The EFM Feature
Screen Shot 2012-01-20 at 9.47.34 AM

Everyone says he “hit it out of the ballpark” last night.  Really?

Updated with correct link.


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.

13 Responses to Why Newt’s Answer Was Wrong

  1. David Walser says:

    Nancy,

    I think you used the wrong link. Don’t you want the link to go to your post on The Home Front rather than your interview with KLo on The Corner?

  2. Frozone says:

    I agree.

    I do believe in repentance and forgiveness, but part of that process is to humbly apologize to those you have offended, and seek to make right your wrong. That Gingrinch has not even spoken to Marianne since the divorce, coupled with a decided lack of humility, tells me that he has done neither.

    I liked Newt before his boomlet, but his self righteous indignation when challenged on his lack of character in the debate last night was very off putting. I’m tiring of his deflection of all tough questions. He can throw red meat, but I find him altogether too smug and self-important for my taste.

    Fortunately, it is not ours to judge, but to forgive. Put me in the “trust but verify” camp, however, as I don’t want Gingrich anywhere near the oval office…

    Here’s the right link:

    http://www.nationalreview.com/home-front/288715/why-newts-answer-was-wrong/nancy-french

    • Brandon from NJ says:

      I was disappointed back in March when Newt Gingrich talked about how his own job, “patriotism”, and “hard work”, led to him cheating on his second wife. I know all sorts of politicians regularly make mistakes in what they say, but this one alone doesn’t make him look sorry about what he did. If there’s any way to conduct yourself, at least look sorry, and say that you did it, but you are determined not to do it again. Again, this is referring to a 12-step program, where among the first of the 12 steps is to acknowledge that the situation is your responsibility.

  3. Let Freedom Ring says:

    Nancy, you are very good about getting to the heart of the matter. I feel the same way as your article–and then some. Your daughter’s answer was very wise. David and you have raised her well.

    Newt Gringrich’s wife had to be telling the truth, because she protected him in other ways about his ethics. If she way merely out to get him, she would have slandered him on every side, but she did not. As I understand it, she merely felt people should know more about his moral character before making up their minds.

    Gingrich misdirected the issue to his advantage. He may be able to debate well, but that is not what would ultimately make him a good president. Mitt Romney has some core values that a lot are picking up on. If enough voters can judiciously sort out the men running, our country will have a great president a year from today.

  4. Terry in Nebraska says:

    In picking up on the news today, I fear that Newt’s lambasting of the media is going to carry him through the voting tomorrow. He’s like a rock star–all glitter, smooth line of talk, adoring fans. Several good zings in a debate does not a good president make. I hope voters realize that Nancy is right. Despite Newt’s “righteous indignation” of having his marriage record brought up, the fact remains that he DID have affairs. Nothing can change that. Morally, past history has a right to play a part in determining the qualifications of a presidential candidate, in my opinion. If a person expresses sorrow over what he/she had done, should they be forgiven? Absolutely. Being forgiven, however, does not mean that we have to then allow that person to hold high public office.

    We need a candidate with a squeaky clean moral record, because you can bet your last clean pair of socks that the Obama camp is going to use whatever history they can dig up–moral or otherwise–in trying to destroy whoever is the GOP nominee. Newt’s affairs/marriages will not fare well under their attack. They will handle the Clinton issue by stating that his affair happened while he was in office, and may even use that against Newt as “proof” that we need a morally clean president.

    With Romney, there’s nothing morally for them to dig up or use.

    • David Snow says:

      Terry -
      I sure hope whoever writes Romney’s campaign commercials reads your post.
      That’s the perfect response to Gingrinch’s hypocritical deflection.

    • Matt says:

      Terry,

      Good comments. My issue has not been about whether I can forgive Newt. No, it’s about whether I can
      trust him or not. Heck, I can forgive a man who molests a child, as crazy as that may sound. But, trust
      that man to watch my kids for the weekend, NOT IN A MILLION YEARS. Sorry Newt, while I’m not comparing what you did to molesting a child, I’m simply saying this: you’ve not earned my trust. I hope the voters of SC
      see it that way

    • Brandon from NJ says:

      I agree, besides the typical rich = evil mantra, there’s really not much they can say at least to a capitalist-principled audience, that would work too well. Which would speak volumes as to why the Obama campaign effort is already focused on Romney, they know there’s someone who they need to get on the case of early on, simply because his record would show that he’s at least somewhat reliable, at least he can deal well with his own family first, and second, he can potentially actually organize an argument for private enterprise. This is something that short of really dominating the airwaves overtime, you would have a hard time doing.

  5. zefi says:

    Cain drops in polls, numbers go to other man, both (shall I say three) of them experienced the same
    thing in the nineties . No more please, we can do it.An ex adulterer in the oval office and a first lady who had an affair with a married man. These type of persons will be making history that will be read by our children and granchildren a century later .Is this the kind of role model that we want our children see? Hypocracy is the buzz word here.
    Protect our children. They are not political ( pandering, expediency, etc), and they need a God fearing leader in the white house as their role model.

    • Brandon from NJ says:

      Gingrich already has a very low chance already, if youtube users can record plenty of Gingrich’s contradicting messages, many of which he made within weeks of each other, he will drop in approval very fast should he become the nominee. The fact that he could make two very opposite statements on foreign policy in libya over the time period of less than a month will be something that he will get grilled over, if not now, then soon.

  6. Laura says:

    You are so right, Nancy! I am horrified that the conservative pundits are rallying around Newt as if adultery has always been a top banner principle of the GOP. It’s sickening. If we were talking about a Democrat, the same people cheering for Newt would be screaming for blood and I am ashamed at their hypocrisy. Even if it was Mitt or Santorum who had cheated on two different wives, no one would be cheering. I am physically ill that America is falling for this.

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>