
"That is what Santorum achieved."

Well, not really. Those were non-binding processes. Santorum got ZERO committed delegates from those three states. In fact Missouri will chose their committed delegates via Caucus (another BAD process) at the end of this month...yeah, after Rick supposedly won them already.

Those caucus events can choose whomever they wish.

8 posted on 03/04/2012 9:42:36 AM PST by Mariner (War Criminal #18)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: VinL

Santorum won the IA caucuses. Had Gingrich not split the conservative vote in Michigan, Santorum would have won, and Romney’s candidacy would have been up in flames. At this point in time Gingrich is sadly playing the role of spoiler. With an unbridgeable gender gap with women (some 20-24 points behind Romney) and with sky-high un-favorability ratings, we really don’t have a recipe for a revival. PPP polling is notoriously unreliable. They were predicting a Romney blowout in MI and it simply did not happen.


9 posted on 03/04/2012 9:55:32 AM PST by Steelfish (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VinL

Santorum won the IA caucuses. Had Gingrich not split the conservative vote in Michigan, Santorum would have won, and Romney’s candidacy would have been up in flames. At this point in time Gingrich is sadly playing the role of spoiler. With an unbridgeable gender gap with women (some 20-24 points behind Romney) and with sky-high un-favorability ratings, we really don’t have a recipe for a revival. PPP polling is notoriously unreliable. They were predicting a Romney blowout in MI and it simply did not happen.


10 posted on 03/04/2012 9:55:45 AM PST by Steelfish (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VinL

Newt has to win more than just Georgia to be able to stay in the race.

I now have doubts if he or Rick can do it. If they eventually have to drop out, then I would have a sit down with the candidate (establishment) and tell them that they had better either get in line with the conservatives or they will see a third party candidate and VP candidate.


11 posted on 03/04/2012 9:56:05 AM PST by crz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Steelfish, my friend, Rick should have bowed out after Fla for the sake of the movement.

Instead, he ran negative ads against Newt in the midwest. When I suggested his tactic was hurting conservatives and he was playing the “spoiler”, Rick’s supporters said it was his right to pursue his strategy to gain the nomination.

Thus, Rick set the rules-—he can’t now be heard to inveigh against Newt for playing by those rules.


12 posted on 03/04/2012 10:03:34 AM PST by VinL (It is better to suffer every wrong, than to consent to wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: VinL

But after FL, Gingrich took a two week hiatus and Santorum romped in to win a crucial trifecta.


13 posted on 03/04/2012 10:06:49 AM PST by Steelfish (ui)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: crz

I agree with you-I made that point previously. Rick and Newt could team up and demand a coalition candidate acceptable to conservatives, at the risk of them bolting the party. Though I doubt they will do so.


14 posted on 03/04/2012 10:07:36 AM PST by VinL (It is better to suffer every wrong, than to consent to wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: VinL

“Gingrich: ‘I’m taking Santorum’s advice’”

Of course he is taking Santorum’s advice. If he took his own advice he’d have to quit.


15 posted on 03/04/2012 10:09:37 AM PST by RFEngineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator; All
You are either willfully ignorant of the facts or you are a naive and gullible sucker if you actually believe your tagline.

Santorum lacks humility, and his gratuitous "family values" spiel alienates A LOT of perfectly good, moral people who don't have families or who are not particularly family-oriented.

What, exactly, ARE "family values"?

Are they the same as Christian values, and if so, why not just say, Christian values? And IF so, how does the word "family" substitute for "Christian" -- does it mean that a person who doesn't have much or any family, is less Christian than the person who centers his/her whole life around his/her family?

Santorum says ludicrous things like "to have a strong national economy, we must have strong familes."

Think about, analyze, that statement: "To have a strong national economy, we must have strong families."

Really? Then why doesn't Ethiopia, or Mexico, or Italy, or any of a number of other nations where families are strong, have a strong national ecnomy?

Clearly, Santorum is being wholly gratuitous trying to connect family values with the economy, and he is being WRONG. But emotional people will only grasp the warm fuzzies of "family values" and miss completely that it's cotton candy fluff, and absurd spin as ONLY a consummate pandering politician can spin it.

