Because of Gingrich's past. Look at his history concerning his marriages, adultery, etc. Just for starters.
Bah, boning some chick shouldn't disqualify someone. If it did, there wouldn't be anyone on Capitol Hill.
Tell that to the Religious Right. Also during that time he was ranting about Clinton's impeachment, hypocrisy at it's finest.
Tell that to the Religious Right. Also during that time he was ranting about Clinton's impeachment, hypocrisy at it's finest.
My memory might be wrong here, given I was in middle school when the impeachment was raging...but the impeachment was not about the fact that Clinton HAD an affair, but rather about the fact that he had lied under oath. The impeachment was for perjury, and obstruction of justice.
Nah, I do remember Newt going on about "how can you trust someone who's unfaithful?".
Bill Sanderson: "Gingrich asked Marianne for the divorce by phoning her on Mother's Day, 1999."
Source: Bill Sanderson. "Newt's Ex Wife Aiming to Pen Book." New York Post. 7/18/2000.
Mickey Porter: "Gingrich's most recent ex-wife says he ditched her eight months after finding out she had multiple sclerosis. Marianne Gingrich, 48 ... says the ex-speaker of the House told her on Mother's Day 1999 that he wanted a divorce, after learning she had a neurological condition that could lead to MS [multiple sclerosis]."
Source: Mickey Porter. "Newt's a Beaut." Akron Beacon Journal. 7/25/2000.
Gail Sheehy: "He completely ignores her," observes a Washington journalist who has interviewed Marianne. "It's my impression the marriage is a dead letter. He is so self-obsessed, she could open the door wrapped in plastic wrap and he wouldn't notice."
Source: Gail Sheehy. "The Inner Quest of Newt Gingrich." Vanity Fair. 9/1995. Pbs.org.
Nah, I do remember Newt going on about "how can you trust someone who's unfaithful?".
Sad.
His justification is probably that his then wife was diagnosed with terminal cancer or something (I remember there being a huge thing about the divorce.) Well, I have always said Gingrich has foot-in-mouth syndrome.
That said, he's still the only person on stage that I think could do anything positive for the nation - affairs and whatnot aside.
I'd vote for Paul, but he goes too far, and is totally unelectable, I think.
My memory might be wrong here, given I was in middle school when the impeachment was raging...but the impeachment was not about the fact that Clinton HAD an affair, but rather about the fact that he had lied under oath. The impeachment was for perjury, and obstruction of justice.
His own entire campaign staff walked out on him.And you mean the affair he had with his current wife? Why is this even relevant? Perhaps to the people who vote based on whether someone supports gay marriage or abortion...
Tell me a BETTER reason why he is ignored. He's got more experience than the rest of the candidates (20 years in congress, minority whip, house speaker, worked with Reagan and Clinton) and is about the only candidate on stage not bickering with everyone else and proposing changes to be made TODAY.