It is odd that the conservative media was a huge supporter of Gingrich when he was not running for public office. Gingrich was a subject matter expert and a well repected contributer/consultant on almost every conservative show, a constistent player.Gingrich's opinion was oft sought by the exact same people that now slam him, that must be hard for him.
His career is over if he is not elected IMO.

I must say I liked the guy and thought he was very informative and new his history. He did seem to try and ride the Reagan express alot.
After seriously reviewing his views and ambitions I would very reluctanly cast a vote for him, if I must.

A sad fact, I am only 43 and have yet been able to cast a vote for a presedential candidate that I was extremely excited about. Always the lesser of evils.

I'll get on the vote ABO 2012 bandwagon, lesser of evils again.

Just as I predicted a couple days ago, now that Newt looks like a possibility, the establishment GOP will push Romney more and more.

Here is an article from the 'American Spectator' today. I apologize, Hoski, for the cut and paste.

"Our Bill Clinton"
R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. on 1.26.12 @ 6:10AM

That is not meant as a compliment.

"WASHINGTON -- How long have I been saying it? At least for 15 years, but in private I have been aware of it longer. Newt Gingrich is conservatism's Bill Clinton, but without the charm. He has acquired wit but he has all the charm of barbed wire.

Newt and Bill are, of course, 1960s generation narcissists, and they share the same problems: waywardness and deviancy. Newt, like Bill, has a proclivity for girl hopping. It is not as egregious as Bill's, but then Newt is not as drop-dead beautiful. His public record is already besmeared with tawdry divorces, and there are private encounters with the fair sex that doubtless will come out. If I have heard of some, you can be sure the Democrats have heard of more. Nancy Pelosi's intimations are timely. Newt up against the Prophet Obama would be a painful thing to watch. He might be deft with one-liners but it would be futile. There are independent and other uncommitted voters to be cultivated in 2012 -- all would be unmoved by Newt's juggling of conservative shibboleths.

Newt and Bill, as 1960s generation self-promoters, share the same duplicity, ostentatious braininess, a propensity for endless scrapes with propriety and the law. They are tireless hustlers. Now Newt is hustling my fellow conservatives in this election. The last time around he successfully hustled conservatives in the House of Representatives and then the conservatives on the House impeachment committee. He blew the impeachment and in fact his role as Speaker. He backed out in disgrace. He now says Republicans in the House were exhausted with his great projects. Nonsense, I knew many of them, and they were exhausted with his atrocious leadership. He is not a leader. He is a huckster. Today Mitt Romney has 72 Congressional endorsements. Newt has 11. Possibly the 11 have yet to meet him.

Now he has found his key for the hustling conservative electorate. He is playing the liberal media card and saying he embodies conservative values. Like Bill with his credulous fans, Newt is hoping conservatives suffer amnesia. Possibly some do. Perhaps they cannot recall mere months ago when this insufferable whiz kid was lambasting the great Congressman Paul Ryan for "right-wing social engineering" -- more evidence of Newt's not-so-hidden longing for the approval of the liberal media.

After his Ryan moment Newt's campaign was a death wagon, and it will be so again -- hopefully before he gets the nomination. Conservatives should not climb onto his death wagon. He is a huckster, and I for one will not be rendered a contortionist trying to defend him. I did so in his earliest days and learned my lesson. After Newt's and Bill's disastrous experiences in government both went on to create empires, Bill in philanthropy and cheap thought, Newt in public policy and cheap thought. As an ex-president Bill has wrung up an unprecedented $75.6 million since absconding from the White House with White House loot and shameless pardons. I do not know how much Newt has amassed, but he got between $1.6 million to $1.8 million from Freddie Mac, and he lobbied for Medicare Part D while receiving, according to the Washington Examiner's Tim Carney, "Big Bucks Pushing Corporate Welfare." Now after a lifetime in Washington he is promoting himself as an outsider.

Contending with Newt for the Republican nomination are Ron Paul, Rick Santorum, and Mitt Romney. All three are truer conservatives than Newt. I like them all. But John Bolton, former ambassador to the United Nations, and John Lehman, Ronald Reagan's secretary of the navy, are for Mitt, and they are solid conservatives. Governor Chris Christie and the economic pundit Larry Kudlow laud Mitt on taxes, on spending, and on attacking crony capitalism. Kudlow calls Romney "Reaganesque." Ann Coulter seems to loathe Newt.

Back in 1992 I appeared with Chris Matthews on some gasbag's television show. Was it Donahue? At any rate, I said candidate Clinton had more skeletons in his closet than a body snatcher. It was a prescient line then, and I always got a laugh. I can apply the same line today to Newt, though he has skeletons both inside and outside his closet. Conservatives should not be surprised by the scandals that lie ahead, if they stick with him. Those of us, who raised the question of character in 1992, were confronted by an indignant Bill Clinton, treating the topic as a low blow. To listen to him, character was the "c" word of American politics. It was reprehensible to mention it. By now we know. Character matters. Paul, Santorum, and Romney have it. Newt has Clinton's character."

