With Gingrich 'More Inclined To Run' In 2012, Some Of His Most Recent Anti-Gay Remarks
Like most of the Republican Party's potential presidential contenders, Newt Gingrich refuses to say definitively whether he plans to run for the White House, but the former Speaker of the House did tell Fox News' Chris Wallace today that he's "more inclined to run than not run."
"[My wife] and I will make a decision probably at the end of February, beginning of March," explained Gingrich. "I think we’re much more inclined to run than not run and I think everything we’ve done over the last year, talking to friends, thinking things through, has made us more inclined to believe that it’s doable."
The "things" done over the past year include shoring up support from the religious right, like an audience at Liberty University, the school founded by Evangelical leader Jerry Falwell, where last month Gingrich warned that "secular socialists" are taking down our nation.
"In the name of religious liberty secular socialists destroy religion," said Gingrich of America today, which he compares to Nazi-occupied Poland, "Our American Civilization will only survive if we have the courage to stand firmly for the truth and to oppose those who would radically undermine and destroy our values, our freedoms, and our very way of life whether they are radical secularists or radical Islamists."
Gingrich made comparable remarks last year, telling, again, Fox News, "There is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us, is prepared to use violence, to use harassment. I think it is prepared to use the government if it can get control of it."
Meanwhile, the Republican's Liberty University speech also took a shot at our nation's judicial system, and he sounded eerily similar to assertions made by his conservative counterparts.
It's no surprise, then, that Gingrich described Judge Vaughn Walker's decision to overturn Proposition 8 as "an outrageous disrespect for our Constitution and for the majority of people of the United States who believe marriage is the union of husband and wife."
In his interview today, Gingrich called winning the Republican primary "an enormous challenge," and, when asked to compare himself to some other alleged hopefuls, he replied, "Structurally, Romney’s the front runner, and in popularity, probably Huckabee’s the front runner, [and] Palin is a phenomenon in her own right."
He then went to say the press and pundits should consider potential candidacies from Mitch Daniels, Tim Pawlenty and other traditional social conservatives. Putting himself "somewhere in that bunch," Gingrich called his candidacy as "competitive."
Reading through Gingrich's recent speeches and statements, however, I would say the only true competition he faces is making sure his tried, true and stale brand of social conservatism resonates louder than other contenders, because this sounds like the same anthem we've been hearing from the right since Gingrich was elected House Speaker way back in 1994.




@Pepa
The only "poll" that matters are election night results.
- Prop. 19 failed in California.
- The Republicans won in most states.
- There is no such thing as the "Tea Party" on the ballot.
- The Libertarian Party, as usual, didn't win any seats in either the federal Congress or the state legislatures.
- And if a ballot initiative allowing same-sex marriage passed in any of the 50 states, I certainly must have missed it.
Claiming you're polling at 5-6% as a party means absolutely nothing in this country. We use the First Pass The Post (FPTP) system. And you have to actually win seats to have influence. Indeed, claiming you are polling at 50% nationally on a generic question about same-sex unions doesn't mean anything either. How many of these people actually vote? Is this before or after the NOM multi-million dollar smear campaign? And, of course, how many of them are just lying to the pollster because hating gays is politically incorrect?
Posted by: John | Dec 6, 2010 12:25:16 AM
"There is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us, is prepared to use violence, to use harassment" ... says the man who divorced his third wife while she was in the hospital for cancer treatments. Thanks for the morality lesson - what planet did you say you were from?
Posted by: Craig | Dec 6, 2010 12:36:25 AM
"The only "poll" that matters are election night results."
In that case lets put DADT on a national referendum. And of course lets ignore all polls then, in other words lets stop trying to convince people about our cause. Polling is like a report card on how good you are at convincing the public and CHANGING their attitudes on a particular issue.
Oh BTW, polling is widely respected and important tool that EVERYBODY uses for many DIFFERENT reason, so your way of demeaning poll taking is shameful and down right STUPID.
" Prop. 19 failed in California."
Because the morons that put on the ballot also wanted employment protections and anti-discrimination rights for pot users. This ballot measure was a flop from the beginning. In AZ we passed a medical marijuana initiative, soon we can pass another one that legalizes it outright, but you must include LANGUAGE that is favorable, and PLUS, the morons that put prop 19 NEVER bother to use polling data on their specific language of the initiative (well because according to YOU, POLLS DON'T COUNT, btw were you advising them? No wonder they lost)
"The Republicans won in most states."
And your point is?
This is called flipping the coin. It is the same coin, different side. It happens every few years or so.
"The Libertarian Party, as usual, didn't win any seats in either the federal Congress or the state legislatures."
No, we got more votes. What were you expecting, a landslide? We listen to voters and read polling data and adjust our resources since *ahem* the dems/reps who control all the states make laws that make it horribly difficult for our party to get on the ballot, therefore we waste money just to get on the ballots, all THANKS TO YOU and your PARTY.
"There is no such thing as the "Tea Party" on the ballot."
Didn't I just say that? Whose comment are you actually reading there?
"And if a ballot initiative allowing same-sex marriage passed in any of the 50 states, I certainly must have missed it."
Even though the most recent ones did not passed, gay activists are now more satisfied that the voting gap is now closing in more, which is a GOOD SIGN. Polling data would encourage gays to continue fighting... oh wait. YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN POLLING. oops.
"Claiming you're polling at 5-6% as a party means absolutely nothing in this country. "
Wow, such ignorance. And I am guessing YOUR party polled 45% or somewhere about, YOUR PARTY is at the helm in CONGRESS and the WHITE HOUSE, and so far DADT looks gloomy, YOUR PARTY did not pass ENDA, or how about DOMA, is that still on the books? Last I checked it still was.