Santorum makes a couple of things loud and clear. First, he is convinced that he is morally superior to me. Second, he thinks because I don't center my life around children and grandchildren, I'm a second-class citizens and therefore he doesn't need to address me or my concerns.

Newt Gingrich talks to EVERYONE. The solutions Gingrich proposes are directed to and will benefit EVERYONE, whether they're family-oriented or not. Newt doesn't schmooze with gratutitous nonsense like "family values." Newt knows he's a sinner and that he has no call to present himself as better in that regard than anyone else.

Your guy Santorum is a phony baloney who thinks he's MORALLY superior, and THAT, my FRiend, is unChristian. He is also a big government guy. Muster courage and READ about his record, then do the Christian thing and FACE IT, face the fact that Newt is EVERY BIT as good and moral a Christian as Santorum, but a much better political visionary.

Godspeed Newt Gingrich.

16 posted on 03/04/2012 10:12:51 AM PST by Finny ("The rules are made for people who aren't willing to make up their own." -- C. Yeager)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: VinL

bfl


17 posted on 03/04/2012 10:15:38 AM PST by TEXOKIE (... and HAPPY VALENTINES DAY to all FREEPERS EVERYWHERE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

I know what happened- because I posted at the time. Within days after Fla, Rick ran ads against Newt picturing him with Obama and claiming Newt was no different. At the time, Newt was still up in Gallup- the ads were significant in elevating Newt’s negatives in the states you reference as “crucial”.

Newt, up until the last 2 weeks, had never run a negative ad against Rick.

That’s just fact. I don’t say anything negative about Rick- I’m just saying here, Rick had the opportunity to drop out and coalesce behind the frontrunner- but choose to compete and go negative. Fine, that was his call.

But now, he can’t apply a different standard to Newt.


18 posted on 03/04/2012 10:16:17 AM PST by VinL (It is better to suffer every wrong, than to consent to wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: VinL

I am a realist. The reason Newt has had problems is his past, fair or unfair, is that he is a known commodity. He has been on the same page as Romney at times. Not because he was a Senator or Congresscritter or that he was supporting the agenda of his President, but because he joined in with policies that were left when he had no reason to do so other than that is what he wanted to do.

In this election, on the GOP side, you can be for Romney, and the whole election is about finance policy, or you can be for Santorum, who is a blend of finance and socially conservative policy. In between, gets you Mitt, who has far more private sector experience than Newt.

It really is that easy.

I will say I will vote for the nominee, because there is no person worse than Obama.

I leave it up to the candidates.

Duke it out as long as you are smart enough to know when you are doing more harm than good.

I will vote for the winner.


19 posted on 03/04/2012 10:17:36 AM PST by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dforest

We go over the same ground. Newt masterminded the takeover of Congress from 40 year Dem rule— that’s hardly an insider. Neither Romney or Rick could have done that- nor would they have tried.

I could go point by point wt Rick and Mitt- and by their governance, provide evidence that they are “insiders”, “unprincipled” and/or are “leftish”.

But, I don’t get into those negative arguments- I’m not going to change preconceived views, nor would I try.


20 posted on 03/04/2012 10:35:15 AM PST by VinL (It is better to suffer every wrong, than to consent to wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ronnie raygun
The Bulldog 2012 ...


21 posted on 03/04/2012 10:42:37 AM PST by Servant of the Cross (the Truth will set you free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: VinL

I understand where you are coming from, but you seem to be out to lunch as to why Newt isn’t popular with the majority of voters right now.

1994 is a long time ago, the average voter doesn’t know or care. In the last few years Newt has posed on a couch with Nancy and renounced Reagan.

I will give you thw words I hear regarding Newt

a braggart

authoritarian

opportunist

Hate to say it, but if people didn’t think that, he would be winning now.


22 posted on 03/04/2012 10:51:25 AM PST by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Finny

Agree, Santorum is no fiscal conservative and his progressive income tax plan proves that. Santorum mostly enjoys Huckabee evangelical support to the detriment of fixing the economy with Newt’s plan, the most conservative solution.


23 posted on 03/04/2012 10:59:49 AM PST by Son House (The Economic Boom Heard Around The World => TEA Party 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: dforest

Newt’s plan is the most conservative economic solution.


