Gingrich Dismissively Tells Gay Iowan to Vote for Barack Obama

You can nowhere see a better example of how far American politics has fallen then in this news story. And who is at the news center of this story that shows a kind of politics that would have been unthinkable years ago due to is blatantly exclusionary nature? Why, of course, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, a person who members of both parties often point to as someone who poisoned the atmosphere in Congress with toxic rhetoric and helped create the attitude that other people from another party are enemies rather than advesaries.

And this time Gingrich show he hasn’t run out of political poison to throw into the proverial well: he told a gay Iowan asking him a basic, boilerplate question that most politicians would respond to in policy terms to go vote for Barack Obama.

Newt Gingrich told a gay man and longtime resident of Oskaloosa here today that he should vote for President Obama.

“I asked him if he’s elected, how does he plan to engage gay Americans. How are we to support him? And he told me to support Obama,” said Scott Arnold, an associate professor of writing at William Penn University.”

Arnold, a Democrat, said he came to the event at Smokey Row coffee house with an open mind. But he wanted to ask Gingrich about how he would represent him as president after reading past comments the former U.S. House Speaker as made about gay and lesbians.

“When you ask somebody a question and you expect them to support all Americans and have everyone’s general interest,” Arnold said. “It’s a little bit frustrating and disheartening when you’re told to support the other side. That he doesn’t’ need your support.”

On the other hand, Gingrich is truly an expert on marriage. After all, he’s now on his third wife.

And so there you have it.

You don’t like a question someone asks you and it isn’t part of a group that you are now wooing? Tell them to vote for the other guy.

Giving a respectful answer to a voter (no matter what party he belongs to)? Nah.

Answering the question in policy terms? Nah.

Leaving open the possibility that if you’re elected you’ll take that voter’s concerns into consideration and at least think about it? That is SO mid-twentieth century!

  

14 Comments

  1. Well, it was a stupid question. What did that guy expect? Would he have been happy with a pandering, fake answer like most politicians give?

    Newt is Newt, he is what it is, and it ain’t particularly pretty…

  2. If that was his whole answer then it was the shortest one ever given by Newt

  3. that was probably newt’s newest religion choice (he’s had three denominations so far, I believe)… catholic conversion ‘conscience’ speaking. He knows he would lose the conservative catholic vote if he answered supportively. Thing is, his answer probably lost every progressive catholic and Christian who believes in Jesus, as God of Mercy and Love, who never said a word about such matters, but mainly chastised the blathering politicians and the ‘my way or the highway’ priesthood of his time.

  4. Newt is in such great shape that he doesn’t need the gay/lesbian vote, the progressive vote, the centrist’s vote, the feminist vote, minority voters, etc etc. He is an equal opportunity offender.

    Even if by some miracle he won the nomination, there aren’t enough conservative voters to elect him in the general. And some conservatives won’t be able to forget the debacle he caused in the House the last time he was in DC, or those 3 religions, or his three wives.

  5. In addition, Newt doesn’t need the endorsements of members of the House from his own party who remember his days of glory and meglomania! He’s gonna win by convincing the gullible that he’s the smartest man in the room.

  6. Here’s the actual video of the interchange.

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2.....for-obama/

    “All Gingrich said was that if the single most important and determinative issue to a gay person was implementing gay marriage, then that person would be disappointed in Newt and probably should vote for Obama.”

    I am not sure if I am for Newt, but Newt Gingrich shows more class in this response most of the commenters, especially those who are grossly misquoting the exchange.

    When you watch the very brief interchange, the guy admits he’s an Obama voter just looking for a media “gotcha”.

    Surprised to see TMV falling for this (going along with it?), hand-in-hand with the far–left, counter-culture radical wing of the DNC.

  7. Jpeditor nailed it. Gingrich’s response to the exchange was the best he could put it considering his views. Actually made me like him a bit more. Its been awhile since I heard a GOP candidate speak like that.

  8. What Gingrich said was, “… for those whom the only issue that really matters is the definition of marriage I won’t get their support.”

    First of all I do not know anyone who believes that the only issue that really matters is the definition of marriage.

    Gingrich definitely evaded this… Everyone should remember that Obama is against gay marriage. And Obama had the balls to say this during the debates before he was elected, while trying to gain as many votes as necessary.

    Obama has done more for gay rights as president than any other president. If Newt were interested in courting votes for gays (or other minorities) there is so much more he could support, while still maintaining his opposition to gay marriage.

    Why do people think the only issue in the gay community is having the right to marry? If Newt was in touch with Americans’ needs he could formulate good policies which would benefit Americans, and not just the Tea Patiers who support him. Instead he dismisses whole groups of people because he does not understand what is necessary to do to make America succeed and for Americans to be happy, productive citizens.

  9. First of all I do not know anyone who believes that the only issue that really matters is the definition of marriage

    Did you not watch the vid or you don’t care what was really said? The question basically ended up being “For those that this is the most important question, How can you engage them?” Not the only thing but the most important thing. You ignore all the back and forth, were Newt was quite polite and nice, that shaped and developed the conversation.

    Why do people think the only issue in the gay community is having the right to marry? If Newt was in touch with Americans’ needs he could formulate good policies which would benefit Americans, and not just the Tea Patiers who support him. Instead he dismisses whole groups of people because he does not understand what is necessary to do to make America succeed and for Americans to be happy, productive citizens

    He just didn’t do that. He gave a whole list of reasons why people should consider supporting him.

  10. “Did you not watch the vid or you don’t care what was really said? The question basically ended up being “For those that this is the most important question, How can you engage them?”’

    Obama does not support gay marriage, but is very aware of issues that affect these Americans and has done much to support the LGBT community. Newt does not support gay marriage either. While Obama has given the gay community many other reasons to support and vote for him beyond the issue of gay marriage. Newt does not. Newt could have answered with reasons why the gay community should support him, and he could have distinguished himself from Obama. However Newt did not give any reasons why the gay community should support him on issues important to them.

  11. “He gave a whole list of reasons why people should consider supporting him.”

    Uhhh….. Newt gave a list of general issues, not what he would do about each of those issues.

    Anyone can say, “Vote for me because I believe in jobs, getting the economy back on the right track, education, etc.”

  12. “You ignore all the back and forth, were Newt was quite polite and nice, that shaped and developed the conversation.”

    Yes- Newt was polite and nice in telling gay Americans that they weren’t important to his campaign – that he could care less about the GLBT community.

  13. Anyone can say, “Vote for me because I believe in jobs, getting the economy back on the right track, education, etc.”

    But because they are gay those things can’t be important?

  14. “But because they are gay those things can’t be important?”

    Those are all important issues. The point I was making is that Newt did not offer any specifics on what he would do. I was addressing your comment that Newt gave a whole list of reasons why people should consider supporting him. But it was just a list of issues, not what he would do with those issues. Just listening to a candidate spout off a list of issues is no reason to support that candidate. Newt offered nothing.

Submit a Comment