Newt’s In
by PubliusATLANTA (AP) – Newt Gingrich is running for president.
The former House speaker disclosed his bid on Twitter and Facebook on Monday and urged followers to tune into Fox News on Wednesday.
“I will be on to talk about my run for president of the United States,” Gingrich wrote after spending a year or more publicly laying the groundwork for a GOP presidential candidacy. “I have been humbled by all the encouragement you have given me to run.”
The move was hardly a surprise; Gingrich has spent months raising money, assembling a campaign team and visiting early primary states. He also quietly opened a campaign headquarters in Atlanta, and had long been scheduled to address the Georgia Republican Party Convention on Friday in Macon, Ga. Aides say that will be his first speech as a full-fledged candidate.
Gingrich, 67, enters a Republican field that’s far from fully formed; no less than a dozen Republicans are weighing bids and only a few have taken steps toward candidacies. It’s a crop of candidates that has many in the Republican Party yearning for more options as they seek the strongest candidate to take on President Barack Obama in 2012.
Besides high name recognition, Gingrich brings to the race a slew of policy ideas, a network of grass-roots support and a political machine years in the making. But his personal baggage—he’s on his third marriage—could hinder his chances as he seeks to woo conservatives who make up the core of the GOP primary electorate.
His entry into the race marks a comeback attempt more than a decade after leaving political office.
The conservative former Georgia congressman rose to power after leading the GOP to its first majority in the House in 40 years, spearheading the Republican revolution in the 1994 elections and pledging to adhere to his party’s “Contract with America.”
Once at the top of the House, he challenged the first-term Democratic president, Bill Clinton, at every turn. A spending fight between Gingrich and Clinton led to federal government shutdowns in 1995 and 1996, and Gingrich watched his popularity fall.
He faced charges of hypocrisy after revelations that he was carrying on an affair with a congressional aide at the same time he was criticizing Clinton’s relationship with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. He divorced his second wife and married the aide, Callista Bisek; she now goes by her husband’s surname.
In an interview earlier this year with a Christian broadcaster, Gingrich said his focus on his job contributed to his infidelity and the failure of his two previous marriages.
Ethics questions also dogged him as speaker.
Gingrich faced some 84 ethics complaints; they were leveled mostly by House Democrats who were in the minority and focused on what critics called his blurring of the lines between politics and his personal life. All but one of those complaints was dismissed with no penalty.
He paid $300,000 for the cost of investigating the final complaint—whether Gingrich’s college course had violated federal tax law—as part of an agreement with House ethics investigators. Led by Republicans, the ethics committee never reached a conclusion about that allegation. And the IRS cleared the organizations connected with the course of any tax violations.
He stepped down from the House in 1999.
Since then, he’s traveled the world speaking on issues from health care to foreign affairs, built a lucrative network of nonprofit and business ventures, and written a steady stream of books. All of that has made him one of the nation’s most well-known Republicans, with a loyal following.
In recent months as he geared up for a run, Gingrich has lambasted Obama’s federal health law and has criticized the Democrat’s foreign policy as “clueless.”
The twice-divorced Gingrich also has been working to make inroads with social conservatives critical to the GOP primary base, highlighting his conversion to Catholicism after marrying Callista.
She works with her husband on documentary films and has figured prominently in campaign appearances in the months since Gingrich made clear he was considering a run.
Although he has lived in northern Virginia for more than a decade, the Pennsylvania-born Gingrich has also been playing up his Georgia roots. He taught college in Georgia and was a longtime congressman from suburban Atlanta, helping build the Republican Party in the state dominated at the time by Democrats.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
171 Comments
Probably the most intellectual candidate and extremely brilliant. Baggage…a BIG problem for him.
.
He's already proven that he doesn't know what to do when he's given the reins of power. He squandered it.
.
Feh.
He cannot win.
Next.
So what? I'm not particularly impressed.
His opinions are still 'interesting'…..but I don't believe he really has the so-called 'fire in the belly', and I'm not so sure that he sincerely embraces TEA party concepts. Future debates, with him as a contender might be interesting,though.
However,a couple of years ago, he seemed eager to play political 'footsie' with Hillary Clinton when it came to 'healthcare' matters, and I wasn't impressed. At that time it indicated (IMHO) 'caving' tendancies, and a need to be 'liked' by the 'other side' , and I've had enough of that approach from past candidates
He's late, April fools was over a month ago.
He's a RINO. His days are gone. We need fresh, serious conservative candidates if we're going to save this country, not wishy washy, blow with the wind elitists.