24 posted on 03/04/2012 11:02:47 AM PST by Son House (The Economic Boom Heard Around The World => TEA Party 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Finny
Santorum makes a couple of things loud and clear. First, he is convinced that he is morally superior to me. Second, he thinks because I don't center my life around children and grandchildren, I'm a second-class citizens and therefore he doesn't need to address me or my concerns.

Bingo.

25 posted on 03/04/2012 11:13:50 AM PST by petercooper (The one difference between Obama & Romney: Obama is only half white.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Finny

First of all, I don’t need to read his record as he was my Senator for 12 years. I think he is incredible and did a super job for Pennsylvania. He voted with the party on some votes and he voted for Unions in Pennsylvania because Pennsylania is a union state and does not have right to work at this time. This was back when union was not an evil word.

As far as your notion that families don’t matter....bull crap. They are the number one importance. The reason that Italy and others are not does well is because they are NOT having children. They are dying on the vine and people like you would love for that to happen to America. You sound like a fiscal person but not much of a social conservative. From the sounds of your post, you clearly are pro-choice.

Family values are the core of the America and you either need to get on board or you will be disappointed on Tuesday. Newt will win ONE STATE on Tuesday and that is it. ONE STATE and he thinks that is all he needs. ONE STATE!!!!! Well I guess if he is that delusional, I can’t stop him and you guys are eating it up. 23 states including Super Tuesday will be done and Newt will have 2 wins out of 23 states.....Not good at all.

Family values are the most important issue we have. The problem is that we as a country have brought in divorce, abortion and other ills into society and that is why we are broke!!!!


26 posted on 03/04/2012 11:22:03 AM PST by napscoordinator (A moral principled Christian with character is the frontrunner! Congrats Santorum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: dforest

I will give you [sic]thw words I hear regarding Newt:a braggart, authoritarian,opportunist
****************
I’ve heard the same about Rick, Mitt and Barrack. I think it comes with the territory when one seeks the presidency. What’s your point?

Secondly, I can’t reply to you when your argument is “he’s on a couch wt pelosi”; “renounced Reagan”; “braggart; opportunist; authoritarian”. Such comments are merely subjective negative characterizations- having nothing to do with his governing record. For myself, I’m not going to “go negative” on the other candidates- I simply remain positive for Newt. —

But that aside, pragmatically, a purported, opportunistic, authoritarian braggart who renounced Reagan and sat on Pelosi’s couch could still be the best man to reverse socialism in 2013- Could he not?

Finally, as for those who “don’t know or care” that he changed the course of the nation in 1994 in a conservative direction; well then, it seems a shame that some people vote with no knowledge or historical perspective.

Certainly, you would agree that someone who actually turned back socialism in 1994; would be a good candidate to do the same in 2013.


27 posted on 03/04/2012 12:34:50 PM PST by VinL (It is better to suffer every wrong, than to consent to wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: VinL

You cannot deny what people outside of FR think. This is but a snippet of what voters out there think.

You can’t bring up 1994 and forget the Newt since 1994.

None of these guys are perfect. I myself don’t dislike Newt. He is smart and a good historian, but I doubt he, or Santorum, are going to be able to win this thing as long as they both stay in it.

The worse part is if one dropped out and Romney ran away with it, which could happen.

They can do one thing though, they can be a thorn in the side of Mitt and the GOP.

May be the only small pleasure we will get.


28 posted on 03/04/2012 1:08:40 PM PST by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: VinL

They could simply scare the livin hell out of the establishment by holding a private meeting somewhere between themselves. The pure speculation would be a site to behold.


29 posted on 03/04/2012 1:22:21 PM PST by crz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Steelfish

Santorum had Michigan locked up. Then he blew the debate by focusing on contraceptives/the intricacies of Senate votes/”taking one for the team”, continued to go off message and put his foot in his mouth, and then failed to get enough “Reagan Democrats” (which were in fact union members organized by Democrat strategists for the purpose of dragging Santorum across the finish line so Obama could cream him in the fall). He has nobody to blame but himself.


30 posted on 03/04/2012 1:35:45 PM PST by trappedincanuckistan (livefreeordietryin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: dforest

You cannot deny what people outside of FR think.
************
My views aren’t formed by what others think-


31 posted on 03/04/2012 2:59:50 PM PST by VinL (It is better to suffer every wrong, than to consent to wrong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Finny

Well said.


