home

Marianne Unfaithful: Newt Unplugged

By Jeralyn, Section Other Politics
Posted on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 07:55:12 PM EST
Tags: Newt Gingrich (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Marianne Gingrich, the second ex-wife of Newt Gingrich, has broken her 12 year silence on Newt, in a lengthy interview with Esquire. She characterizes him as a fraud, and not just for his "kick 'em when they're down" dealings with the women in his life, which we all knew about years ago.

My biggest gripe with Newt is still with is 1994 Contract on America.

I still think there's no way he would gamble on his history and run for President. He's probably angling for some other job he can get by appointment.

< Blagojevich: Reading the Tea Leaves | Thursday Night Open Thread >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Marianne Unfaithful: Newt Unplugged | 24 comments (24 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    It's a great article, but I have to disagree (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by scribe on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 08:00:04 PM EST
    I think Gingrich is dead-serious on running for President.  He's right on top of everything, particularly fundraising, among Repugs.

    But, back to the article.  I think Marianne had one of the most trenchant insights about pols I've seen anywhere:

    That's what corruption is -- when you're too exhausted, you're gonna go with your weakness. So when we see corruption, we shouldn't say, 'They're all corrupt.' Rather, we should say, 'At what point did you decide that? And why? Why were you vulnerable?' "
     

    That, and the fact that the thing which most irritated and irritates Gingrich is busting him about his weight.

    Gingrich, Girthrich?

    Let me know when you call (none / 0) (#7)
    by jimakaPPJ on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 09:04:13 PM EST
    Rangel... I want to hear his answer.

    Corruption exists. When Bush was Pres you could attack Repubs on a variety of issues.

    Now all you can do is attack a worn our politico while ignoring the problems in your own house.

    Parent

    And yet .... (5.00 / 3) (#2)
    by Peter G on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 08:08:10 PM EST
    "I still think there's no way he would gamble on his history and run for President."  That's exactly what I thought about Giuliani ...

    good point (5.00 / 2) (#3)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 08:18:49 PM EST
    these egomaniacs are in a league of their own.

    Parent
    Hehee. (none / 0) (#4)
    by brodie on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 08:29:47 PM EST
    Some Repubs just have no shame.  They either won't go away and hope people forget (Vitter, Ensign) or they go away then come back all too soon without ever honestly and fully addressing why they left in the first place (Newt, Nixon).

    Yes, indeed, Newt is perfectly capable of going Rudy and jumping into the race despite it all.  He's probably calculating now exactly when to make his formal announcement of the exploratory committee, then the formal announcement of the decision, etc.  And why not -- the MSM was rather friendly to Rudy (see Matthews, Chris, et al) and but for the way Biden loudly noted that Giuliani tended to have only a noun and a verb and 9-11, he might have gone much farther, who knows.  

    And Newtie is another GOP favorite of the corp media, judging by the number of Sunday morning tv appearances and the way many tv hosts treat him as some sort of amazing intellectual force majeure.

    Parent

    dang that was classic (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by nycstray on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 10:07:04 PM EST
    but for the way Biden loudly noted that Giuliani tended to have only a noun and a verb and 9-11


    Parent
    Yup (none / 0) (#13)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 11:23:40 PM EST
    Best thing Biden ever said.  So perfect, I couldn't even laugh, just sat there with my mouth hanging open in sheer admiration.

    Parent
    This particular league isn't limited to one team (none / 0) (#8)
    by Peter G on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 09:28:45 PM EST
    of Republicans.  Do the names John Edwards and Gary Hart ring a bell?

    Parent
    Yes Repubs don't (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by brodie on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 10:08:34 PM EST
    have a monopoly in acting shamelessly, but they do tend to hang around longer or come back more frequently despite their ugly hypocrisy and misdeeds while Ds tend to quickly have to resign.  

    Though I wouldn't cite JE or GH -- Edwards is still gone from the political scene, fortunately, and Hart, while he left and then came back into the race long ago, was guilty not of rank hypocrisy à la Newt and the GOP gang of moralizers, but of relatively quaint, garden variety cheating on his wife.  And he hasn't tried for a major political comeback or serious personal rehab tour since then, unlike Newt or Nixey.

    An Eliot Spitzer sort of confirms and cuts against my argument.  He quickly resigned, rather than try to hang on as a GOPer would do (see also SC Gov Mark Sanford for another R example of hanging around), but now is in the process of at least a partial comeback.  We'll see about running for office after a decent interval with the media gig.

    Parent

    The other difference is that (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 11:35:18 PM EST
    these GOP fools with no shame are quickly accepted back into "polite society" as commentators and experts, whereas the Dem. ones are generally banished.

    I have to admire Spitzer, and appreciate MSNBC and CNN, for his toughing it out the way he has.  Unlike a lot of these others, he's a genuine authority on things like financial institution malfeasance and has a great deal to contribute to the various debates going on right now.  I wouldn't vote for him for anything, but I'm definitely interested in what he has to say.