It doesn't matter if you get 60% or 70% of the vote if YOU CHOSE TO DO NOTHING for the people (ie gay people) who have elected you. What I am noting is a historic and sudden shift and rise for my party. I was not advocating that we won. How STUPID are you?
"How many of these people actually vote? Is this before or after the NOM multi-million dollar smear campaign? And, of course, how many of them are just lying to the pollster because hating gays is politically incorrect?"
Why should it matter to YOU when you say:
"The only "poll" that matters are election night results."
Which way is it? Of course you libs will always speak through both ends of your mouths like there was no tomorrow at the expense of the gay community.
Posted by: pepa | Dec 6, 2010 2:10:35 AM
newt gingrich? that old reprobate? really? bring it, bitch.
Posted by: nic | Dec 6, 2010 2:14:19 AM
@PEPA,
go to hell.
Posted by: nic | Dec 6, 2010 2:23:03 AM
@PEPA,
what do repug conservatives have to offer? put up, or shut up, bitch. your long tiresome, soporific diatribes will gather no interest nor traction here. you are a pathetic faggot.
Posted by: nic | Dec 6, 2010 2:30:05 AM
Thrice married and an adulterer. Is that ok with God??
http://anythingimages.com/images/334Sanctity002.jpg
Posted by: CB | Dec 6, 2010 3:26:10 AM
"In essence more fiscally conservative and more socially tolerant... which is libertarian in nature."
Fiscal conservatism and social tolerance have little to do with libertarianism. It's a rather extreme distortion, in much the same way that libertarian ideologues conflate every governmental system that features more than minimal state intervention (i.e. every government that has and will ever exist in history)into a nebulous collectivism.
"It is still 2 years ahead, and it is a long time politically speaking, so anything can happen, as a former "teabagger" I can say that frustrations are still high and many people are turning their attentions to third party (more than ever, about 5-6% voted libertarian in my state which is above average and we have increased our voter base by 10%) so quite frankly we should not underestimate the public, whether it is voting for a political party or on an issue like gay marriage."
There is no national figure and there won't be one two years for now. Nor is there a viable slate of Congressional candidates.
"Like I mentioned earlier, the GOP needs to chose someone else that have their heads on straight. My two choices would be Ron Paul or Donald Trump. Other than that I am sticking third party."
Neither of whom is libertarian, incidentally. In either your simplistic framework or an actual one.
Posted by: Zach | Dec 6, 2010 3:58:36 AM
"what do repug conservatives have to offer?"
I don't know why don't you ask THEM.
You freak.
Posted by: pepa | Dec 6, 2010 4:19:46 AM
"Fiscal conservatism and social tolerance have little to do with libertarianism."
So I guess I should be lectured by someone who in essence is NOT a libertarian on libertarian principles. Hm. Okay.
Just to let you know, you're not doing a good job, unless of course you could *lecture* me on what it is to be a libertarian, since from what I can gather you"re mainly focused on deconstructing libertarianism not really understanding what it really is.
But do try again, your professorial tendencies are very telling... lol
"There is no national figure and there won't be one two years for now. Nor is there a viable slate of Congressional candidates."
Again read my previous post on HOW YOUR PARTY is preventing my party from getting on the ballot.
"Neither of whom is libertarian, incidentally. In either your simplistic framework or an actual one."
*Sigh*
Surely you can provide me with some examples as to why they are not AFTER you have been able to actually educate yourself about what it is to be libertarian.
Because libs' number one job is DESTROY. They want to destroy opponents, democracy,(by keeping third parties out) our economy, and eventually the gay community.
Boy you don't have the slightest idea. The Libertarian Party should be the LEAST of your worries professor.
Posted by: pepa | Dec 6, 2010 4:34:20 AM
To Andy Towle:
Is the usage of the word "faggot" on a gay person appropriate on these boards?
I would like to know.
Posted by: pepa | Dec 6, 2010 4:41:26 AM
@Pepa - I hope you feel better when you sober up. Anyone who supports fiscal responsibility and thinks "the Donald" would be a good candidate is either stoned, knows very little about trump, or just can't think very well.
Posted by: justiceontherocks | Dec 6, 2010 6:57:24 AM
@PEPA
"faggot" as it applies to you is entirely appropriate. you are a mindless sissy. you have hung your bonnet on the hook of irrationality.
you do know that ayn rand obliterated her self-hood when she irrationally became the demented spokesperson for libertarianism, don't you? she became a groveling beggar to manhood. there is nothing to admire about her or your political viewpoint. there is nothing kind about libertarianism. face it, creep, your philosophy is like a rake: everything for me and nothing for you.
Posted by: nic | Dec 6, 2010 9:02:05 AM
This guy is REALLY smart and REALLY EVIL. If he does run, he'll know how to mobilize his base and if he gets elected, we're F*CKED.
Posted by: Leo | Dec 6, 2010 9:21:49 AM
**pops the popcorn and enjoying the reads and daggers on this thread**
Posted by: Chitown Kev | Dec 6, 2010 9:23:42 AM
**joins Chitown Kev**
crunch, crunch, crunch... ;)
Posted by: Leo | Dec 6, 2010 9:30:49 AM
Well, I tried.
You can't really have a conversation with a fanatic.
Especially one as mindless as Pepa.
Posted by: John | Dec 6, 2010 10:26:59 AM
Candace Gingrich, Newt's Gay sister, responded to her brother's discussion of Prop 8 on the Bill O’Reilly talk-show. Find it here:
http://girldujour.wordpress.com/2008/11/23/an-open-letter-to-newt-gingrich-from-his-gay-sister-candace/
Posted by: Daya | Dec 6, 2010 12:02:39 PM