I'm less concerned about his third marriage than I am about the fact he backed Dede Scozzafava in New York. He's supposedly an intelligent man, but he fails to understand the TEA party movement.
Let the clusterf–k begin.
Keep on moving Newt, thanks for your service to the country. It's time to find a nice place to retire. Maybe write that historical blockbuster novel. You're a smart guy, I'm sure there is a job for you somewhere, just not in government, please.
The guy's a closet Progressive, and not to be trusted….
He should not win…
Some of that baggage is that he's still sipping the Climate Change Kool-aid….
Who the heck is he listening to, that would advise him to run? That right there tells me he's lost his marbles.
He's very smart and was a great Speaker of the House but I would never want him as President. He's been part of the whole Washington crowd too long to be trusted to do the right things.
Good stuff. Now there's an oxymoron….McCain and 'excitement'.
His military service aside….he's a 'weenie'.
Smart guy, but smart ass.
He should stick to commentary and writing books.
I'll leave it blank before I'll vote for Newt.
I'll say one thing … if the RINOs foist Newtie on us, he'll sure make a good concession speech.
Gingrich will keep policy on the front burner which is a good thing…
Do not invest much into his worthiness as a Presidential contender; Gingrich is quite unattractive personally- and has almost no chance at a nod. But what he will do is keep the candidates focused on policy and issues- which will be a net plus- and his brilliance will elevate the level of debate.
So in the end it is a positive development…
Professor Gingrich was at the pinnacle of his political success as the bomb-throwing minority whip. He then reached his level of incompetence as House Speaker. His First 100 Days were a thing of brilliance, but a few short months later, Clinton rope-a-doped him over the government shutdown.
Gingrich is a living, breathing demonstration of why those of the academy almost always make terrible executives. So he's not The One to take on Comrade Calamity, either.
He's not even very well closeted.
Democrats need to go and review the facts! Historical evidence: Look at what happened when Republicans took over Congress in the late 90’s:
1994 290.576 Billion Deficit – Newt became Speaker of The House.
1995 227.96 Billion Deficit
1996 145.125 Billion Deficit
1997 29.04 Billion Deficit
1998 89.96 Billion Surplus
1999 159.512 Billion Surplus
2000 290.772 Billion Surplus
2001 152.76 Billion Surplus
9/11 hits and two wars are being fought
So what happens when dems took back control in 2007. This is before the health care sham:
2002 158 Bilion Deficit
2003 378 Billion Deficit
2004 413 Billion Deficit
2005 318 Billion Deficit
2006 260.4 Billion Deficit
2007 165.24 Billion Deficit
2008 455 Billion Deficit
2009 1400 Billion Deficit–1.4 trillion
2010 1350 Billion Deficit-1.3 trillion
The Democrats controlled the House of Representatives until 1994 and then regained control in 2006, so the Republicans have had control of the purse strings for 12 years since the Great Depression. Presidents can propose all the budgets they want, they can only sign off on spending bills that are sent to them by the House of Representatives.
The Democrats were in control of Congress, the part of our government where spending bills come from, for 38 of the last 50 years. In the late nineties when we had a "surplus", the Republicans were in control of Congress. While it is true that the President can veto budgets that spend too much, and thus should carry some of the blame, the majority of the blame should be placed squarely on the House.
"The administration of justice is the firmest pillar of government." George Washington
Is he the same person who squandered the opportunity under Clinton? And who paved the way for today crisis supporting Clinton's Community investing Act and repealing Glass Steagall act later?
Okay…now that Newt is in….when's he gettin' out???
I am NOT voting for a man who cheats on his WIVES (plural meaning more than one) and blames HIS being unfaithful on his working too hard for America to remain faithful. THAT is BS!!!
If a man can't tell the truth to his own WIVES (meaning more than one) then HOW can we possibly believe that he is going to tell US the truth??????? Uhhhhh….HE WON'T!!!!
NO NEWT in 2012!!
I agree…if he's in the closet…I'm buyin a new house!!!
Just in case anyone needs a Newt Refresher Course… .http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi6n_-wB154&feature=youtu.be
Puke me with a stick. Speaking of stick, what a schmuck and stick in the mud. Nothing but a loud mouth, immoral, RINO-has-been, Newt is a LOSER. The only difference between Newt and Mitt is that Newt already screwed the pooch and Mitt is, more-or-less, a pooch, a prince in waiting and a porch dog. UGH, heave, hurl, no, no,no, dammit three times, all the way to hell, NO to Gingrich.
Everytime we nominate someone because it's their turn, we lose…
and the guys still infested with the cooties he got when sitting next to Nancy….