    But there's no question he and CNN and MSNBC have been pounded hard for having him on their air, yet we've never heard a peep about Newtie and Tom DeLay being treated as somehow respectable commentators.

    Parent

    Maybe it's due to the fact (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by jondee on Fri Aug 13, 2010 at 09:01:49 AM EST
    that we've become so cynical that the perception is now that the more amoral and Machievellian a political figure is, the more qualified they are to be observers and commentators..

    Kissinger still wont risk traveling to certain parts of the world for fear of arrest, yet he has the record for quest appearances on Charlie Rose.

    Parent

    Gary Hart, at least, (none / 0) (#19)
    by Peter G on Fri Aug 13, 2010 at 08:45:46 AM EST
    is not banished.  He is a "scholar in residence" and holds a chaired professorship at the University of Colorado, Denver campus. I don't say that's wrong or that he should be hiding in shame.  Just pointing out that he isn't.  

    Parent
    When was the last time (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by gyrfalcon on Sun Aug 15, 2010 at 08:16:20 AM EST
    you saw him on TV?

    Of course people like Gary Hart have jobs, and often good ones.  I'm not suggesting they be made unemployable and homeless.  What astonishes me is that so many of the disgraced GOP ones get to parade around all the time on TV and at political and even policy gatherings and are treated with deep respect by eager hosts.

    Parent

    Spitzer (none / 0) (#21)
    by PatHat on Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 08:25:10 AM EST
    I really wish Spitzer would have fought it out. New York really needed a strong hand. I would vote for him again, if only to try to reign in Wall Street a bit. I don't care much about private issues...so long as the pol isn't running on family values.

    Parent
    i dont think he runs (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by pitachips on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 10:01:24 PM EST
    All of this is meant to let him live the high life on the dime of corporations, and to raise his profile so he can sell his shytty books.

    And don't forget the movies (none / 0) (#14)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 11:27:18 PM EST
    How he can run around promoting a film called "Finding God in America" or whatever it is, with his history, and sitting there primly with the wife he was banging in the House parking lot while he was going after Bill Clinton is just mind-boggling.  How even a Fox interviewer can look at the two of them without bursting out laughing is beyond me.

    Not to mention he doesn't even make any sense with his pompous political/ideological pronouncements.

    Parent

    Meant to say (none / 0) (#15)
    by gyrfalcon on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 11:29:09 PM EST
    just that I agree with you.  He's living very high off the hog now with no real responsibility.  I think he'd love to be president, but he's not going to go after it aggressively.  He's hoping there'll be some great "Draft Newtie" campaign he can graciously assent to, but I don't see him launching it himself.  He's got it way too soft and cushy the way it is right now.

    Parent
    some other job he can get by appointment... (none / 0) (#5)
    by desertswine on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 08:30:15 PM EST
    Right now his job seems to be right-wing fluffer.

    His competition (none / 0) (#6)
    by christinep on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 08:57:50 PM EST
    may really be Sarah Palin at this point. Two poobah Republican pundits--paid a lot. One becomes top something. It is a sort of shadow-boxing thing whereby he occasionally notes that she (Palin) is interested in running (thereby setting her up for the takedown early) and she does likewise for him (Gingrich.) Ah well, 'loved the report about Gingrich, who seems to be worse (in the area of human beingness) than even I thought; and, 'am slightly curious about whether he or Palin emerge as the "top" Republican voice/strategist/talker/philosopher king or queen.

    Parent
    Heh (none / 0) (#12)
    by lilburro on Thu Aug 12, 2010 at 10:40:07 PM EST
    great headline, and great singer.  

    I think its funny (none / 0) (#17)
    by efm on Fri Aug 13, 2010 at 01:06:23 AM EST
    It amuses me that everyone thats on both sides always think that the crimes of the other side are so much worse than anything that people with their own political views would do.

    It's not the "crimes" (5.00 / 2) (#18)
    by Yman on Fri Aug 13, 2010 at 07:58:21 AM EST
    After all, infidelity is a personal/moral issue rather than a crime (at least, in most states).

    It's the hypocrisy of the champions of "family values".

    Parent

    What else is he going to do? (none / 0) (#22)
    by Palli on Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 09:36:30 AM EST
    Got no other skills: he doesn't like to grade papers, he needs a staff for dictation so his running the mouth sentences become position papers, he has alimony payments and if Palin can do it....well, by gum, so will he!  The Heritage Foundation has to spend a lot of their funding to keep a myriad of facts underground so they can't just keep paying for "scholarly regurgitation" forever.

    maybe (none / 0) (#23)
    by Palli on Sat Aug 14, 2010 at 09:41:00 AM EST
    Newt can be a bedroom cabinet (certainly Shafley won't let him in the kitchen) for some other president.
    Marianne Unfaithful: Newt Unplugged | 24 comments (24 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment