I’m not a Newt supporter, in fact, he is the one candidate that I’ve long said I couldn’t support (due to his marriage infidelities...I think that shows his true principles and will account for the way he “plays” politics as well.) But after 4 years of Obama, I’ll be voting for anyone who’s not Obama.
That being said, the info about Barney Frank in the article...”But Democrats such as the soon-to-retire Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.) have suggested Gingrich as the GOP nominee would benefit the Democratic Party.
‘He would be the best thing to happen to Democrats since Barry Goldwater,’ Frank said last week. Goldwater is credited with reviving Republican conservatism in the ’60s”...makes me think that Newt is more of a threat to the Dems than I believed he would be.
If Frank says we’d love Newt as the candidate, we should interpret that as we don’t want Newt as a candidate...at least that’s the sense I’m feeling. Same with Nancy Pelosi trying to derail him by some “new” allegation. She wants the Republicans to be afraid to nominate him, obviously.
I was starting to think that they (Democrats and news media) DID want Newt to be the nominee because they have been largely silent about his past (ethics investigation, marriages, that stupid Tiffany's thing) - keeping that in their pocket until he becomes the nominee.
With this Pelosi/Frank thing, I guess you could look at it from your point of view - if those two are talking about this now, they DON'T want him as the nominee.
Of course, there's always the possibility that Pelosi just went off the reservation accidentally and revealed something she wasn't supposed to reveal.
My guess is that her "dirt" will just be a rehash of the ethics investigations - but my concern is that the left wing news media will treat it as all "new" or a "reveal" even though it is old. There may be one tiny piece in there that is new, but they will treat the whole thing as a "startling revelation" on orders from Democrat headquarters.