Newt Gingrich Attacks Fashionable Anti-Catholic Bigotry

Share on facebook
Facebook 0
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
LinkedIn 0
Share on reddit
Reddit 0
Share on delicious
Share on digg
Share on stumbleupon
StumbleUpon 0
Share on whatsapp
Share on email
Share on print

I assume that only hard core political junkies like me watched the New Hampshire Republican presidential debate last night which is a shame.  All of the candidates acquitted themselves well, including Ron Paul who came across as avuncular Uncle Ron, instead of crazy Uncle Ron.  Go here for a first rate overview of the debate.  It was a debate heavy on substance and each of the candidates dealt with the questions adequately.  I think Rick Santorum, who had quite a bit more air time last night than he did in previous debates, did himself a lot of good.   However, the standout moment of the debate came when Newt Gingrich dealt with a question about gay marriage.  The question was phrased as one would expect by denizens of the mainstream press, asking the candidates how they would talk to a gay couple who wanted to get married.  When Gingrich’s turn came, he was having none of it.

“I just want to raise the point about the news media bias,” Gingrich said. “You don’t hear the opposite question asked.

“Should the Catholic church be forced to close its adoption services in Massachusetts because it won’t accept gay couples, which is exactly what the state has done? Should the Catholic church be driven out of providing charitable services in the District of Columbia because it won’t give in to secular bigotry? Should the Catholic church find itself discriminated against by the Obama administration on key delivery of services because of the bias and the bigotry of the administration?” Mr. Gingrich asked.

Mr. Gingrich finished his comments by criticizing the media for not covering “anti-Christian bigotry.”

“The bigotry question goes both ways and there’s a lot more anti-Christian bigotry today than there is concerning the other side, and none of it gets covered by the news media,” said Mr. Gingrich.

Mr. Gingrich’s remarks drew a loud round of applause from the audience at Saint Anselm College in Manchester, New Hampshire.

Mitt Romney and Rick Perry chimed in, echoing Gingrich’s attack on the Obama discrimination against the Catholic Church,  Go here to see a video of Newt’s statement.  Some people have doubted the authenticity of the conversion of Gingrich to the Faith.  I think it is clear that his statement came from his heart, and there is no nobler calling for any Catholic in public life than to speak out in defense of the Church when the Bride of Christ is under bigoted assault.  Bravo to Newt Gingrich!

More to explorer

Ignorance, Sheer Ignorance

  The Left is becoming a stronghold of ignorant yahoos:   Just outside downtown Dunn, N.C., a historic antebellum-style house honors Maj.

Fifty Years

Hattip to commenter Dale Price.  My motto has always been:  “Slay all the Lunies, and let God sort ’em out!”

Deep State? What Deep State?

Surprise!:     Who would have thought that, this deep into the Russia collusion probe, we’d be learning about yet another dossier


  1. I watched it. Newt proved his point by the fact that the live-blog I was following was incredulous when he said that Catholic Charities shut it’s adoption services because it was required to service gay couples. Even political junkies are unaware of it.

    Romney had the best night, highlighted by his exchange with George Snuffleupagus over contraception. The audience actually booed George and it made the entire GOP look good. It proved without a doubt that Romney is the best debater in the bunch. Ron Paul also had a good night highlighted by his exchange with Newt over serving in the military. Paul actually came across as a patriot. Those were the highlights of the night.

    Huntsman had an okay night. He managed to convince people of his foreign policy bona fides. Perry had a completely forgettable night. Newt managed to attack free enterprise in his vain attempt to attack Romney’s record at Bain. I think that was the least conservative moment of the night. Santorum didn’t have a bad night but he failed in his argument aimed at Romney that the president isn’t a manager or CEO.

    A couple of minor but revealing points. Romney endorsed the Bowles-Simpson plan minus the cap gains and dividend tax hikes. I agree with him and it’s a pretty wonky statement which confirms that Romney really knows his economics. I found the “right to privacy” question very interesting. Romney’s a lawyer. Did he really not know the Supreme Court decisions at issue or was it an artful dodge? Ron Paul didn’t know what he was talking about. Paul loves the Constitution but he doesn’t know case law at all. Santorum directly quoted a Supreme Court decision and I don’t think anybody but lawyers would’ve caught it. He knows his constitutional law.

  2. I watched and Romney did not steal the show for me. He did okay, but I liked Huntsman and I liked Perry. I also liked Santorum. Newt spoke very well to the anti-Catholic but for me that was his ONLY shinining moment. Of all of the candidates Newt and Ron Paul are my least preferred. Had the debate actually given the other candidates more time or at least the same as Romney I think there would have been CLEAR winner and it would not have been Romney.

  3. Also watched the Sunday too-early debate. Everyone was ganging up on Mitt. Huntsman’s best moments came when it was attacking Mitt. He finally showed some spark. But the real memorable part for me was when one of the moderators tried to pin candidates down on gay rights again.

    Romney: If people are looking for someone who will discriminate against gays or in any way suggest that people who have a different sexual orientation don’t have full rights in this country, they won’t find that in me.

    Moderator: When’s the last time you stood up and spoke out for increasing gay rights?

    Romney: Right now.


    Moderator: What if you had a son who came to you and said he was gay?

    Santorum (without hesitation): I would love him as much as I did the second before he said it and I would try to do everything I can to be as good a father to him as possible.

  4. With Cain and Bachmann out and Perry pushed to the end of the stage and steering clear of the topic of illegal immigration, these last two debates were good PR for the GOP.

    I will say however that while Santorum has a working-class friendly economic plan, his talk about ending welfare dependency can be perceived as cold-hearted. He’s better off sticking to talking about the economic opportunities he’ll create.

  5. In the wrap up, after they had to tell what they’d be doing if not for…, George Smugapolis started on their lost opportunities to be less than honorable gentlemen. Off button.

  6. Newt has the ability to make a provocative statement at the right time. Catholics should understand that they have been used. Democrats want your votes, but they have little time for pro life, anti gay marriage or health care and teacher conscious issues. If it makes Catholic Democrats feel good that they are willing to bankrupt their country to provide for illegals, gay self esteem, and unions in the private or government organizations then more peace to you. Our country needs less hands out and more hands pitching in.

  7. “I will say however that while Santorum has a working-class friendly economic plan, his talk about ending welfare dependency can be perceived as cold-hearted. He’s better off sticking to talking about the economic opportunities he’ll create.”

    I agree with you to a point but if we’ve gotten to the point that we are afraid of pointing out the obvious, that the welfare state has not solved anything but has created a dependent class that we can’t afford to support anymore then no amount of economic growth will save us…the sooner we admit the war on poverty has been lost the better we will be.

Comments are closed.