Devastating profile of Newt Gingrich and his marriages in Gail Collins column in NY Times
By: Patrick Roberts | Published Saturday, March 12, 2011, 10:55 AM | Updated Friday, September 9, 2011, 10:07 PM
If you want to read one of the most devastating pieces of journalism in a long time read Gail Collins on Newt Gingrich in Saturday's New York Times.
Collins is usually in the shadow of her more famous Irish American colleague Maureen Dowd but on this occasion she outdoes everyone.
Gingrich, pictured here with third wife Callista, was recently on Christan Broadcasting Network defending his three marriages. and he said " There is no question that at times in my life , partially driven by how passionately I feel about this country that I worked far too hard and that things happened in my life that were not appropriate."
Huh?
As an excuse for infidelity it beats the band.
As the man who led the impeachment charge against Bill Clinton it gives hypocrisy a new name.
And Collins knows how to apply the knife mocking Gingrich for saying his passion for work led to his affairs.
She goes back over Gingrich's two broken marriages.
In the first one he told his wife Jackie when she was recovering from surgery for uterine cancer he was divorcing her --charming I'm sure.
His second wife Marianne , who suffered from multiple sclerosis, was visiting her mother when he called to tell her he'd met some one better.
A real class act.
The Catholic Church found a way to have Gingrich annul his second marriage and marry his third wife, a much younger woman after becoming a Catholic.
With Catholics like him no wonder the church is in trouble.
Gingrich is ready to forgive his own sins, but judging by his rhetoric not those of others.
What a hypocrite!
12 Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Switch to the desktop site to post a comment.kaydog1 | Mar 25, 2011, 02:53 PM EDT
The NY Times? That Commie rag? So they don't like Gingrich? SURPRISE!!! They would do the SAME hatchet job on ANY viable non-progressive candidate. Please note, their's is no analysis of the soundness of his IDEAS here, no rebuttal of his economic or political ANALYSIS, no comparison of Gingrich' PLATFORM as compared to Obama's. Instead, we are treated to whispered aspersions on his marital relationships - rather like the "mean girls" you knew in grade school sneaking up to you and whispering in your ear: "You'd better not play with HER, she's DIRTY. And if you do, WE won't like you....and don't you DARE tell her what we said." Remember those horrid, destructive little creatures? Well they grew up to be Democrats and some of them now occupy the carcass of what USED to be the NY Times. Just as the standard Progressive political debating technique these days is to call anyone who disagrees with them BIGOTTED, RACIST, and a HATER, so too I expect the run-up to the 2012 election to contain a large number of personal smear attacks and precious little actual political analysis - especially from the likes of the Times. But then, that is why their circulation is down better than 10% last year - people who want ACCURATE reporting get the Wall Street Journal (whose circulation is UP 0.5 % in the same period). People who want Times-style "reportage" already get The Daily Worker. I'm not impressed.
mayoman | Mar 19, 2011, 10:43 AM EDT
Well done, Patrick.
Porickseantuny | Mar 16, 2011, 04:37 PM EDT
Gingrich didn't led the charge against Clinton. In fact in his silence was his admission that the Clinton administration had the goods on him. If his indiscretions hadn't been in Hilary's purloined FBI dossiers, he would have been loud. The man has led a life with many indiscretions the same as some converts to sainthood. e.g. St Francis of Assisi and Ignatius Loyola. He certainly has much to atone for.
maloney | Mar 15, 2011, 03:01 PM EDT
carollover..thank you for your post. Sounds to me like Newt is the man for the job.
carollover | Mar 14, 2011, 09:29 AM EDT
I believe Gingrich (together with the late Lee Atwater) is most responsible for everything that's wrong in government and politics today. There was a time when Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill could argue all day, and then sit down in the Oval Office after hours and tell bawdy Irish jokes. Gingrich took out Speaker Jim Wright, and that marked a sea change in how Republicans and Dems got along. Gingrich's philosophy wasn't "I just disagree with you". Gingrich's philosophy was "I disagree with you, and I will do all I can to destroy everything you stand for." His attitude was the end of bipartisanship, and the start of the modern day meanness and anger we see in politics. And it goes both ways. Far right Republicans hated Clinton and hate Obama even more, and Dems loathed W. Bush. There was and is no middle ground. Extremism has taken hold on the left and right, and it all goes back to Newt. He's a smart person, but he's mean, shallow, cold hearted and would throw anyone under the bus.
ellenfromcork | Mar 12, 2011, 05:17 PM EST
Ah Newt, always ready to see the splinter in someone else's eye, but not the log in his own.
onefinefour | Mar 12, 2011, 05:00 PM EST
That's it, 2BorNot2B and monsoonman -- if you can't say anything relevant about the person we're discussing, badmouth someone else!
Monsoonman | Mar 12, 2011, 01:58 PM EST
So when is a "passionate politician" something to scorn around here in liberalville? I seem to remember mr. clinton has quite a few tire marked,character assassinated, discarded, ladies in his wake. Even his "spiritual counselor", the "reverend" jesse jackson himself, while in the middle of counseling the president had to confess to his own moral predilections( 2 timing). Isn't it time we judge conservatives by the same standard that liberals use?= That character doesn't matter?
Monsoonman | Mar 12, 2011, 01:28 PM EST
You need to get your rabies shots. Could we please see the transcript of the phone conversation between Newt and his 2nd, multiple sclerosis stricken wife? You know the one where he tells her " I met someone better, so adios". Thanks in advance for your cooperation.
JoeyTranchina | Mar 12, 2011, 11:32 AM EST
This is a fair account of an unfair American politician. The real story is that this manipulative hypocrite still has an audience in right-wing US politics... although David Brooks, also of the NY Times, wrote that he wouldn't hire Gingrich to "manage a 7-11" convenience store.. Newt Gingrich is not a declared candidate for any public office. That means there is not accountability for money he raises for his so-called "campaign." Most right-wing storie,s like most Fundamentalist stories, are not about politics or religion at all. They are about raising money from suckers. This is another of those stories.
brondell | Mar 12, 2011, 11:25 AM EST
Newt is an"Expedient" Catholic and a hypocrite.
ShamrockShore | Mar 12, 2011, 11:18 AM EST
He's a spineless jerk! And if the voters elect him - they deserve him.