And the two wars and 1.5 TRILLION in unfunded tax-cuts during 2002-2008 came from where? The tooth-fairy?
Newt…Never Ending White Trash….he's too liberal for conservatives, too conservative for liberals, too mainstream for the libertarians, and too libertarian for main stream….a rebel without a clue if ever there was one…..
That's funny…Another GOP candidate with exactly ZERO chance to win.
We're up to our asses in RINOs….
time for some culling, not nomination…..
Dress him purple and call him SMURF!!!
He's a decoy!!!
He doesn't have what it takes to be POTUS!!!
Newt neutered himself sitting on that damn couch with Cruella DeVille (aka Auntie Nan).
GO AWAY NEWT!!! You're about as exciting as Ron Paul!!!
.
a career politician. i think we've had enough of those.
After Mr. ETHANOL gingrich counted the MILLIONS and MILLIONS of dollars he got from the ETHANOL LOBBY for supporting this waste of taxpayer money, he decided he has a shot at buying the election to become the "president of corn".
Americans, conservatives and Republicans: DO NOT ALLOW THE NO-CHARACTER, AMNESTY-JOHN mccain disaster to be repeated. You, and America, can do better — a LOT better — than Mr. ETHANOL (aka, "Monica-Stain-Bill Lite").
Replacing a president who's a PUPPET of the union bo$$e$ with one that's a PUPPET of the ETHANIOL LOBBY really isn't much of an improvement.
ron paul is way more exciting than newt and thats saying something.
Sorry Newt, I like you an all but your a little right of center…not nearly far enough to get my vote or my wife's vote or my kids vote. You had your chance and you blew it bud.
Isn't this the guy who sat on a couch with Pelosi and told all of us to get green? endorsing climate change junk science?…As a matter of fact Newt for that one …Take a hike off a short pier!
"unfunded tax-cuts"
Oh no not another one.
Good grief.
"Democrats need to go and review the facts!"
Yes, but it is the voter who needs to do this not the Democrats, they are largely a lost cause by now.
At one time, I did invest some interest into his worthiness as a President, but after researching, his appeal diminished.
But I have to admit, I like his messages regarding "America". And despite his negatives, the guy has a patriot heart. So, I hope in a sense, he does put his hat in so we can all see how he handles himself when skeletons are exposed and policy issues are debated. The positives he brings to the issues can be mentored into the soul of a good conservative candidate.
The guy's a freakin' anti-Constutionalist…
and pro-amnisty…
Newt blew it when he fell for the Globull Warming scam. And, what's worse is that he's intelligent. I cannot vote for a person who is so easily snookered. Too Dangerous.
If he was so smart, he would have never endorsed Scazowitch or sat on the couch with Pelosi.
Nobody calls me "extremely brilliant" and I figured out that wasn't a smart thing to do.
You don't understand it costs the government not to tax you?
That concept comes from the same people that submit budget cuts based on proposed increased spending .
And only if he would take Carl Rove with him.
Newt's in………… and democrats are already cheering the good news. He could not win a local race for dogcatcher.
I don't know but we sure need someone to stand up and take control of this runaway train.
Conditions couldn't be better for a conservative big time win, but the missing piece here, the leader, is all but absent.
This guy ain't it.
Evey night before bedtime I always say my liberal prayers and apparently someone is listening so thank you for Newt. And please lord if you're still dialed in, let Michelle Bachmann and Sarah Palin run for president too. And the Donald. Oh, and don't forget Sharron Angle.
Go Away Newt!
President of what country – Israel?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKBHdErHSrA
Yes, it's called Accounting 101
If you remove something from the credit column you have to remove something from the debit column.
The Bush tax-cuts ended up costing, by the most conservative estimates, 2.7 TRILLION dollars over the past eight years.
And a third war plus 4.5 TRILLION in unfunded spending during 2009-2011 came from where?
God, you regressives are stupid.
So far only Herman Cain is worth a squat. But, anybody but a marxist in 2012, anybody.
You're a citizen of what country – Iran?
NO MORE SQUISHY RINOS!
So, I take it you don't like Gingrich? (wink)
Liberal prayers to……Lucifer?
How's that liberal prayer go? O mighty gaeea(sic) and barry thank you for letting me kill babies today. Though I have no honesty or integrity please let georgie boy put words in my mouth and opinions in my head. No thoughts, those hurt, I had one once. Let me reap the benefits of gov't. largesse but don't do anything to help people who care about the USA, they must be evil, my professor said so and he, it?, is kewl. Bless all terrorist until the time of Sharia, amen.
No it's the tooth fairy you fool.
Silly proggie.
Take every negative thing said about him and then ask yourself one question:
Is he better than Obama?
