A well deserved thrashing

[Grim17]

I am not a Newt Gingrich supporter, but it's incidents like this that make me almost wish I were. CNN got exactly what they deserved, and all the other liberal media outlets deserved to have gotten this too.

OUTSTANDING

[video=youtube;zc4lnlDVW3o]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=zc4lnlDVW3o[/video]


The look on that moderators face is priceless.

 

[ksu_aviator]

Gotta admit, it wasn't the typical political answer. If Romney faced this question, he'd have said: "There was a time in my life when I had some indiscretions and I have paid the price for my actions. I am sorry for those that I have hurt and I take full responsibility." The question is, which answer is more honest? The guy that says, "No, I don't want to talk about it and you shouldn't have brought it up" or the guy that gives the previously mentioned, focus group tested, political answer that is impossible to discern his true character. At least with this we know what Newt is thinking, good or bad.

 

[SheWolf]

I am not a Newt Gingrich supporter, but it's incidents like this that make me almost wish I were. CNN got exactly what they deserved, and all the other liberal media outlets deserved to have gotten this too.

OUTSTANDING




The look on that moderators face is priceless.

Damn... lol

I entirely missed the debate, but I'd have to agree with Newt. I am beyond shocked that they'd open the debate like that, ****ing rude and unprofessional. I know CNN is probably thinking that people might be thinking about that, but they should be professional and avoid a confrontation. That's not the point of a debate. If Newt wanted to address it, he could. If they wanted to treat him fairly and all other candidates fairly in a controversy, they could address it before the debate and work out how to approach it publicly... lol

I think CNN must have thought if they made the situation as confrontational as possible, then maybe their debates would get more ratings and more discussion... It's just right or professional.

 

[SheWolf]

Gotta admit, it wasn't the typical political answer. If Romney faced this question, he'd have said: "There was a time in my life when I had some indiscretions and I have paid the price for my actions. I am sorry for those that I have hurt and I take full responsibility." The question is, which answer is more honest? The guy that says, "No, I don't want to talk about it and you shouldn't have brought it up" or the guy that gives the previously mentioned, focus group tested, political answer that is impossible to discern his true character. At least with this we know what Newt is thinking, good or bad.

It would have been funny to see Romney take a question like that, because he usually tries to avoid answering questions... lol. It would be actually nice for once to see Romney corned into answering a damn question for once, just one ****ing time.

I saw somebody give him a question (I think it was John King too) and say... simply yes or no.... just say yes or no... and Romney laughed and went into an explanation. Just like he did with the state's rights and banning birth control. Just answer the damn question Mitt. GAWD

 

[winston53660]

I am not a Newt Gingrich supporter, but it's incidents like this that make me almost wish I were. CNN got exactly what they deserved, and all the other liberal media outlets deserved to have gotten this too.


.

OMG you gotta be kidding me. The guy orchestrated a witch hunt over a friggen blow job. And now he is getting popped.

 

[Redress]

HOLY ****! A political candidate got asked about something in the news! STOP THE PRESSES!

I do love how conservatives have one answer for everything: it's not my fault, it's the media.

 

[SheWolf]

OMG you gotta be kidding me. The guy orchestrated a witch hunt over a friggen blow job. And now he is getting popped.

That's a good point...

 

[SheWolf]

HOLY ****! A political candidate got asked about something in the news! STOP THE PRESSES!

I do love how conservatives have one answer for everything: it's not my fault, it's the media.

LOL... I just saw more of the exchange on TV, and he really did pull the I'm a victim of the liberal media card... I think he would have looked better if he stopped short of crying about the media targeting him. lol. It probably has more to do with him hurting his ex wife whose now probably out for revenge, than it does with the media bullying him because he's not Obama.

 

[pbrauer]

HOLY ****! A political candidate got asked about something in the news! STOP THE PRESSES!

I do love how conservatives have one answer for everything: it's not my fault, it's the media.

Exactly!! Newt is very smart he played to his base. He's done this before, even in one of the Fox debates. BTW, in a PPP poll, Newt is up by 6 over Romney.

 

[pbrauer]

OMG you gotta be kidding me. The guy orchestrated a witch hunt over a friggen blow job. And now he is getting popped.

To be fair, you don't know if his ex-wife's story is true.

 

[Redress]

LOL... I just saw more of the exchange on TV, and he really did pull the I'm a victim of the liberal media card... I think he would have looked better if he stopped short of crying about the media targeting him. lol. It probably has more to do with him hurting his ex wife whose now probably out for revenge, than it does with the media bullying him because he's not Obama.