I and most Americans care very little for how much skirt which politician chases. We love reading about it, we love mocking the mighty when they do silly things over the opposite sex much the same as we laugh at that guy down the street who started dating his university age au paire. But we'll still vote for them.

Clinton still scores extremely high on popularity polls, Gingrich's unfavorables are the highest of any current American politician and that's what drives the people who run the Republican party around the bend. It's why I absolutely adore Newt Gingrich.

Newt's star began to shine back when hate radio was first gaining legs, and to this day if you listen to Newt you can hear the repetition of those same words he has been using ever since. He talks of his opponent using, "sick, pathetic, lie, decay, failure, and destroy". He uses those words over and over again. He makes reference to Saul Alinky who wrote the textbook on demagoguery.

Newt is down in Florida. The Republican establishment has pumped untold millions into the state. We will never know how much, but nationally,,,, he's still ahead. With Republican voters that is.

Newt gives Republicans what they like. The haranguing hate speech they hear every day on Fox and the radio from Rush and Hannity. And he would never win a national election. Never. It's more than obvious to anyone who follows polling, politics, and elections. Certainly the leadership of the Republican party follows polls, they live by them. Newt is a guaranteed loss.

So why does the American Spectator love Mittens? Everyone knows his history of pro abortion, gun grabbing, socialist health care. Didn't Mitt used to be a Democrat? Mitt will do as he's told. AS president he would know his place as CEO. A CEO does as the board of directors dictates. The most important things are to keep taxes as low as possible, corporate taxes as low as possible, and direct lots of public moneys towards huge corporations. Pharma, "Defense" all the usual suspects.

Santorum wiped the floor with Mitt last night. People were waiting for the Mitt/Newt slugfest and Santorum won. Why? Because he doesn't have to make it up. Mitt has a lying problem, no not that one, Mitts problem is that he can't lie convincingly. He doesn't believe what he's saying. Newt does, Newt believes his own lies, but he's so full of bile and hate that he turns people off. Santorum and Paul don't have to fake it.

Hoski,

Agreed! I know this thread is not about Hillary, but I think the point you made about her not divorcing his sorry ass for his philandering exposes a bit of her moral fiber as well. Her character is no better than Bill's. Not much sand to anyone who would tolerate a lifetime of that behavior from a spouse.

We Americans deserve a President with good character. Otherwise, we could be just like the French. Politics aside, I can't carp too much about Obama's character. Clinton and Nixon come to mind for beneath the bar standards.

I see that Hillary announce she would be departing/retiring as Secretary of State at the end of Obama's current term. I'm just waiting for Biden to have a health or family matter that requires him to "spend more time with his family" and drop off the ticket. Joe under the bus and Hil on the platform!

Cheers,
WAM

Why not support limited govt, and the candidate that supports limited govt if you think you get screwed? You get screwed by big govt. not limited govt.

A little insider info. Newt is a thorn in the GOP establishments side. And the reason why is Newt would be a people's President and cut a lot of waste, and spending. At least support big cuts. NEWT has big project ideas, but he would pay for any by cutting waste, and growing the economy. NEWT was fined for ethics violations supported by republicans because he supported cutting back "welfare as we know it" The GOP establishment is about controlling the money, not cutting back big govt. Some in the establishment are for cutting back spending, and all Tea Party candidates are for cutting back on govt spending. The Establishment wants their guy to win, heck with who the voters want. They want Romney. He will support the big investment banks, and the fatcats on Wall St., and Romney will win the independents, and the Establishment will control the Senate and the purse strings. Romney has lots of big money backed by the WA Establishment GOP. Obama is still bailing out, and rewarding the big banks. The big money on Wall St. supported Obama more so than any candidate in history. Not so this go round. He has bad mouthed them far too much as the reason for our financial problems.

clinchknot,
Please, please please stop with the foolishness comparing our nation to Greece, or any other. We are not anything close. We do not have taxi drivers or hair stylists retiring at 50 on the Govt's dime.
A quick check on the European hotspots, Greece, Italy, Spain, etc. clearly shows the extreme austerity measures are crippling their economies.
Our economy is indeed growing, albeit at a slower rate than hoped for. Today's paper shows growth for a third straight quarter and accelerating.

"Romney ,,,,,,, by the WA Establishment GOP."

Hmmm. Where have we heard that misnomer before?

WAM, you don't think......
Really?!?
OMG!

Ask Moishe or Clay Cooper...they're experts