I am on record as no Newt fan, but I must say that the events of the last few days, ABC news, and I have been a little unfair to him.
Let’s start with ABC News. Newt is on record acknowledging his previous infidelities and has stated that he repents of his actions and he asked God to forgive him. There is no news in this. I heard reporter Brian Ross acknowledging in an interview that the comments of an [angry] ex-wife must be taken with a grain of salt. Yes, so why air them? She makes the comments that break no news other than to add salaciousness and supposed newness to old facts. She says it. Newt denies it. Now we have a he said/she said situation and there is no way any one of can ever know the truth. To air such a thing from a grieved source when it contains no new information for which to judge Newt the candidate is the very definition of a hit piece. No light, and not very much heat either. It is unprofessional and rather despicable for ABC to air it.
Let me clear that I think that Newt’s acknowledged past personal life is fair game for consideration. He may have asked God to forgive him and that is well and good, but it is relevant for determining trustworthiness and judgement. The fact is that like me, Newt is a sinner. Thing is, I have asked God to forgive me certain sins but it doesn’t mean I am not still tempted and might be able to resist some time in the future. Sin is like that. Anyway, I think it is fair to weight this in judgement for/against Newt. That said, this story did not give me one piece of usable information that can help me further analyze the candidate. It was a smear, pure and simple.
Since this seems to be the only piece of ‘news’ to come out of the interview, I think I was unfair to call for him to drop out over this. I assumed there would be more (perhaps because I don’t like Newt the candidate) and I jumped the gun. I was wrong to do so.
All that said, I think that Newt’s temperament, judgement, and intellectual flightiness make him a very risky proposition as a candidate and as a president. Would he be a million times better than Obama, you betcha. Do I think he the best we can choose from now? No.
But it is up to Newt to make the case and he should not drop out because of this interview. It is still a hard sell for me.
January 20, 2012 at 4:29 am
I don't think their is one grain of truth in that "open" marriage claim she made. Why? At one point she said that Newt said Callista "didn't care what he did" implying that Callista was ok with the whole idea.
Really? REALLY!!! Ask your wife if that sounds reasonable.
January 20, 2012 at 4:45 am
Despite the concerns regarding Gingrich, it has been and still remains "anyone but Romney" for me. I simply will not vote for Romney now or in the general election, and I won't waste any effort or time trying to attack Gingrich as long as Romney is in the race. For me, worrying too much about Gingrich is a waste when there is a bigger problem – Romney.
January 20, 2012 at 5:29 am
Flash forward ten years to Brian Ross's interview with Callista, bemoaning the fact that she's been replaced by a newer model. Yawn.
January 20, 2012 at 8:46 am
So, we want a twice cheater (2nd and 3rd marraiges from adulterous affairs)and his mistress as our role models in the White House. We all bemoaned Clinton and his antics (me included), but we're taking a pass on Ginchrich because he is our conservative? Please. I'll forgive him as we are all sinners, bit NO way will I ever vote for him. And to the comment that calista wouldn't allow an open marriage? Calista was the mistress and knowingly had the affair with a married Ginchrich. Her morals were already corrupted, so who knows what she would agree to. Nothing wlould surprise me.
January 20, 2012 at 1:46 pm
Good post, and this is kind of where I am at. His past actions are really inexcusable – even if the current claims are exaggerated. We should allow that he is a changed man, but we should also be leery.
January 20, 2012 at 3:33 pm
Not sure this is the right place for this particular piece, but did everybody see this: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/14/christian-conservative-leaders-vote-to-back-santorum/
This is why Gingrich should step down. I think he has fooled a lot of people with his conservative credentials, but, like you said, Patrick, it's hard to trust him and know where he would lead the country. With Santorum you always know exactly what he will be fighting for and you know he'll continue to fight as long as he can while also getting things done. With a majority in both the House and Senate, Santorum will be the most effective at moving this country back to where it belongs.
January 20, 2012 at 5:40 pm
I'm not in favor of either Rick or Newt. Both are big government conservatives. We need to think small government, so my vote is going to Ron Paul.