If he would have said something like: "I will make one brief comment on this and that is all. It is not true. I will not respond to these allegations any further and would prefer to talk about running this country." I would have been all over respect. But to blame the media that his ex-wife granted interviews and said things about him when he is running for ****ing president? Give me a ****ing break. Next we will hear that reporting about Romney's company is a liberal conspiracy too...

 

[SheWolf]

Exactly!! Newt is very smart he played to his base. He's done this before, even in one of the Fox debates. BTW, in a PPP poll, Newt is up by 6 over Romney.

I hope Newt does win to slow Romney down... It just wouldn't be right for Romney to wrap the nomination up in such a short amount of time. They need to be vetted by the people first. I like seeing all this dirt coming out on them too... lol.. get it out now. I want to spend more time getting to know all these characters.

 

[winston53660]

To be fair, you don't know if his ex-wife's story is true.

So many wives so much territory to cover. The guy left one in her hospital bed when he was chasing Clinton.

 

[SheWolf]

To be fair, you don't know if his ex-wife's story is true.

It's also not current, and it concerns Newt's past. If Clinton was president and somebody said 10 years ago he wanted an open relationship, it really wouldn't matter much... lol

 

[nonpareil]

Everything about Romney had better come out before Republican choose the nominee so that they know who they choose, according to Gingrich, but god forbids the same standard is applied to him. He's running for the Nomination of a party that rejects gay marriage because they claim they want to "preserve the sanctity of marriage", and here's a guy who married 3 times, cheated at least twice, and allegedly asked his ex-wife for an open marriage to have affairs with his prospective 3rd wife, and that's off limits and he's shock he's got a question about it - what a f**king hypocrite.

 

[StillBallin75]

What? You're a "family-values" Conservative and you've had two divorces and relationships with all these women at the same time and asked for an open marriage? Well how dare they ask a question about that! Ref, throw a penalty flag that's not allowed!!

:2bigcry:

 

[Gie]

Damn... lol

I entirely missed the debate, but I'd have to agree with Newt. I am beyond shocked that they'd open the debate like that, ****ing rude and unprofessional. I know CNN is probably thinking that people might be thinking about that, but they should be professional and avoid a confrontation. That's not the point of a debate. If Newt wanted to address it, he could. If they wanted to treat him fairly and all other candidates fairly in a controversy, they could address it before the debate and work out how to approach it publicly... lol

I think CNN must have thought if they made the situation as confrontational as possible, then maybe their debates would get more ratings and more discussion... It's just right or professional.

I'm pretty sure you meant It's just not right or professional and I agree with you. Unfortunately it does not surprise me. A pathetic moment in broadcast journalism history.

HOLY ****! A political candidate got asked about something in the news! STOP THE PRESSES!

I do love how conservatives have one answer for everything: it's not my fault, it's the media.

Uhm, where did Gingrich say that?

If he would have said something like: "I will make one brief comment on this and that is all. It is not true. I will not respond to these allegations any further and would prefer to talk about running this country." I would have been all over respect. But to blame the media that his ex-wife granted interviews and said things about him when he is running for ****ing president? Give me a ****ing break. Next we will hear that reporting about Romney's company is a liberal conspiracy too...

Did you watch the same clip the rest of us did? Gingrich chastised the moderator (quite rightly) for opening a presidential debate with that tabloid treacle. Could you point me to the part where he says this problem is the media's fault? I mean give us a ****ing break with creating comments about blame where none exist. No matter what he will have to answer these questions and should IMO. Opening a presidential debate like that? Disgusting and I don't care who the candidate is or from what party, leave that crap for the rest of your 24/7 ratings whoring, don't place it front and center in a presidential debate.

I think Newt is done and unelectable, but this clip does illustrate the sad state of affairs in our news media across the board. CNN has been at this longer than all the others, this only makes the old hag look even more toothless. I wonder how the public would poll on this, regardless if they think Newt is guilty or not? For the record, I suspect he is. He strikes me as the type that wants his cake and too eat it too.

 

[Redress]

Uhm, where did Gingrich say that?

You did watch the clip in the OP, no? Go to the 30 second mark.

Did you watch the same clip the rest of us did? Gingrich chastised the moderator (quite rightly) for opening a presidential debate with that tabloid treacle. Could you point me to the part where he says this problem is the media's fault? I mean give us a ****ing break with creating comments about blame where none exist. No matter what he will have to answer these questions and should IMO. Opening a presidential debate like that? Disgusting and I don't care who the candidate is or from what party, leave that crap for the rest of your 24/7 ratings whoring, don't place it front and center in a presidential debate.

