Face it, Mitt Romney comes across as a nice, honest, good-looking, down-to-earth guy. The kind of guy you might appreciate as a neighbor or enjoy a round of golf with. Surely, he would not lob falsehoods at his political opponent, but looks can be deceiving and in the case of Romney they are. This editorial from the Wall Street Journal informs that the Romney campaign continues to keep alive the bogus ethics charges against Newt Gingrich, despite being well aware that they are not true. The Morning Spew previously posted a CNN video about those false ethics charges here.
The ethics charges and Gingrich’s resignation, the editorial goes on to say, were all part of a Democrat vendetta designed to destroy the GOP. In an effort to minimize damage to his own party, Gingrich paid a fine and resigned.
Isn’t it amazing to learn that Romney, who claims to carry the GOP conservative banner, is the one to continue the attack? Isn’t is astounding that the old guard RINOs, who experienced first hand the damage inflicted by Democrats as they played their dirty tricks, have come out in support of Romney? The Romney who continues to damage the GOP for political gain. It’s a dirty play right out of the Democrat attack handbook, if ever there was one.
Let’s not replace the Chicago Machine with the Romney Machine.
From The Wall Street Journal
Professor Gingrich’s Ethics
The facts that Romney omits in his 1990s history lesson.
Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are having a spirited debate about whose record is worse, and the pity is that usually they both make good points. One notable exception is Mr. Romney’s misleading attack on the former speaker’s House ethics case in the 1990s.
Mr. Romney often invokes the episode, which turned on the financing for a history course Mr. Gingrich taught at Kennesaw State College and Reinhardt College, and then implies that his eventual House reprimand and $300,000 fine led him to “resign in disgrace.” This week Mr. Romney has been calling on Mr. Gingrich to release “all of the records” from the investigation. This is strange, since the 1997 document “In the Matter of Representative Newt Gingrich” is online—all 1,280 pages of it, including exhibits.
Even casual readers will learn a lot about Mr. Gingrich’s political method, but what they won’t find is evidence of impropriety because the accusations were a partisan vendetta. Democrats saw Mr. Gingrich’s low approval ratings and wanted to force the GOP to make an embarrassing floor defense. The pettifogging was also meant to counterbalance the Clinton White House’s own ethical woes.
On the merits, the claim was that Mr. Gingrich diverted funds from a tax-exempt 501(c)3 organization for political activity. The Progress and Freedom Foundation sponsored his seminar “Renewing American Civilization,” and Democrats charged its real purpose was advancing Professor Gingrich’s career.
In 1997, the speaker basically copped a plea and accepted the House rebuke to avoid further political damage. Yet a formal IRS investigation in 1999 exonerated Mr. Gingrich and found that the course was intended to educate students about American government and society.
The quality of the education they received in l’affaire Gingrich is another matter. The curriculum and lectures detailed in the ethics report are laden with Mr. Gingrich’s pop theories on the five pillars of this, the 14 ideas for that, “the Triangle of American Success.” The conservative scholar James Q. Wilson called it “bland, vague, hortatory and lacking in substance.” But Mr. Gingrich wasn’t running for academic tenure.
Read the rest at the Wall Street Journal
The interview with Mrs. Gingrich was broadcast on a second Chung show, airing during the same period, called “Eye To Eye With Connie Chung.” In the interview, Chung asks the elderly Mrs. Gingrich, who is hilariously dragging on a cigarette, what her son Newt thought of Hillary Clinton. What happened next (you gotta watch the video), set off a firestorm of criticism and illustrates the ongoing media bias against conservatives. Even back then, there was a “gotcha” mentality, that seemed to only be applied to conservatives.
via The Right Scoop:
CNN reported back in 1999 that Newt’s college course that the Democrats tried to make hay out of in saying it was a major ethics violation was vindicated and proved legitimate by the IRS:
As a service to our readers, the Spew Crew will keep a running tally of journalists who have been effectively “newtered” by Newt Gingrich. If we miss any, please put them in the comments and we will add them!
UPDATE: Added a few more! Thanks, Spew readers! And welcome to our new readers! Stick around, why don’t you?
UPDATE #2 : Okay, dear readers, you have been heard! I have added links to the various newtering videos as so many of you have suggested. Please keep adding any new “newterings” that you see to the comments and we’ll update the list!
Click here to watch Steffie and Diane Sawyer get newtered.
Click here to watch Diane Sawyer and Steffie get newtered (same video as above).
Click here to watch Juan Williams get newtered.
Click here to watch John King get newtered.
Click here to see Scott Pelley get newtered.
Click here to see Ann Curry get newtered.
Click here to see Maria Bartiromo get newtered (bonus: Jim Cramer gets it, too).
Click here to see John Harris get newtered.
Click here to see Chris Wallace get newtered (this one pains me……sniff…..)
Click here to see Megyn Kelly get newtered.
Click here to watch Ron Allen get newtered (bonus: a little Olbermann at the end, too).
Click here to watch David Gregory get newtered.
Idea from - Dan Riehl
hat tip: Irritated Woman]]>
Back on August 11, 2011, Newt Gingrich lauds the Debt Super Committee as being useless. Guess what? He was right again. Gingrich has great insight into how American politics should work. He is my choice for President in 2012!!!
Watch the FoxNews video]]>
What this story illustrates is exactly how clever Newt is. Barney has just given him a national platform about an important issue and more publicity than he will ever get from his debate performance in and of itself. Of course, Barney had no choice but to respond. Afterall, who wouldn’t respond when someone is suggesting you should go to jail? Too bad for Barney, that many Americans agree with Newt.
From Talking Points Memo
Is it a violation of Congressional decorum to call for your former colleagues to be thrown in jail? Newt Gingrich lobbed a bomb early in Tuesday’s Bloomberg/Washington Post debate by telling the audience that he would like to imprison Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) and former Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT), co-authors of last year’s financial reform package. The attack drew a fierce and immediate rebuttal from Frank, who slammed the “self-styled intellectual leader of the free world” for his “very odd” comments.
“If you want to put people in jail, you ought to start with Barney Frank and Chris Dodd,” Gingrich said in the debate. His remark came after the candidates were asked about the lack of criminal prosecutions of Wall Street officials in the wake of the financial crisis.
Moderator Charlie Rose offered Gingrich a chance to walk his remarks back, saying he surely didn’t mean they should actually go to jail. But Gingrich stood his ground, saying Dodd should be investigated for his ties to Countrywide Financial and Frank for his ties to Fannie Mae.
“All I am saying is, everybody in the media who wants to go after the business community ought to start by going after the politicians who were at the heart of the sickness that is weakening this country,” he said.
Frank said Gingrich’s anger over his and Dodd’s role in the financial meltdown was absurd given that Republicans were in charge of the House and — excerpt for a brief period — Senate, from 1995 to 2007.He noted that he worked on reform legislation on mortgage in his first year as chair in 2007.
“It’s interesting, the charge is failure to stop Newt Gingrich and Tom Delay from deregulating,” he said. “This notion we caused the problem that started while they were in charge even by Gingrich’s standards is very odd.”
Added Frank: “I wish I knew that he was willing to listen to my advice, I would have given him some: I would have told him not to impeach Clinton, I would have told his successors not to go to war with Iraq, and I would have told DeLay not to go on the dance show.”
read the rest at Talking Points Memo