“He didn’t honor his pledge 2 other times, why would anyone think he would honor this one.”
This is an entirely valid point. Unfortunately, the Salon account of the hospital divorce discussion is a pack of lies: even WaPo concedes this point. http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/aspects-of-gingrich-divorce-story-distorted/2011/11/17/gIQA8iY4YN_story.html
What is untrue about the 98 Story. Sounds the same as the link you provided only the link has more details.
This article also backs up the story from 98. Esquire? I don’t read it so don’t know which way it leans.
http://www.esquire.com/features/newt-gingrich-0910-5
The CLAIM was “Gingrich ended his first marriage by serving his wife with divorce papers while she lay in a hospital bed dying of cancer.”
1. She wasn’t dying: she’s still alive today.
2. She didn’t have cancer. She was being hospitalized for removal of a benign tumor.
3. He didn’t demand a divorce in that meeting; they already had been separated for months and were in the process of getting a divorce prior to her being hospitalized.
4. Moreover, his wife asked HIM for the divorce, not vice versa.
5. He concedes getting sucked into an argument about the pending divorce while he was visiting—he even has retrospective regrets about having made the visit—but that wasn’t his intent or the purpose of the visit.
In short, while the gist of the story is true, many of the most unflattering particulars are quite false. http://unionleader.com/article/20111118/NEWS0605/111119892
I’m not defending Newt’s serial infidelity, but just because he’s been a jerk in some regards doesn’t mean that every story about his being a jerk is true.