Why Newt Gingrich should never be President

These last few weeks, we've seen the rise of Newt Gingrich in the Republican primary polls. He has now officially taken over the top spot of the national polls and looks to be quite a ways ahead in Florida. To those that have had these discussions with me, they know I dislike Gingrich... and I have many, many reason. In the debate in Tampa he admonished Romney for attacking him using what he called untrue statements(many of which were VERY true), and then immediately following the debate attacked Romney more viciously and with less facts. But, he will defend this not an attack... he is a very good debater... but I'll contend... the greater the debate, the bigger the possibility you're a slime ball! In this post, I'll tell you why I don't like Gingrich and why you shouldn't vote for him either.



Lobbyist for Freddie Mac - don't let this guy trick you. He did lobby for them. As Romney pointed out last night(kinda sad because he stole some of my thunder), there is a lot more to this lobby deal. You were hired by the chief lobbyist of Freddie Mac. First, Gingrich tried to say he was hired as a "historian". Then he was hired as a "consultant". So, what was it Newt? At the very least, Newt was "consulting" the lobbyist at Freddie Mac how to gain influence in Washington. And that's at the very LEAST.

Cheating while prosecuting a cheater.

Not only that, but he served both women divorce papers while they were sick. As also mentioned, he divorced his 2nd wife in 1999, but was having the affair while he led the Clinton impeachment charge for his affair with Monica Lewinsky.  I believe in God's forgiveness for your mistakes. I know we all need it from time to time. But, cheating twice, and leaving both wives while they were very, very sick... that is a character flaw. Never again can you claim moral high ground or discuss family issues with any credibility. According to this post(and I'm not sure on the accuracy), Gingrich sees no problem preaching family values and living to totally different. To quote his ex-wife Marianne from this article:

He'd just returned from Erie, Pennsylvania, where he'd given a speech full of high sentiments about compassion and family values.

The next night, they sat talking out on their back patio in Georgia. She said, "How do you give that speech and do what you're doing?"

"It doesn't matter what I do," he answered. "People need to hear what I have to say. There's no one else who can say what I can say. It doesn't matter what I live."

I don't want to hear you preach to us about the values of the American family when you've stomped all over them in such a despicable way.

The Flip-flopper. Romney has been labeled this, and probably rightly so. But Gingrich is just as bad, if not worse! Here is a link that outlines a few of his flip-flops. Or here is video example. You'd think the "anti-Romney" candidate would be the opposite of him instead of the exact same in this regard! This also only cements the opinion I have that floats with the winds of political change. If it is of political advantage for him to take a position, he will do that. The guy doesn't have an ounce of personal conviction that couldn't be changed by money or political motivations.

He invested in companies he legislated. This is a way too common practice in Washington, and I'm sure many more than we'd like to admit have taken apart in insider trading. But his just fuels my no ethics/personal convictions argument. He bought Boeing stock right before he legislated it, know it would rise. But of course, he is totally against it and finds it despicable.

Gingrich was guilty of ethics violations that lead to him not having the votes to remain speaker. Gingrich claims he chose not to run. But all evidence points to Gingrich starting his campaign for speaker only to realize he couldn't get the votes then dropping it. But, back to the ethics violations. Gingrich says it was a Democratic witch hunt to try and neutralize him. Maybe that is the case, and maybe it was taken too far... I say he was found guilty by a panel of 5 Repubs and 5 Dems in a Republican controlled House. 

Let's also not forget that as campaigns tend to linger on, more dirt is stirred up on candidates. Have we heard the end of the ethics violations? I suspect(and Nancy Pelosi knows) that more stuff will come out. What about his affairs? Will we hear of more? It's hard to say, but you sure couldn't have predicted all the accusations on Herman Cain. Maybe they won't be true, but that won't stop them from hurting his campaign.

Ethics violations? Not good, but forgivable. Cheating? Not good, forgivable. Flip-flopping? Character flaw, but who cares! Lobbyist? Not good, but you gotta make money. Any one of these by themselves is a red flag, but could be looked past in the right circumstances. But combined the history and you see a man who isn't making "mistakes", but a man who has serious character flaws. It shows me he has serious issues playing by any set of rules and will use the system in a way to benefit him, despite the rules. 

To finish, a great quote from this Esquire article:

The real story is that Newt Gingrich is so deeply conflicted and strange, so erratic and unreliable, so scheming and secretive, that he's way too much like a character out of Dostoevsky than a politician should ever be.