Newt is one of those people who I would only vote for if he were running against Obama.
I have not seen any evidence that he has invested in the "green" companies or stands to gain monetarily from promoting it. But, I wouldn't put it past him either. Do you know what they are?
I am more bothered by how many times (lost count) he has flip-flopped since the 1990s and that awful ad he did with Pelosi…..Ugh!
Do you say liberal prayers to a picture of Obama? Is that all you do with it?
Sorry Baroke Owebama, I obviously should have included a sarc in my post, judging from the thumbs down I've received.
I am the antithesis of socialist/progressive. I've been posting on the Big sites since Oct. '09.
If you scan my comments over that time time you will see where I stand.
"Probably the most intellectual candidate…" – him and Ambassador John Bolton.
His consulting firm was on the payroll of an ethanol producers group http://exiledonline.com/freemarket-whore-newt-gin... he's sell out to power. The only principle the man has is using the power of the state to increase his wealth.
Herman Cain would make a good cabinet member, not a President though.
Yes, but someone from the Establishment Republican side needs to bridge the gap between them and the Tea Party folks. I'm not saying Newt can do it, but whoever the GOP nominee is I think has to appeal to a enough of the old-guard and the new-guard Tea Party patriots.
Being inside the beltway for a long time is both a plus and a minus. A plus with establishment folks who'd be willing to vote for him and a minus with some Tea Party people who distrust life-long public service types.
Show me the money!
So what happens when dems took back control in 2007. This is before the health care sham:
2002 158 Bilion Deficit
2003 378 Billion Deficit
2004 413 Billion Deficit
2005 318 Billion Deficit
2006 260.4 Billion Deficit
2007 165.24 Billion Deficit
2008 455 Billion Deficit
2009 1400 Billion Deficit–1.4 trillion
2010 1350 Billion Deficit-1.3 trillion
The Democrats controlled the House of Representatives until 1994 and then regained control in 2006, so the Republicans have had control of the purse strings for 12 years since the Great Depression. Presidents can propose all the budgets they want, they can only sign off on spending bills that are sent to them by the House of Representatives.
Go away Newt.
Thanks. I do remember something about ethanol but, I didn't know about the consulting firm. That should make the debates interesting.
Understood, but why do we always keep ending up with lesser of evil, worst case scenario candidates? And, believe it or not, there are worse anti-Americans in the Senate than even Obama contemplated. Here's hoping that Newt's useful purpose is to distract the left while the independent voters rally and put forth a real candidate instead of waiting for spring and taking a floater as some sort of appartion of righteous divination. I don't think Newt has any substantial base of consequence so maybe he will gorge his ego and slither back to the next publicity opp.
Save your money newt…………………and put the cash up behind a viable candidate.
the noblama machine will chew you up……………………………and then eat you alive.
I think Mr. Bolton is about the best candidate the GOP could put up. He may not look as lounge-lizardy as Huntsman or Romney but his Mark-Twain meets Albert Einstein persona might work better for him than some estimate. Of course, Mr. Twain was more liberal than Bolton is but he was a brilliant writer and, with Professor Einstein, pulled of wearing the 'stache.
Off topic: Is it Jimmy Carter All Over Again?
http://netrightdaily.com/2011/05/is-it-jimmy-cart...
"The administration of justice is the firmest pillar of government."George Washington
Dittos!
Then I hope you'll accept my apology. I'm usually better than that at spotting sarcasm without benefit of sarc tag…
Newt could likely position himself, along with Pawlenty, for a chance to be tapped for a VP to fill out a ticket, but I don't see either of them winning greater than third-place in any primary vote.
Mr. Bolton is more personable, just as intellectual, just as connected, and has no, serious character flaws for social conservatives to complain about. I expect him to do as well or perhaps better in the primaries.
If however, our side is fooled by "good looks" then we'll wind up with Romney or Huntsman.
I'm waiting to hear what the Huckster is going to decide. Paul's entrance alone might already have cost us a win but Huckster's entrance again would probably seal the GOP's fate.
Just taking a page out of the socialist playbook so as to smack you in the face with it. Payback's a bitter beyotch, huh?
God, you regressives are cretins.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHx1bKpTc_8&fe...
I actually saw the commercial when it aired….. Newt trying to curry favor with the DC establishment! I lost a lot of respect for him. He is NOT my first choice!
This is where you try to ignore Bill Clinton in the budget balancing equation. But in this case it's your own numbers that betray your twisted political point. The Republican congress balanced the budget with a Democratic president wielding the veto pen. But the same Republican congress couldn't be bothered to balance the budget from 2001-2007 with a Republican president. So it looks like it was the Democratic president who held congressional spending in check.
