A claim Newt Gingrich made about offering ABC character witnesses to deny his ex-wife's allegations is wrong.
While I would consider myself an independent, I am closest to a moderate Republican voter. I have generally struggled with supporting any of the Republican nominees for extreme positions on either social issues (Rick Santorum) or international issues (Ron Paul) or candidates that have changed their positions on multiple issues (Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich) and who appear to only aspire to the presidency for the title and power.
But Newt Gingrich takes the cake, a man who has resorted to fabrications, bullying, misinformation and revisionist history for comments on personal and political topics & issues that clearly do not match the facts of his checkered and erratic past.
A man who says and does anything for political purposes should be defined as a politician. A politician like Newt is beyond that – a pompous, arrogant self-grandiose politician who claims to be a champion of moral values after multiple affairs while publically reprimanding others who did the same, a politician who apparently believes the public is so gullible they would even swallow that one of his affairs was due to his "great love for this country", a politician that cozies up to the Reagan legacy today while ripping it during his presidency, a man who would more quickly blame the media instead of owning up to his (clearly) own failings and a politician who's personal ambition crowds out any hope he would be a dignified leader of the free world.
And as Newt recently ripped Mitt Romney's capitalist ways by commenting how horrid Bain Capital was to allow executives to walk away with millions for themselves while firing countless individuals who were unwilling victims of those executive decisions. Sound familiar? Gee Newt – so I am SURE you are pro-regulation for financial institutions and would want to strengthen Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley. After all, didn't Wall Street and bank executives walk away with tens and hundreds of millions of dollars after decisions they made helped cause the catastrophe in 2008 and also resulted in massive layoffs of employees who also were unwitting participants of those decisions. Right? After all, you couldn't possibly be two-faced about an issue like that JUST to get elected, RIGHT?
Newt Gingrich should never be given a position of ultimate power. Never.
Also – congratulations John King for a great and perfectly reasonable question (considering the news at the time) during the South Carolina Republican debates. He can distract people – but he cannot hide.
I like what you guys tend to be up too. This kind of celver work and coverage! Keep up the wonderful works guys I've incorporated you guys to my personal blogroll.
Your daily destination for political news. Join John each night as he pulls back the curtain on Washington, cuts through the partisan noise, and gets to the bottom of stories that affect you.
John King, USA aired weekdays at 6pm ET. The final show aired June 29, 2012.
Any questions for John? Tweet them to @JohnKingCNN and he'll answer them Tuesday's at noon ET on CNN.com/LIVE
Subscribe | About John King
Click here to access transcripts from recent shows.