32 posted on 03/04/2012 3:03:52 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator

Those are some awfully big assumptions you’re making to win your argument.


33 posted on 03/04/2012 3:08:06 PM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
You confuse symptoms and causes.

Again, please, elaborate: What ARE family values? So far, I have from you: anti-divorce, anti-abortion. Like you, I believe both of those things have hurt America, and I think objection to both of those things fall under the purview of Christian values. But FRiend, if you were able to all of the sudden legislate human nature to make divorce and abortion disappear tomorrow, the price of gas would STILL be close to $5 a gallon.

You are "thinking" with your emotions, and I think you are doing it in no small part because it lets you feel morally superior to others. STOP IT and start using logic and reason. REDUCE GOVERNMENT if you want a more moral society. Electing a Church Lady holier-than-thou moralizing president is the wrong way to go about reducing government.

34 posted on 03/05/2012 9:58:27 AM PST by Finny ("The rules are made for people who aren't willing to make up their own." -- C. Yeager)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
As far as your notion that families don’t matter....bull crap.

FRiend, you are so wrong, so far off base, that it would be funny if it wasn't so disgusting. I have been writing about the destruction of divorce and the destructiveness of feminizing American males for YEARS on FR. Furthermore, I come from a very large, very close family, and I live in a neighborhood with lots and lots of kids, and the kids' presence here is one of the main things that make this neighborhood so attracive. I know EVERY BIT AS WELL AS YOU, how much families matter and there is every possiblity that I know it BETTER than you.

I also know, however, that families are only a PART of the whole picture, and that ONLY arrogant, snotty, mean people flaunt their family in the faces of those not blessed likewise in order to make those people perceive that they're less valuable to society.

You need a good swift kick in the ass, and I can think of a lot of good, upright, family men who would love to give it to you for being so self-righteous.

35 posted on 03/05/2012 10:18:27 AM PST by Finny ("The rules are made for people who aren't willing to make up their own." -- C. Yeager)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Finny

I have been writing about the destruction of divorce and the destructiveness of feminizing American males for YEARS on FR.

Well I don’t know how you think I could know that. The only response I was giving to you was from the post you gave me which just sounded so anti-family that I was actually taken aback from it. I am grateful that you are giving your opinion on various destruction of American males and what goes along with it. I just hadn’t had the opportunity to see any of them. Anyway, good luck tomorrow and may the best candidate win. Take care FRiend.


36 posted on 03/05/2012 10:56:18 AM PST by napscoordinator (A moral principled Christian with character is the frontrunner! Congrats Santorum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
Classy post, and thanks.

Godspeed Newt Gingrich.

37 posted on 03/05/2012 12:16:06 PM PST by Finny ("The rules are made for people who aren't willing to make up their own." -- C. Yeager)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: napscoordinator
Well Santorum won 3 states and that is why he stayed in the race. Gingrich needs to win 3 states on Super Tuesday to stay in the race. Let’s see if little Newt can achieve that. Winning Georgia is not enough. 3 state or out Newt. That is what Santorum achieved.

I'm starting to see why so many have views that differ from you. Using phrases like "little Newt" and such, while ignoring that your guy really has performed pretty bad in the locked in delegates area and his best arguments seem to ape Newt. I'm guessing you bought into all the trash talk about Newt and/or have a single-issue standard for who you'll support, or you wouldn't be so stuck on Rick.

38 posted on 03/05/2012 5:09:42 PM PST by trebb ("If a man will not work, he should not eat" From 2 Thes 3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: trebb

Results are what matters and Santorum will win at least 3 states tomorrow. Gingrich will win 1 for a total of 2 states in 23 states. That is a horrible record.


39 posted on 03/05/2012 6:03:57 PM PST by napscoordinator (A moral principled Christian with character is the frontrunner! Congrats Santorum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: All; VinL
Good Conservative Candidates need to work together, not drop out =>>

GOP Needs Brokered Primary Now! Rick as temp Placekeeper Nominee; Decide Final Nominee @ Convention

40 posted on 03/05/2012 6:15:22 PM PST by Golden Gate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson