Skip to comments.Newt E-mails Rush, Stands by House, WSJ & Politico Lie About Him
Posted on 12/21/2011 11:24:21 AM PST by OneVike
Politico claims that Gingrich sides with Obama on payroll tax, but he just emailed Rush and said he stands by the Republicans in the House.
So why do conservatives ever give credibility to anything Politico writes?
politico almost always gets it wrong.
GO GINGRICH AND RUSH ROCKS!
I am listening to Rush!
or Newt is spinning trying to cover it up.
It’s difficult because I don’t trust newt or politico.
I trust Newt more than either politico or WSJ. Newt has a lot more to loose by being wrong than Politico or WSJ, so I think Newt is being truthful. Besides I read both accounts and he never even said what they said he said.
Politico is the means of Bishop Romney’s dirty tricks
against Gov. Palin, Mr. Cain, and now Mr. Gingrich.
They are his “go to flacks” for any dirt he wants thrown.
The Wall Street Journal reports quotes from Gingrich which say similar things, with a different slant. Gingrich e-mailing to say the slant is wrong is not surprising, but let’s see him explain his quotes.
Newtie is under tremendous pressure to hide his true self.
Incumbent presidents have enormous advantages. And I think what Republicans ought to do is whats right for America. They ought to do it calmly and pleasantly and happily,Or are the "good quotes" real, and the "bad quotes" made up?
[the senate bill is] an absurd dereliction of duty.
Obama is so inept as a president, and the Congress is so dysfunctional as an institution, that we are lurching from failure to failure to failure,
a Senate majority leader who is totally disruptive and a president who is basically campaigner-in-chief, who has no interest in solving the problems of the American people.
Its very hard for the legislative branch to outperform the president in communications, he said. He has all the advantages of being one person. He has all the advantages of the White House as a backdrop, and my experience is presidents routinely win.
It is rare that you find a journalist actually manufacturing quotes. They are generally punished for that sort of thing. This isn't some fly-by-night paper.
But I guess we should take the candidate's e-mail word that the story is false, because why? If there is a video of the press conference, it should be easy to post it to prove that these words were not spoken.
Politico is nothing but a gossip site. Page 6 for political junkies.
My money is on them both twisting what he told them to the point of even leaving key words out eo that he looks bad.
What does WSJ & Politico have to gain? What does Newt have to gain?
Again, Newt cannot afford to be seen supporting Obama, but the WSJ and Politico would love to make him seem closer to Obama then their favorite Republican, Romney.
Romney probably thinks that conservatives gets all their news from Peggy Noonan and David Frum.
BTW, a more interesting argument would be that the quotes are accurate, but don’t mean what they sound like.
Is his “Republicans ought to do what’s right for America. They ought to do it calmly and pleasantly and happily” a bad quote? Or is it a quote that actually means they should fight for their 1-year extension but be nice about it?
The problem is that 2nd thing doesn’t make sense. If they are going to FIGHT against Obama and Reid, they can’t do it “calmly and pleasantly and happily,”. That wording only makes sense if Gingrich is telling them to give in.
Mr. Gingrich made it clear he favored a one-year extension of the two-percentage point payroll tax cut, which expires Jan. 1, not the two-month extension that passed the Senate with bipartisan support. He called the Senate bill an absurd dereliction of duty.That quote from here
Obama is so inept as a president, and the Congress is so dysfunctional as an institution, that we are lurching from failure to failure to failure, Mr. Gingrich said.
Hey Charles, regardless of ones stand on Newt, you must admit the timing of our two posts are phenomenally perfect.
It’s about making up headlines. National Review just did the same thing. They don’t report on what Newt actually said, they report their conclusion reached from what he said. Gingrich never said “Throw in the towel” or “Take the Senate Bill” National Review is approaching drive by media status.
Sure, Politico gets stuff wrong. But Gingrich also constantly walks stuff back.
So it’s not like someone goes “wow” here when Gingrich claims he didn’t say what someone else said he did.
My take exactly:
Just because Newt emails Rush to say he didn’t say (or mean) what he said is not enough to explain why the WSJ quoted him saying what he says he didn’t say.
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.