Posted on 03/27/2011 8:56:41 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Newt Gingrich: I’m not a hypocrite - POLITICO Live: Newt Gingrich: I’m not a hypocrite March 27, 2011
Newt Gingrich: I’m not a hypocrite
Pressed on “Fox News Sunday” about his adulterous past, Newt Gingrich said it was not hypocritical for him to impeach Bill Clinton while he cheated on his own wife because he never lied under oath.
“I don’t know what you would have had me do,” he said, getting a little testy, “because…the president of the United States [was] committing perjury. Remember, he’s a lawyer! This was not some accidental thing. And I thought the outcome was about right.”
The all-but-official candidate for the Republican presidential nomination granted that his own extramarital affairs will be an issue in the coming campaign, but he sounded hopeful that voters will, if they don’t forgive or forget, at least look the other way.
“We’ll find out six months or a year from now whether people are forgiving and whether they put in context events that are 10 and 15 years old,” Gingrich said.
The former House speaker from Georgia said it didn’t bother him that he was throwing rocks at Clinton as president while living in his own metaphorical glass house. He said he would have resigned his leadership post if he didn’t think he could go after Clinton for breaking the law.
“It’s not about personal behavior, and it’s not about what he did in the Oval Office,” Gingrich said of his failed 1998 effort to destroy Clinton. “You can condemn that. You can say it’s totally inappropriate. It was about a much deeper and more profound thing: Does the president of the United States have to obey the law?
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
Newt has a past, Obama does not. Nobody knew a damn thing about Obama but voted him in as president. Newt might be all the things people here say but I don’t think he would be a traitor like zero. Anyway I’d rather vote for Palin.
Much as I dislike the Newtster, he’s absolutely correct about Clinton. The basis of the impeachment was PERJURY, not infidelity. And like a trailer park version of Camelot, the spin machine convinced too many idiots it was about the sex.
I don’t want Newt to be POTUS, but I sure do want him in the mix of candidates for the nomination. He is brighter and more articulate, and has a better sense of our history and the way politics works, than most of the field. He will be able to frame the upcoming debate. Primaries and debates serve a variety of purposes, not simply determining the ultimate winner.
Richard Nixon: “I am not a crook.”
Bill Clinton: “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is” is.”
Newt Gingrich: “I am not a hypocrite.”
That is an acceptable position.
Newt is crazy smart and superb at strategy.
Okay, fair point. Interestingly enough, a friend of mine says almost the same thing about Sarah Palin. My friend thinks Palin won’t ultimately run for president (and won’t get the nomination even if she does) but wants to stay in conversation as long as possible so she has the influence and visibility to shape the GOP message in the run-up to the election.
Eventually, though, we need someone who can actually win a general election - and in that it looks to me like we are seriously screwed.
Newt? No, thanks...
Yeah, but those weren't "oath" oaths.
Certainly hope Newt is NOT the pubbies chosen one cause I will NOT support him.
Richard Nixon: “I am not a crook.”
He’s just showing his true colors, a socialist piece of crap!
Regrettably, I have to agree with your conclusion :(
There is just no one out there who will “do it all.” Palin is a fascinating character with all the attributes I’d like to see in a POTUS, but she has been “Borked” to a fare thee well. She could find a cure for cancer and establish peace in the Middle East and her detractors would proclaim loudly that she did too little too late. I haven’t thought since 11/08 that she would actually go all out in ‘12.
And you can count on the GOP having its quadrennial conservative vs. establishment battle, alienating a huge block regardless of who wins the nomination. Whoever emerges won’t appeal to the vast ‘independent’ vote. The only prayers is for such disgust with the incumbent, they’d vote for anyone just to get him out of there.
I wish there was some way I could impart to the GOP in no uncertain terms that NONE OF THE USUAL SUSPECTS NEED APPLY.
You are all failed, and we do not have time to fail again.
Do not waste what little time we have left.
It is none of your turn.
Richard Nixon: I am not a crook.
Bill Clinton: I did not have sex with that woman.
;o).......
Perhaps I didn’t make myself clear. I was responding to Newt’s explanation of his adultery vs. that of Clinton. Yes I’m very aware that Clinton lied under oath. What I meant was if Newt had been under oath and asked if he was committing adultery, would he have lied? I kind of think he might have. I’m not excusing Clinton - just saying that they both committed adultery - Clinton was put into a position to lie under oath about it, Newt wasn’t.
I would love to see him debate Obammy, leaving him gutted like a pig in the slaughter house. All the while Obammy is looking at the teleprompter looking for the answer.
Gingrich would leave him looking like the town guest at a lynching party.
“politician” is right. Sometimes he says one thing, and in the next breath he says the opposite. I am not a Gingrich fan at all, but if it came down to a Gingrich vs Obama vote, I hold my nose and vote for Gingrich.
I can’t believe Gingrich thinks he has the chops to appeal to the socon part of the Republican base. But then, nothing in politics ought to surprise me.
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.