Posted on 10/30/2011 3:32:23 AM PDT by markomalley
Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich said Catholics should pray about the decision of whom to support for public office and then vote according to their consciences.
Gingrich, a convert who entered the Catholic Church in 2009, is running for the Republican presidential nomination.
Gingrich told CNA on Oct. 24 that he believes the single biggest threat to America today is “the attack against the Judeo-Christian tradition and the effort to drive God out of public life and eliminate the understanding that our rights come from our Creator.”
The former speaker explained that he was motivated to run for president by the current political situation in America.
“The United States faces the most serious election since 1860,” he said.
“Our challenges are so great and the consequence of choosing American exceptionalism or class warfare and bureaucratic socialism is so large that as a citizen I felt compelled to run.”
Gingrich explained that his faith would influence his political decisions as president.
“Any leader should seek God's guidance,” he said. “The teachings of the Church inform my thinking about solving earthly problems.”
Gingrich said that he would “listen” to the concerns of those who feel threatened by his views and values.
“In many cases better communications and clarification will eliminate their worries,” he said.
“In some cases they are right to feel threatened because we have incompatible values and fundamentally different visions of the future.”
As speaker of the House, Gingrich had a strongly pro-life voting record.
In his race for GOP presidential candidate, he has signed the Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life Presidential Leadership Pledge.
The pledge asks candidates to commit to nominating federal judges who are dedicated to “applying the original meaning of the Constitution;” selecting “only pro-life appointees for relevant Cabinet and Executive Branch positions;” supporting legislation to “permanently end all taxpayer funding of abortion;” and working toward a law “to protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion.”
Gingrich has also expressed support for efforts to defend marriage.
“I helped author the Defense of Marriage Act which the Obama administration should be protecting in court,” he said in a Republican primary debate in Manchester, N.H. on June 13, 2011.
“I think if that fails, you have no choice except a constitutional amendment.”
Gingrich told CNA that Catholic voters who are trying to pick a candidate to support in the upcoming election should pray about their decision and “take seriously the responsibility of citizenship.”
“Pray for America and for our leaders,” he said. “Then vote as your conscience instructs you.”
“If possible become an activist helping America regain its sense of purpose and direction.”
I've read variously that wife number #1 was deceased when he married wife number #3, and also that wife number #1 is very much alive. (This would seem to be an easy thing to verify... )
It is clear that Newt wasn't baptized when he married wife #1 (meaning that the Church can dissolve the marriage if she needs to), and also that the relationship was rather irregular from the start (she was a high-school geometry teacher and he was her 16-year-old student ... okay ... we call this "abuse" now, and the teacher generally has a mugshot posted on FR somewhere). So if it's true that she's alive, there were some substantial grounds for an annulment.
I have never heard that. I must be living under a rock.
I will not vote for Romney (not due to his religion but because he's a RINO)
Perry would be massacred by Obambi in a debate
But in a debate Cain would massacre Obambi -- and one shudders to think what Gingrich would do to him
So it's Cain or Gingrich -- Cain doesn't have baggage as he wasn't in politics before -- something that can be a plus AND a minus
Gingrich has baggage, but he's still very good and KNOWs what needs to be done to get us out of this mess
Between the two of them I haven't completely decided (yes Gingrich is Catholic, but Cain represents Catholic values as well)
Has he repented? Doesn’t that come before forgiveness
You must be very easy to convince
This is a little confusing. As conservatives, don't we state that people have the right to spend their money how they see fit? I don't get what these two examples you've mentioned repeatedly in the thread have to do with belief in fiscal conservatism when it comes to government.
He did the same thing to TWO wives.
First one with cancer, the second he left within days of her getting a diagnosis of MS.
Forgive, yes. But should we not learn something about him from this?
Very well said, Johnnie.
His backing of Dede was an abomination AND very poor judgement.
The link you posted is just a gratuitous commentary that regurgitates the petty, supposedly "salient" personal points against Newt from the article in the Esquire magazine which had a self-serving interview with Marianne Ginther (Newt's second wife, who is correctly described as "someone with a bone to pick"), without even slightest attempt to hide the bias or undertake even basic fact-checking.