Then in 2008 the financial markets melted down after eight years of regulatory neglect and had to saved by still another Democratic president.
EEEEEEEAWWWWWW!
;-D
Sorry, but I just can't agree. What you're saying is what we've been doing as conservatives for far too long now, sacrificing principles just to get a republican into office. We need someone in office who will say what they mean and mean what they say. Newt won't do that.
Agreed
Ya, believe it or not I have missed a needed /sarc in my posts on occasion. It's true.
I got you on the first read of course because the thesis itself is so damn absurd, and it's true.
They literally say that they have reduced the amount they had planned to increase in spending and call that a tax cut.
And the sheeple eat it right up (right slobis?). Vote D! Vote D! Stick it to the rich guy!
Then they happily pay 4 and 5$ per gallon for gas and meekly say thank you when the statist calls for new taxes on miles driven.
We are Effed people. Freaking Effed.
Translation from the Newspeak for patriots:
Missed the short bus again today, did we?
God, you regressives are morons.
The pizza guy? Cain is not able.
I'd rather vote for Lady Gaga than Newt.
Dude, the radical left, meaning Obama, Pelosi and Reid are outspending all of the previous administrations PUT TOGETHER.
Wake the F up man, read the tea leaves, put down the bong.
We are broke and Obama is going to fix it by raising taxes and spending MORE!
Bush was out of control.
Bush was like a guy driving us all in a bus towards a cliff and gently tapping the brakes.
Obama took over and said 'F this, I can make the bus fly'.
"Hope" you got yer seat belt on proggie.
So your choice is an adulterer, a Mormon or a bumkin. Maybe you should just come back and try again in four years.
But by then you will be facing Hilary and have no chance there. Must be depressing to be a bagger right now.
I will not vote for Newt.
No President of the United States can create either a budget deficit or a budget surplus. All spending bills originate in the House of Representatives and all taxes are voted into law by Congress. This means Bill Clinton did not balance the budget, the Republicans did.
Democrats controlled both houses of Congress before Barack Obama became president. The deficit he inherited was created by the Congressional Democrats, including Senator Barack Obama, who did absolutely nothing to oppose the runaway spending. He was one of the biggest of the big spenders.
Well, well, well…..since the Democrats have controlled the purse strings of congress since 2006, it would appear that Obama is merely continuing the slow destruction of our economy that was started by the democrat's. Why is it they can't take the blame for things when they go badly as fast as they take the credit "if" things go better? Oh, and by the way, unemployment was under 7% near the end of the Bush administration, the deficit was actually only about $400 billion, and the government wasn't in the car business!!!
Because he did NOT!
Exactaly and he is also on the board of GE (medical). Just a slight conflict of interest.
My point seems to have been lost on you. If it was the Republicans who balanced the budget under Clinton, then why didn't they just continue the good work under Bush. They were there for six more years, but couldn't do it.
So it mush have been Clinton.
Newt is on my short list but only because under his speaker-ship we had a balance budget, reformed welfare, and ended ridiculous perks for House members. The ethics violations were political and I won't let the Dems choose who I will or won't vote for. He will have to vie for my vote because he joins one of the strongest fields Republicans have had in a long time. No, I don't listen to the media who portrays them as otherwise. We need to pick the best candidate who will follow through on the serious problems that face our great republic.
Who are you describing as the "bumpkin?" – Huckster?
I don't think you could pin that label on John Bolton. Summa Cum Laude from Yale is hardly bumpkin.
Watch you gonna do if it comes down to that? Hillary already rolled over when Obama cracked the racial whip, even Bill shuddered and cringed. I don't see or hear of any challengers on the socialist side of the story.
Did he not resign from as Speaker? Has he held elected office since? Time for new life on the conservative side, Newt's day and opportunity came and went. At most, I'll concede, he would make a lot stronger Speaker now, when he would be most useful, than Boehner.
When I was a newly converted Reagan era conservative, I liked ole Newt, he was fire and vinegar and action, he did the things like he could channel Rush yet still appeal to moderates. Dede Scozzafava was the last straw for me. He is one of the most obligated Washington installations still standing, his alliances and allegiances are as shifty as a congressional budget plan.
That effort was led by Phil and Wendy Graham.
RIght on, right on. People need to remember, he lost the following election after the showdown with Clinton, but the Republican party still picked up seats. This man has no business in the White House except as a visitor, provided he signs the register in triplicate.
If I wanted a slimy reptile for a president, I would vote for the poser.
You must be logged in to post a comment.