January 20, 2012 at 10:16 pm
Yes! She is obviously lying about this upstanding family man! Admissions of his dumping previous wives for being ill or "not pretty enough to be the wife of a president" obvioulsy also lies. That money he took from Freddie Mac while railing against it? More lies, Newt wouldn't do anything like that. Stories of his history of "shtupping campaign volunteers"??? Can't be true. I have a great idea, why doesn't Newt make a "Contract with America"?? That this slimeball is even allowed on a stage with Ron Paul is an affront. Judge the fruit people.
January 21, 2012 at 12:17 am
I'd love to see the math. 1,000,000 times better than Obama? A serial adulterer? Really. Your hatred of Obama is out of balance. I wonder why. As an asside, a Benedictine Nun sent me a racist cartoon of Obama. She appologized but, that is another matter. I wonder how widespread racism is in the catholic arena since she also sent it to other brothers and sisters and virginia school teachers. Just sayin.
January 21, 2012 at 12:32 am
That this slimeball is even allowed on a stage with Ron Paul is an affront.
Ron Paul goes on radio shows hosted by the like of 9/11 truther Alex Jones, and welcomes the endorsement of white supremacist groups such as Storm Front.
Being on stage with Newt is an improvement with his normal associations.
January 21, 2012 at 1:41 pm
"I think I was unfair to call for him to drop out over this. "
Wow. How gracious. Go read your earlier post again. You were adolescent and name-calling in a manner way out of line for someone who does not even know the guy or the facts. You called him "a tool," twice. You ought to apologize to him and your readers for being unprofessional and failing to edit an over-reactive emotional rant. WHen you are a widely-read blogger, you can't act like you are just one of the guys down at the pub. You're not. You have a public voice and responsibility , and need to resist the temptation to go off like you just had you fourth beer.
January 21, 2012 at 4:37 pm
The "endorsements" of Ron Paul by white supremacist groups doesn't mean Paul or his ideas are wrong. I have never seen any proof that RP is racist. The support for Ron Paul from these quarters, from what I've seen, is because of his positions on the Federal Reserve, the bloated government we have, our governments crazy desire to police the world, and his stand on out of control legal and illegal immigration. Most of his supporters are not racists, the only thing they have in common with the racists is an anti-pathy toward the things I just mentioned.
As for Alex Jones, perhaps it was not a wise decision for Ron Paul to be on his show, but I imagine based on what I know about Jones, that he and Paul share simular ideals about government and social policy. I know neither man is racist, because Jones's wife is Jewish, and if Paul is racist, I doubt he would bother to appear on Jones's show.
January 22, 2012 at 7:46 am
Agreeing with JFM. Your previous posts paint you as a Pharisee and a hypcrite. We are all sinners. What Newt did/said was between him, his wife and God. And I've found in life those who are the loudest finger-pointers are usually covering up things in their own life/marriage. You should probably shut up and focus on issues heretofore.
January 23, 2012 at 2:13 pm
I agree with JFM and anon. You can be (and have been) really unprofessional in your approach to politics. You are ESPECIALLY dismissive and insulting toward the Ron Paul crowd and Ron Paul himself. You actually went so far as to call Caucuses "stupid" when it looked like he was going to win Iowa, and I called you out on it then, saying that if Santorum won you would call it a huge victory for an underdog candidate…which you did in fact do in a later post. You are biased and just as bad as all of the liberal media, just with a different flavor.
Get over yourself, Archbold. Remember, big name Catholics have fallen (just recently) from the heights because they thought their words mattered more than *the* Word.
January 24, 2012 at 2:14 am
I gree with the other posters before me. I think the "populist" media (Bill Maher on the left, Ann Coulter on the right) have for so long thrown around derrogatory terms like "tool" "jerk" etc to the point where they expect the public to simply accept it in public discourse. Well…isn't this branded as a Catholic blog? Do you think we should accept it?
Also, I think it's a bit hypocritical of you to go off on ABC news airing the allegations of Newt's ex-wife, when all you did on this blog is repeat them and take the opportunity to editorialize how much you don't like him. Does anyone else see the irony in your post?