Posted under Election 2012 & Newt Gingrich & Republican Party
Man, I should have gone into politics! If a goofy looking joker like Newt Gingrich can use politics to pull chicks then a decent looking guy like me could rack up Wilt Chamberlainesque numbers.
According to R. Emmett Tyrrell, Newt is fond of the ladies and is sometimes able to con one into acceding to his advances. Apparently there are some skeletons in Newton’s closet.
This article goes for the throat. This was an intentional hit job. By that I don’t mean it’s not true, I suspect it is, I just mean it was deliberately intended to inflict damage.
Notice that RET speaks favorably of the three other main candidates including Ron Paul, so I don’t think this was specifically a pro-Romney hit.
Anyway, once the campaign is over maybe Newtie can get together with Herman Cain and they can troll for chicks together.
Kirt Higdon on 28 Jan 2012 at 5:21 am #
Gun to the head? If you told me to vote for Romney, I’d reluctantly do it. If you told me to vote for Newt, I’d dare you to pull the trigger.
roho on 28 Jan 2012 at 6:01 am #
I could care less about the opinion of Bolton and other neocons. But, character does matter. The Dems have enough dirt on Newt to burn him at the stake while laughing.
Observant Reader on 28 Jan 2012 at 8:43 am #
I basically agree with the author’s position (hate Gingrich, respect Romney Santorum and Paul) although I’m a Paul supporter. But this article was really style over substance. I was expecting some specific stories of Newt’s less well-known affairs.
C Bowen on 28 Jan 2012 at 11:04 pm #
Tyrell did deliver some raw meat when Clinton was elected (if granted, all he did was develop George Carpozi Junior’s Bush commissioned scandal file/book and the existing info on Mena that Jerry Brown passed on) and presumably loathes Newt’s failure to deliver on Vince Foster, Mena, and obviously, being compromised on Impeachment.
The throwaway paragraph on Romney’s alleged bonofides is Beltway crap, but I do suspect there is a real threat here.
When the WaPo ditched Sally Denton’s and Roger Morris’s article on Mena at the last second, Tyrell found his own magazine stopping his Mena report (which turned up in RET’sClinton bio, Boy Clinton.) The Am Spec brass did let him publish an article for the Nov 1996 issue detailing Clinton’s cocaine abuse in the ’80s. He will go for the gutter, and conceded that he interviewed Bobbi Ann Williams (claimed to have a love child with Clinton) though he didn’t believe her story.
I should mention that RET borrowed from Roger Morris (Harvard, liberal credentials) on the revelation that Clinton had spied for the CIA while at Oxford, and of course, covered Clinton’s missing time touring Russia, and suggested in the time honored tradition, that it was suspicious that Clinton’s “father” could not have been his father.
This could be fun.
Woden on 30 Jan 2012 at 10:05 am #
If there is a Newt/Cain ticket, will there be enough room on the campaign bus for all their wives, mistresses, and girlfriends? The Mormon at least believes in monogamy.
Bruce on 30 Jan 2012 at 12:13 pm #
Agree with Kirt’s comment.
I’m voting for Ron Paul. I disagree with libertarianism and don’t trust him on immigration, but the temptation to give the establishment the finger is just too great.
Rusty on 31 Jan 2012 at 4:21 pm #
The fix is obviously in on the presidential race and we are totally hosed. The banksters/oligarchs/internationalmoneychangers have already chosen twins to potentially replace their triplet in the WH. Every single voter knows or strongly suspects this, and everyone has been talking about it on every website from here to Vladavostock.
We should rather expend our valuable time and energy stirring up debate over senators, reps, judges, etc. Not as fun, I know, and a dangerous plunge into murkier waters, but a heck of a lot more productive. Assuming anyone is really into the whole productivity thing, of course.
C Bowen on 31 Jan 2012 at 11:29 pm #
Rusty;
While I agree in regards to the obligatory post that goes something like “I will vote for Ron Paul but” insert various reservation, your call to action is ever more debate.
There is an active campaign discussed on this web site to use the Ron Paul campaign to secure spheres of influence or develop networks within the campaign and it’s supporters which will translate to actual local and state politics.
It is dubious to say ‘every voter knows or strongly suspects’–that is a crutch for inaction or just another modern myth to soothe the leftover node of democracy or American republicanism–and I would be the first to say it is rigged–so what is your point? Like the 70% who don’t believe the 9/11 story (or amongst Republicans, the 70% who believe Saddam was behind 9/11) or the 70% who believe something bigger then Oswald acting alone killed Kennedy, or an old favorite the 70% who did not believe the Vince Foster story but still re-elected Clinton–what does that tell us?–none of it matters, it just is–programmed response to political questions.