I think Newt is done and unelectable, but this clip does illustrate the sad state of affairs in our news media across the board. CNN has been at this longer than all the others, this only makes the old hag look even more toothless. I wonder how the public would poll on this, regardless if they think Newt is guilty or not? For the record, I suspect he is. He strikes me as the type that wants his cake and too eat it too.

So you are saying you did watch it? But you missed the "vicious, destructive, negative nature of the mainstream media"? You might want to go back and watch it again. Here is the thing: it's the media's job to ask questions about issues that are in the news involving them. This story is in the news. It's in the news because an ex-wife of one of the major candidates made comments that reflect on the candidate. None of this is the news media's fault. Not asking about it would have been ignoring the 400 pound gorilla in the room. Now I will agree that his answer played well for a conservative crowd, since conservatives love to play the victim to the evil media news(except the media that reports what they want to hear). However, for any one who is not all wound up in playing the victim, he came off as whiny.

 

[Mycroft]

Good response, Newt.

And judging from the audiences reaction to his response, Republicans, at least, agree with him.

Who cares if the liberals agree with him?

 

[Gie]

You did watch the clip in the OP, no? Go to the 30 second mark.

Yeah I did, which is why I asked you to point to the part where he started blaming the media for this situation with his ex wife. You say the 30 second mark, well here is what he said exactly at the 30 second mark.
"I think the destructive vicious negative nature of much of the news media makes it harder to govern this country, harder to attract decent people to public office and I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate on a topic like that."

While you probably disagree with him about the sad state of affairs in our ratings driven news media, attempting to equate this with blaming the media for his problems is another thing. He is right, or you don't think he is, about this as the opening question in a presidential debate. Yes or no? Why or why not? You bringing prior dislike for Gingrich personally into this, or you think this question is appropriate as the starting point in a presidential debate?

So you are saying you did watch it? But you missed the "vicious, destructive, negative nature of the mainstream media"? You might want to go back and watch it again. Here is the thing: it's the media's job to ask questions about issues that are in the news involving them. This story is in the news. It's in the news because an ex-wife of one of the major candidates made comments that reflect on the candidate. None of this is the news media's fault. Not asking about it would have been ignoring the 400 pound gorilla in the room. Now I will agree that his answer played well for a conservative crowd, since conservatives love to play the victim to the evil media news(except the media that reports what they want to hear). However, for any one who is not all wound up in playing the victim, he came off as whiny.

Of course it is "reporters" job to ask questions about issues that are in the news and Gingrich is at this moment being grilled post debate about just this matter. Of course this CNN employee was not acting in the role of a reporter in an interview, he is so called moderator. Opening a presidential debate with "did you want an open marriage" question. Give us a ****ing break. Nobody (aside from you) has stated this is the media's fault. Certainly not Gingrich, outside another internet equivalency argument. Yes I'm sure you want to want to go on about "conservatives love to blah blah blah and they are gonna start going on about liberal conspiracies blah blah blah" and get on a soapbox in general. Bully for you! I personally don't care that you think he came across as whiny. So what, I mean really so what? How did you think the so called moderator came across? Professional, is that your stance? This kind of "question" should open a presidential debate because you don't like Gingrich or is it because if this moderator does not ask it in this forum, it won't get asked and the public will suffer as well as the common good? It is most important this question be asked in a presidential debate much less as the opening question? Really? How droll and give me a ****ing break. Plu perfect please.

Good response, Newt.

And judging from the audiences reaction to his response, Republicans, at least, agree with him.

Who cares if the liberals agree with him?

Yeah I'd be interested to see what the public at large (not just reps) think of it. From what I am seeing reading and hearing, there was quite a division at ABC abut airing the interview just prior to the primary. Likewise they are being criticized for going ahead and airing it over the objection of many at ABC. Now add CNN into the mix for opening their prestigious "debate" with it. As noted earlier by someone else, I think the look on the moderators face is self explanatory and indicative a little bit of a *gulp*.

 

[nonpareil]

Yeah I did, which is why I asked you to point to the part where he started blaming the media for this situation with his ex wife. You say the 30 second mark, well here is what he said exactly at the 30 second mark.
"I think the destructive vicious negative nature of much of the news media makes it harder to govern this country, harder to attract decent people to public office and I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate on a topic like that."

While you probably disagree with him about the sad state of affairs in our ratings driven news media, attempting to equate this with blaming the media for his problems is another thing. He is right, or you don't think he is, about this as the opening question in a presidential debate. Yes or no? Why or why not? You bringing prior dislike for Gingrich personally into this, or you think this question is appropriate as the starting point in a presidential debate?