What only a few minutes of light research would show - but the articles don't mention - is that Marianne and Newt had been separated since June 1987, and have lived their separate lives apart (he lived in Washington D.C., she lived in Jonesboro, Georgia). IOW, their marriage was effectively over in 1987, many years before Newt even met Callista Bisek, so his "affair" with Callista couldn't possibly be the cause of the death of their marriage and the long divorce process before it became finalized (Marianne did keep his last name, Gingrich, even after the divorce). Yet through all these years Newt has supported his "sick wife" and put most of his earnings from the book sales and royalties into the bank accounts made in Marianne's name, which didn't serve him well during their eventual divorce; essentially, Newt and Callista had to start their marriage from scratch, financially. They have done very well financially for themselves since then, which, it appears, made ex-wife even more bitter and disgruntled, as you would have seen if you had read original Esquire article.
From "Newt Gingrich: The Indispensable Republican." - Esquire, by John H. Richardson, 2010 August 10
"Back in the 1990s, she [Marianne] told a reporter she could end her husband's career with a single interview."
In 1999, under relentless attacks from Democrats in Congress and liberals in the media, joined by his competitors, critics and detractors from the establishment wing of Republican party and some disenchanted conservative "radicals" (who assumed they had all the power after winning Congress, on the strength of Gingrich's Contract With America) Gingrich did not care to hold onto the personal power of leadership at any cost (unlike Nancy Pelosi, for example). He didn't consider himself "indispensable" in Congress (though 8 years of Speaker Dennis Hastert's leadership, even with the Republican President Bush produced less positive change than Gingrich accomplished in 4 years as Speaker). He did what adults do, what he thought was best for the party and party unity; he resigned from Congress, and finally had time to put his personal life in order - fast-tracked and finalized the divorce from Marianne, married Callista and moved with her to Virginia.
Newt has steadfastly refused to defend himself in his personal life, despite numerous opportunities to do so. Partly because he is a decent man and doesn't want to engage in [usually required] bitter exchanges of mutual accusations and trashing of his ex-wives, and partly because he may feel some responsibility for failed marriages (whether through his fault or not; it takes at least two people to maintain or wreck a marriage). He has apologized for his failed marriages, atoned and moved on with his personal life. He also became Catholic because it was his wife's life-long religion and it would be in the best interests of family harmony.
For more details, see:
Jackie Gingrich Cushman : Setting the Record Straight (about my dad's first marriage) - FR post #55, 2011 May 15
"Cain/Gingrich 2012"? - FR post #64, 2011 October 06
Whether we like Newt personally (smart, strong personalities are seldom liked by public, especially conservatives under attacks by rabid liberal media with "bones to pick") or politically, or as a preferred candidate, at least let's have the decency to stop perpetuating the misleading liberal "facts" and falsehoods about the man's personal life. He deserves better, and we can do and be better.
He has done more for conservatives and conservative movement, in or out of elective office, as a Speaker and since his voluntary "retirement," than anyone since Ronald Reagan:
Gingrich's Secret Weapon: Newt Inc. - FR, post #56, 2011 May 15 (excerpt)
Gingrich's Secret Weapon: Newt Inc. - WSJ, by Neil King Jr. and Patrick O'Connor, 2011 May 09
You ask him (Newt) if he feels vindicated by the Tea Parties, if he thinks that his third act has come around.No, he says. "I see myself as a citizen leader trying to understand three things:
• What the country has to do to be successful.
• How you would communicate that to the American people so they would let you do it.
• And then how you'd actually implement it if they gave you permission to do it."
You ask him (Newt) if he feels vindicated by the Tea Parties, if he thinks that his third act has come around.No, he says. "I see myself as a citizen leader trying to understand three things:
• What the country has to do to be successful.
• How you would communicate that to the American people so they would let you do it.
• And then how you'd actually implement it if they gave you permission to do it."
You are making wrong assumptions and base them on the wrong "facts", and that's not a good conservative practice.
1. See my post #69 about morals and faith, and you just might change your tone, if not your mind.
2. You are assuming that the Gingrich family ran a $500K bill buying jewelry, when, in fact, they only had a credit line open at Tiffany's which has been untapped and since closed - that's an inexpensive way to have a line of credit for emergencies or unexpected purchases. Many people avail themselves of such credit lines, they are not unusual.
3. You are assuming / implying that Newt and Callista are not living within their means, yet you have no idea what their means are; chances are that $500K line of credit means something different to them than it does to you. Has anybody even implied that they have no means to pay the $500K bill, if they decided to spend their own money in any way on themselves?
There is also another reason why they felt they might need a backup source of credit funding in 2005, and it has nothing to do with buying jewelry.
See "Cain/Gingrich 2012"? - FR post #64, 2011 October 06
Of course, they may not be able to afford millions of dollars to loan to Newt's campaign (something that John Kerry had no problem borrowing from his billionaire chocolate heiress wife, or that John McCain had no problem borrowing from his multimillionaire beer distributor heiress wife) but whatever gave you an idea that they are behind on any of their payments or spend more than they can afford to pay, aka living beyond their means?
or taking a Med Cruise while delaying your campaign ...
