Tifanny’s debtor and serial adulterer, Newt Gingrich, dismissed the old Reagan-era political axiom that Republicans should not attack other Republicans when he blasted fellow candidate Ron Paul over his controversial newsletters.
Asked by CNN’s Wolf Blitzer about tough attack ads Paul has been running against him, Gingrich crucified Paul, who he said “disowns ten years of his own letter, says he doesn’t really realize what was in it, had no idea that he was making money on, that it was racist, anti-Semitic.”
”He’s attacking me for serial hypocrisy and he spent ten years out of earning money off a newsletter that had his name that he didn’t notice,” he said.“He’s got to come up with some very straight answers to get somebody to take him seriously. Would I be willing to listen to him? Sure. I think the choice of Ron Paul or Barack Obama would be a very bad choice for America.”
On the question if whether he would support Ron Paul in the general election should he be the Republican nominee, Gingrich flatly said “no” and took another opportunity to blast Paul.
“I think Ron Paul’s views are totally outside the mainstream of virtually every decent American,” he said. “Now, that’s going to be very controversial, but I just suggest to people, read the newsletters.”
While watching Republicans (RINOS or not) attack one another is most certainly endless entertainment and popcorn should be served, Newt Gingrich–a vile and disgusting troll without a shed of decency, knowledge of history, and willingness to serve the country over his own personal political profiteering–appears to be doing what every presidential candidate that’s slipped in the polls does: attack the current frontrunner.
Ron Paul has seen a major boost in popularity in Iowa and his rivals are taking stock. Newt Gingrich may be the worst human being in the world, but like many others in the media he does raise an interesting point about Ron Paul’s positions on race. Mr. Paul previously dismissed the racist newsletters during his run in 2008 and he seems oddly reluctant to face the similar questions now. Mr. Paul took the classic “no comment” equivocation to a whole new level when he abruptly ended a CNN interview when the discussion of his racist newsletters came up. Indeed, the newsletters Mr. Paul sold in the years between his failed 1984 Senate bid and his congressional comeback in 1996 reveal the constitutional copulator (or his ghostwriter) to be a deranged and dyspeptic wingnut with extremely paranoid thoughts about blacks, gays, and Israel. In fact, his comments about gays were just as vitriolic, saying they were “far better off when social pressure forced them to hide their activities, and a ‘gay lobby”’suppressed the truth about AIDS, the newsletters claimed.”
Obviously these rantings present extraordinary problems for a man who not only has endeared himself to many progressives and thoughtful civil libertarians on issues pertaining to foreign policy and the economy, but who is seeking the highest office in the and. Unfortunately, a “some of my best friends are black” response won’t suffice.
The major dilemma with Ron Paul is that, as a leave-us-alone libertarian who isn’t an outright moron as Santorum and Bachmann, and isn’t beloved by anti-science, anti-reason religious conservatives, the racist and homophobic vitriol in his newsletters don’t necessarily rile social moderates and progressives like the comments made by Bachmann and Sanatorum would.
For example, openly gay (and an adorable dick about it) sex columnist Dan Savage really isn’t phased by the anti-gay rantings in Paul’s newsletters.
According to Slate.com:
“Ron may not like gay people, and may not want to hang out with us or use our toilets, but he’s content to leave us the fuck alone and recognizes that gay citizens are entitled to the same rights as all other citizens. Santorum, on the other hand, believes that his bigotry must be given the force of law. That’s an important difference.”
Bear in mind this is the same man who made Rick Santorum’s last name synonymous with ‘anal frothy discharge following anal sex, which now dictates all “Santorum” Google searches (go ahead, try it). So Savage is certainly no stranger to blissfully and scathingly lambasting anti-gay Republicans.
Of course Gingrich realizes that saying anything unkind about Ron Paul, the president of the Internet, could get him in trouble.
Michael is a comedian/VO artist/Columnist extraordinaire, who co-wrote an award-nominated comedy, wrote for NY Times Laugh Lines, guest-blogged for Joe Biden, and writes a column for MSNBC.com affiliated Cagle. Follow him on Twitter and Facebook. Seriously, follow him or he’ll send you a photo of Rush Limbaugh bending over in a thong.