Posted on 11/05/2011 10:07:20 AM PDT by bullypulpit
Back in the 1990s, [Marianne Gingrich] told a reporter she could end her husband's career with a single interview. She held her tongue all through the affair and the divorce and even through the annulment Gingrich requested from the Catholic Church two years later, trying to erase their shared past. Now she sits quietly for a moment, ignoring her eggs, trying to decide how far she wants to go.
(Excerpt) Read more at esquire.com ...
I was surprised to learn they had a fairly long marriage though. 18 years.
“...Palin loon squad, who I fear have now migrated to the Cain loon squad.”
You lost me right there.
In the interest of good sportsmanship, this past Palin supporter and present Newt/Cain supporter wishes you well with your candidates, Romney, Perry and Obama.
Signed,
Loon...
This article is intended to be a HIT Piece, taken from that angle, it is only worth, well not much.
If you cannot detect a left-wing hit job, then I suggest you sharpen your cognitive skills. There’s a ample supply of adjectives and conclusions in the article, and very few facts, which later are then distorted in an attempt to substantiate the author’s preordained viewpoint. And then the author supplements the distortions by making stuff up out of whole cloth.
Those of us who were around at the time know the Congressional history, including the false “ethics” attacks on Gingrich, including the circumstances under which Gingrich stepped down from office. And I infer that if author was happy to be inaccurate about the checkable stuff, he cannot be trusted about matters that I cannot verify 1st hand (e.g., whether he accurately captured Gingrich’s ex-wife’s remarks.)
It’s also relevant that Esquire is not an honest publication; it’s a member in good standing of the MSM/Democrat/Left-wing establishment, proving its bona fides by publishing this instance of written felacio on Obama:
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/07/13/esquires-psalm-to-obama/
Esquire is not in the business of reporting the truth.
Gingrich did not present his wife with divorce papers when she was in the hospital. She was the one who asked for the divorce. Their daughter has explained this many, many times. I do question Newt’s judgement in marrying a smoker.
The spin on the ‘serving divorce papers to his wife in the hospital, who was dying of cancer’ story was a lie, and it bears repeating the actual facts.
- She wasn’t dying - and is alive today.
- She was having a benign tumor removed.
- She initiated the divorce.
- The divorce was decided and talked about by the family months before she entered the hospital.
It’s between Cain and Gingrich for me....I long to see a debate between Gingrich and Obama...can you imagine, a Republican that can actually debate?
It is a weak field of candidates, but every last one of them is better than McCain, and do I even have to mention how they compare to Obama?
You're the one running around FR acting like an authority on politics, when in reality you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground. Its YOU reactionaries who don't have a clue. Your candidate talks out both sides of his mouth and blames everyone but himself for his dumb campaign rhetoric. Unlock you lips from Cain's butt and you might learn something.
And its “Reagan”, not Regan, dummy!
If your spouse was "dying of cancer" there wouldn't be much point in having her sign divorce papers.
LOL, she probably asked him for a divorce because he was already cheating on her with wife #2. Then he cheated on wife #2 with wife #3.
bullypulpit is a Rick Perry supporter...they’re pretty vile at times, huh?
Hey bullypulpit, how’s Mr. 6% doing, anyways?
You should head over to Redstate, where they’ve banned anybody who doesn’t walk the Perry line. You’ll be more at home there.
I love it...everytime someone personally attacks another poster, I’ve been looking up their past posts to see who they support. They pretty consistently support one guy. Want to take a guess who “Reagan Man” supports, MNJohnnie? Here’s a hint: he’s under 10%...LOL
LOL... Thanks for confirming what I suspected.
I didn’t read the entire article. I have to do something important, like take a crap.
A quote from the leadin: As 2012 approaches, he has raised as much money as all of his potential rivals combined and sits atop the polls for the Republican presidential nomination
Two lies by the author right away.
Yes, Esquire, that learned bastion of moderate political acumen. Not!
When I run across hit pieces like this I Google around to find other articles by the same author. John H. Richardson is a left-wing ideologue. For a little "balance" check out his Esky piece on The One's first-year "accomplishments:"
The real problem is, no conservative should ever be fully satisfied with this bunch of GOP wannabees. Half-baked has-beens, asleep at the wheel types and neophytes claiming superiority. This hysteria for defending Cain as a walk-on-water savior shows you Cainiacs lack any real substance. Let go of the emotional euphoria and try thinking for a change.
What more productive?
Trying to determine - and then supporting - the best of an imperfect crop of Republicans, all of which would be clearly superior to Obama,
OR
your pointless, incessant bitching.
We shook Newt’s hand at the Duluth, GA forum the other night. He’s not the warmest guy in the world. But I’m not interested in playing tennis or hitting happy hour with the guy. What I am interested in is dismantling as much of the overgrown bureacracy as possible and he wants to do that. Apparently the guy hates shaking hands and kissing babies. So what? Who cares? If he gets rid of the police state and restores the constitutional republic I’ll be eternally grateful and happy to overlook his personality flaws.
Funny. That's EXACTLY what I've been telling them Caniacs! LOL
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.