The EFM Feature
Screen Shot 2011-12-22 at 2.12.08 PM

This article is a letter from Newt Gingrich to Virginia about his original claim about the existence of Santa Claus, which he currently denies ever having made.

Comments and Discussion

Evangelicals for Mitt provides comments as a way to engage in a public and respectiful discussion about articles and issues. Any comment may be removed by the editors for violating common decency or tempting flames.

12 Responses to Newt: Virginia, Let’s Revisit This Santa Issue

  1. Larry says:

    Please tell me that you realize Newt didn’t write the letter. Its a Lefty’s creation … which is why, I suppose, its posted here.

    It seems that Team Romney is now relying heavily on something other than the truth to describe his own record … and that of his opponents. More principle and honor?

    This was very, VERY revealing.

    • Brandon from NJ says:

      The letter is from a long time ago, back in the 1990s. The reason why Nancy Franch wrote this is because it reflects on the accusations plenty of people use against Romney on a regular basis, i.e. a personal attack, attack on his circumstances, or an attack on his beliefs, without really bothering to address what he really said in full. Gingrich sent this letter to a little girl years ago, most likely to entertain her, chances are in the years since then, the girl figured out how Gingrich probably just told it to her in good nature to entertain her, and relied on her to move on. Sure, there are plenty of people who at one point have wierd beliefs, but if you think the GOP is wierd for letting a Mormon run, we’ve allowed a Presbyterian who didn’t regularly attend church (Ronald Reagan), a notorious big game hunter (Theodore Roosevelt), a Quaker (Richard Nixon), a Unitarian (Dwight D. Eisenhower), and I could go on and on, but yes, if you look at the bunch of presidents, both successful and unsuccessful that the Republican Party has nominated, you have to admit, plenty of them would be quite the odd bunch, and few if any would be an ideal American Christian.

      Did Newt Gingrich believe in Santa Claus? I doubt it, but he likely wrote what he did to make the little girl happy and figured she would grow out of it soon enough, and like some of the attacks on Romney, it’s not all that relevant to his character. The same is true for the “Never Vote for a Mormon” screed that gets put up in the news, either. I am not part of the faith, but this idea that we should never trust Mormons doesn’t represent me as a Christian, or as a general person, if I could get someone who was willing to contest against the legislature and the court systems, as well as exemplify marriage by having a marriage that he and his wife have worked so long to keep intact, I would vote for him, and we have both of those qualities in Mitt Romney.

      • Larry says:

        The letter was never written by Newt. Again, that it appears on this site speaks
        volumes about the veracity of so many of Team Romney’s claims. That you should attempt to defend the indefensible addresses those same concerns regarding Mitt supporters.

        • Brandon from NJ says:

          Yeah, it tells you that people for Romney are highly satirical and sarcastic, something that’s a little hard to get over the internet, I’m afraid.

  2. Robin says:

    I am shocked that anyone can be for Newt. I think he must be the biggest ego-head in the country to do the immoral things that he has done and think he can still run for President! I hope the American people want a man who is exemplary, not a disgrace. Would we revere Washington if he had had two adulterous affairs and been found unethical and thrown out of Congress? I would hide my head in shame. It is Newt who should hide his head in shame and drop out of this race. I will not be able to vote for Gingrich the whor-ible if my Republican party is so stupid as to raise him to be our choice for President. How can you Newt followers be so blind. Do morals and integrity, and honesty and faithfulness mean nothing to you? There is no way he can beat Obama. Obama will drag out all of Newt’s filthy laundry…(I’m sure we haven’t seen it all yet), and people will say, well, Obama has ruined us economically, but Newt is a bombastic, say whatever is on his head at the minute and apologize later, immoral, disgusting vermin and so at least Obama is a family man….. and there goes the election.
    Anyone for Newt needs their head and heart examined.
    America needs Mitt Romney to be President.

    • Brandon from NJ says:

      Robin, The big deal why people can be for Newt is his ability to rabidly attack opponents, including Obama. However, one of Obama’s biggest problems is that rather than explain his policies, he tries to explain what his opposition thinks. My feeling when I hear this is the fact that I could care less, you’re our president, I care more about you explaining what’s great in what you do, then worry about what your opponents may think, or have to hear strawman fallacies about what anyone against you must think. However, it’s important that whomever opposes Obama doesn’t embrace a similar style.

      The problem is, Newt’s style is about the same as Obama’s, he’s pretty much going head over heels just to go after Obama. While it’s silent now, Obama’s team will no doubt attack Newt ferociously if he is nominated. One thing I do recall is his statements about Libya over the spread of two weeks. He suggested back in March that we quickly remove Qadaffi from power. A rapid removal from power suggests armed force against him. Gingrich can rehearse whatever he says to sound as if he knows what he’s talking about, however, anyone with a decent enough memory can easily argue inconsistency in what he ranted about right there.

  3. Terry says:

    Larry, me thinks that you have a problem with Romney’s religion. While I respect everyone’s right to voice an opinion, you remind me of some of the people I dialog with on YouTube on an almost daily basis. To these folks, Mormonism is a cult and all Mormons are liars, (of which I have been charged with being many times by them), which means that they would never consider voting for one. What I find amusing, and slightly disturbing at the same time, is that no matter how much business experience the Mormon in question has, or the successes he/she has racked up, the fact that they are …*gasp*… Mormon, automatically disqualifies them from consideration. Kind of like that idiot preacher from 2008 who stated that a vote for a Mormon is a vote for Satan. Fortunately, EFM got it right a long time ago: we’re electing a Commander-in-Chief, not a Pastor-in-Chief or any other Whatever-in-Chief. Nobody has to change their religious beliefs to vote for Romney. All they have to do decide is if Romney’s moral compass is pointing in the same direction as their moral compass, and if what Romney wants for America is the same thing they want. If that proves to be the case, then voting for Mitt should be a no-brainer for them.

    • Terry says:

      Correction (and no, this isn’t a flip-flop): “All they have to do decide is if Romney’s…” should read “All they have to decide is if Romney’s…”

  4. Larry says:

    Terry, it’s clear that you refuse to support Obama because you’re a racist homophobe. Absurd suggestion? Yes … indeed, it’s a stupid remark. Not unlike your absurd charge. I’m weary of such adolescent nonsense from Romney boosters who can’t seem to fathom why a conservative would find Mitt so unacceptable.

    Try this. Imagine a group of people for whom actual records and speeches (and the trends they suggest) matter. Furthermore, imagine that the same group finds no concern, whatsoever, over his faith. Indeed, imagine this same group continuing to consider his faith so unobjectionable that even though they view Mormonism as a false religion it simply remains unimportant as a factor in his candidacy.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>