January 23rd, 2012 
Alec Difrawi 
He makes promises he can’t keep.
He turns childish when he doesn’t get his way.
He appears to be an angry little man running for the Republican nomination.
During the beginning of his campaign, Gingrich vowed to follow the Republican’s Eleventh Commandment stating, “Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican.” He even asked his supporters to stay positive and avoid attacking fellow GOP opponents in an attempt to stick to the important issues.
Let’s just say no one was surprised when almost two weeks later Gingrich abandoned his vow to run a smear-free campaign. Letting his true colors shine, he attacked other Republicans, calling Romney a liar and also accusing him of pious baloney. Unable to make up his mind, Gingrich’s campaign went back and forth between claiming to be positive and spewing out attacks on Romney claiming he was the 2nd most dangerous man in America.
The straw that personally broke Grandpa Gingrich’s back – an attack of his character through a series of TV ads in Iowa. In these, Romney’s team portrayed Gingrich as unworthy of the GOP nomination and unfit to be president. Once Gingrich got a taste of his own medicine, things turned real ugly.
Newt Gingrich turned negative, and as his numbers dropped so did his civility (or at least what remained of it). Of course, he holds Romney personally responsible for the Iowa loss and claims he is only defending himself. Instead of focusing on the nation’s issues, Gingrich looks determined to bring Romney (and the rest of the Republican Party) down at all verbally immature costs.
What happened to Newt’s promise to be positive and take the high road during his campaign? Does he truly think the nation will elect such an angry little man?
Posted in 
Tags: 
very well written, sometimes the truth hurts, great tags
Nice Piece.
After the results in South Carolina, Romney will have to take the gloves off to change the momentum of the race.
I respect that Newt attempted to run a positive candidacy, however, it was apparent that this strategy was not shared by Mitt Romney, his PAC(s), nor the liberal, “elite media”. Prior to the South Carolina primary, Newt was falsely attacked in ads broadcast widely throughout the state, which was then followed by left wing media ABC’s announcement of an interview with Newt’s bitter ex-wife regarding personal matters. Although the media feigned a journalistic ethical dilemma, it was obvious that they intended to release the ex-Mrs. Gingrich’s claims prior to the primary, which they ultimately did. It became obvious their intent was to smear Gingrich and allow him little time to refute the veracity of these claims. Within two days of ABC’s “exclusive” release, and during the opening question of the South Carolina debate, liberal media’s CNN moderator, John King, questioned Newt regarding those personal, intimate matters. Newt’s fiery response that he was, “…tired of the elite media protecting Barack Obama by attacking Republicans” was not only admirable but long overdue. The audience’s standing ovation resoundingly showed a deep connection with Newt’s exasperation with the liberal media’s continued bias and attacks. Angry? Yes. Little? Not as much as the media would like.
“Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.”
–Thomas Jefferson
I appreciate the input and would be more prone to agree if Newt didn’t fail in his attempts to run a positive campaign. And why would the media need to attack Republicans when they do a fairly great job of it themselves?
To be perfectly honest, Alec, *none* of the current candidates have run a positive campaign. Personally, I’d prefer to see the candidates stick to discussing their positions on various *important* issues, and even comparing/contrasting their positions with their opponents’. Unfortunately, that’s not what the press/media/and viewers consider when they choose the debate, “Winner”. What it all boils down to is more like a, “Super Bowl Debate” where the candidates attempt to battle one another for poll points. And don’t kid yourself, this is not just the way Republicans debate; it’s the same method used by Democrats. Do you not remember the Hillary and other Democratic contenders vs. Obama debates? See the links below:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=opNmTcTwFp0&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MkDZWLPkJs0&feature=related
I could post several hundred more links, but I’ll spare you. I’m certain you know how to Google Youtube.
Why would the media attack Republicans, you ask? For the fun of it, of course. It’s all just a nasty game, remember?
And just in case you haven’t read about or seen the video, here’s what Obama’s , “Puppetmaster”, George Soros, had to say about Mitt Romney.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeDtzeKo-G8
“I’m a traitor to my Class.” –George Soros (Research this man and don’t rely alone on Wikipedia, lol!
Class? Oh, the ELITE class! Pardon me for being so, “classless”, George. I thought we abandoned feudalism quite some time ago…
DontBelieveTheLiberalMedia, great links. The intention with this post was not to target the Republicans, I would have written the same if the Democrats were currently debating each other with such tactics.
The media isn’t attacking Republicans, Republicans are attacking Republicans. They’ve made political debates into pure amusement. It’s hard to watch them and think that any of these candidates could be (or even are qualified to be) the future president of America.
Whose to blame? How do politicians such as Newt and Romney make it so far?
I’m glad to see that you acknowledge that attack “tactics” are part of the, “game”. However, if you truly believe that the media is innocent of biased attacks, I would suggest reading a variety of non-left-leaning news sources. Again, just for brevity’s sake:
http://www.mrc.org/static/biasbasics/Exhibit2-5GallupPollsonMediaBias.aspx
http://cmpa.com/studies_political_obama.html
http://www.gargaro.com/bias.html
I realize that you have the right to your opinion, but so does the general public. Professional journalism should *never* infringe on this right by promoting their own agenda. By their own code of conduct, the media is obligated to report only facts, which promotes an informed public. Due to the media’s ongoing bias, I certainly understand the difficulty of realizing the qualifications of any of the candidates. Candidates’ aggressive attacks do give voters pause, but information gained is, and should, be researched by competent individual voters. Given the experience and knowledge of each of the GOP candidates, any ONE of them is more qualified for the office of POTUS than Obama. How did he make it so far without ever having any real experience or even proof of eligibility? I dare you to ask the media that question. Prepare for their laughter and insults. Who’s to blame, you ask? I challenge all intelligent voters to ask themselves that question and find an honest answer.
http://www.tellthetruth2012.org/
Never called the media innocent. Their job is to report, the viewers job is to judge. What would be a solution to the issue of media sources promoting their own agenda? Media regulation?
Is the media is obligated to report only the facts? What about opinions?
Obama made it this far because the Americans elected him. The majority of votes is the only qualification necessary.
That’s an interesting link at the end. If the detest on media bias is so strong why not start a media source with the purpose of reporting with no bias?
I greatly appreciate this article. Please create more articles.