If you are his strategist, you may have an issue with that decision and quit, as many did by moving to "greener" pastures of well-funded expected Perry campaign or to other "sexier" campaigns... But at the time there were many people deciding to jump into the field or jumping out of the field of candidates, and it was probably a perfect time to take a break and relax before what was going to be months of grueling campaign schedule - while the media was concerned and busy with other "are you in or out" would-be candidates. He is doing better now than most of better-funded campaigns where the outside contractors he has hired, landed.
That the people, who he hired and left to tend to his campaign and fundraise in his absence, decided to quit instead and go for the money for themselves, speaks a lot more about them than about Newt's decision to treat his wife to a short vacation before a long hard campaign.
Despite opinions to the contrary, one thing that Gingrich doesn’t have to worry about is media “disclosures” of “skeletons in the closet” that might devastate less vetted candidates.
His public service life spans several decades and has been examined under electronic microscope by his enemies on both side of the isle. And his private life is well known (notwithstanding his refusal to defend himself in public, and despite constant stream of lies, falsehoods and insinuations) and has been very open and, well, “public” due to his active engagement in politics and support of conservative causes.
So, as far as “skeletons in the closet” that might derail a candidacy of less-vetted candidate, his supposed weakness is actually his strength. If this is all they can muster in Newt’s personal life to try and smear him, this would go as far as the lead balloon. While they would talk about his supposed “infidelities” he will talk about issues and conservative solutions to the many problems that concern people the most today.
Link upthread (to a column by his daughter) indicates there was no cancer and that wife one asked for the divorce.
But, I am just looking for Not-Romney who can defeat Obama and use the power of the Presidency most effectively. I am not convinced that the current seeming FR favorite, Cain, is that man. He seems a step slow to me.
Newt himself does not deny his extra marital activity, nor does second wife or third.
The point is only exacerbated by the existing illnesses, it is not the entire point. The point is his ability to drop any allegiance as a means to an end He is not a conservative, he merely knows how to talk like one.
He actually has made a damn good living by literally rewriting history.
He is yet another professorial narcissist
Thank you for your rather strained treatise on financing ala credit lines. Somehow, I never thought of Tiffany’s as a bank. Frankly, this is the least of my concerns over Newt. He has a problem with perception and the fact that conduct with respect to the morality he preaches go hand-in-hand. As you say, it’s great that he treated “Callista” to a vacation before the arduous campaign. My experience with him as a Congressman/Constituent tells me it would have been better had he displayed that caring in his prior marriage.
Regardless, my biggest beef with him is his despicable performance at the height of the Lewinsky Scandal. I’ve been over this before and I’ll not go over it again except to say he promised certain things and he did not deliver. It has finished him as a candidate for me.
Any retailer or the company that can issue a credit card or can extend a line of credit (LOC) is, in effect, a "bank" - think Sears, Macy's etc., though without a bank charter - banking / financing services are outsourced. Tiffany's and other high-end retailers often issue higher limit "affinity" credit cards or LOCs to credit-worthy customers - it's a profitable, low-risk side business for them.
My experience with him as a Congressman/Constituent tells me it would have been better had he displayed that caring in his prior marriage.
I thought that my post #69 and the links within have shown that he more than cared for his chain-smoking self-described "sick," legally separated and estranged wife, including financially, despite the strain it caused him personally. As to how he would publicly display this caring, I don't think that ostentatious public displays of affection towards their wives, for example, by Bill Clinton, John Edwards, Al Gore et al constituted "caring" in the true meaning of the word. That's perception vs reality.
As you say, it's great that he treated “Callista” to a vacation before the arduous campaign.
I thought at the time that it was a display of caring towards his wife, though I doubt very much that it was Newt's intention to make it public or that he was happy about it becoming public. Yet the commentary, here on FR and elsewhere in political blogosphere and punditry, liberal or conservative, was universally of derision and scorn. Again, perception vs reality.
He has a problem with perception and the fact that conduct with respect to the morality he preaches go hand-in-hand.
As is often said, in politics "perception is reality". We know that people on both ideological fronts worked long and hard to create perception of Newt that, we now find, is far removed from reality.
I can only introduce some facts and try to inject a dose of reality. I don't expect to be able to change some people's perception of reality - perception is in the eye of the beholder.
"Don't underestimate your power to change yourself; don't overestimate your power to change others" - Wayne Dyer
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.