Of course it is "reporters" job to ask questions about issues that are in the news and Gingrich is at this moment being grilled post debate about just this matter. The open marriage question. Nobody (aside from you) has stated this is the media's fault. Certainly not Gingrich, outside another internet equivalency argument. Yes I'm sure you want to want to go on about "conservatives love to blah blah blah and they are gonna start going on about liberal conspiracies blah blah blah" and get on a soapbox in general. Bully for you! I personally don't care that you think he came across as whiny. So what, I mean really so what? How did you think the so called moderator came across? Professional, is that your stance? This kind of "question" should open a presidential debate because you don't like Gingrich or is it because if this moderator does not ask it in this forum, it won't get asked and the public will suffer as well as the common good? It is most important this question be asked in a presidential debate much less as the opening question? Really? How droll and give me a ****ing break. Plu perfect pease.


Yeah I'd be interested to see what the public at large (not just reps) think of it. From what I am seeing reading and hearing, there was quite a division at ABC abut airing the interview just prior to the primary. Likewise they are being criticized for going ahead and airing it over the objection of many at ABC. Now add CNN into the mix for opening their prestigious "debate" with it. As noted earlier by someone else, I think the look on the moderators face is self explanatory and indicative a little bit of a *gulp*.

It's the news that breaks that day, why shouldn't the moderator open the debate with the question?

 

[MaggieD]

It's the news that breaks that day, why shouldn't the moderator open the debate with the question?

Part of his severe criticism of the media was that it did break that day. It was timed perfectly to do the most damage possible to Gingrich. And no one even knows whether or not it's true. Unfortunately, the media is both king-maker and destroyer. In a presidential debate, the forum moderators should at least try to be neutral. What's-his-face was completely out of line. And Gingrich handled it perfectly.

I noticed that Gingrich's 2010 income tax records were released yesterday and he only deducted $19,000 in alimony. Perhaps her checks stopped last March.

 

[Gie]

Part of his severe criticism of the media was that it did break that day. It was timed perfectly to do the most damage possible to Gingrich. And no one even knows whether or not it's true. Unfortunately, the media is both king-maker and destroyer. In a presidential debate, the forum moderators should at least try to be neutral. What's-his-face was completely out of line. And Gingrich handled it perfectly.

I noticed that Gingrich's 2010 income tax records were released yesterday and he only deducted $19,000 in alimony. Perhaps her checks stopped last March.

Oh you beat me to it. Though I can see it now, Mr. Gingrich, hours ago a publication featured an interview where one of your ex wives claimed you enjoyed anal sex and requested it from her.

It is in the news and it is breaking, so yeah it not only needs to be asked at a presidential debate, but it is so important an "issue" and question it needs to be the first one asked. Over the economy, health care, etc, etc.

Apparently we are about to see some furious internet argument flourishes a plenty. Think I'll just go to bed instead. Though there is some paint drying on the fence outside my windows. Gotta go.

 

[nonpareil]

Part of his severe criticism of the media was that it did break that day. It was timed perfectly to do the most damage possible to Gingrich. And no one even knows whether or not it's true. Unfortunately, the media is both king-maker and destroyer. In a presidential debate, the forum moderators should at least try to be neutral. What's-his-face was completely out of line. And Gingrich handled it perfectly.

You failed to answer why the moderator should not open with the question about a news that break that day.

His ex-wife chose to give the interview close to the SC primary - so he should go to the source. How was the moderator not neutral?

Gingrich handled it like the ass that he is.

I noticed that Gingrich's 2010 income tax records were released yesterday and he only deducted $19,000 in alimony.

It was released to coincide with the debate and put pressure on Romney, see that's okay, but when the pressure is on him, it's the media being "negative", the hypocritical whiner.

Perhaps her checks stopped last March.

So speculation that reflects negatively about her is okay.

 

[nonpareil]

Oh you beat me to it. Though I can see it now, Mr. Gingrich, hours ago a publication featured an interview where one of your ex wives claimed you enjoyed anal sex and requested it from her.

It is in the news and it is breaking, so yeah it not only needs to be asked at a presidential debate, but it is so important an "issue" and question it needs to be the first one asked. Over the economy, health care, etc, etc.

Apparently we are about to see some furious internet argument flourishes a plenty. Think I'll just go to bed instead. Though there is some paint drying on the fence outside my windows. Gotta go.

So you think that his view on marriage is not important to Republican voters - the party that is all about the "sanctity of marriage"?