Newt Gingrich Criticises Liberal Bigotry Against Christians

The latest debate among candidates seeking the Republican nomination was held in New Hampshire today, and the “moderators” were the notoriously far left media personalities Diane Sawyer and George Stephanopoulos of ABC.

Of course these repellent frauds grilled the Republicans about the past and present with a degree of intensity that would be 100 times greater than what they have ever applied to their hero Barack Obama.

I have to keep saying this- Why do the Republicans put themselves up for interrogation by these left wing jerks posing as journalists and reporters? Sawyer and her little friend are not objective participants, they are Democrat Party agents, and they deserve nothing but contempt and derision. The Republicans should just flat refuse to go on air with these odious fakes.

The “moderators” got contempt and derision in spades from a crowd that loudly voiced its displeasure at the endless focus on social issues.

Stephanopholous and Sawyer spent thirty-five minutes of the debate on gay marrage and contraception, with every question carrying the heavy implication that those who dissented with Progressive viewpoints were “bigoted”.

Newt Gingrich finally had had enough-, and (see video) said to loud applause-

“I just want to raise a point about the news media bias. 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?

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.”

Good on Newt, but its not enough. All of the Republican candidates should have just said, “this is BS” and walked out. That’s the kind of direct action they need to take rather than continue to try and get along with these repugnant liberal media cowards who every time they open their mouths bring the craft of journalism into even greater disrepute.

Stephanopoulos struggles with fairness during NH debate

Newt slams media for ignoring anti-Christian bigotry

12 thoughts on “Newt Gingrich Criticises Liberal Bigotry Against Christians

  1. That’s my boy.

    The tragic state of Rep politics is that many Repubs still crave that circus act, Ron Paul, whom I agree with on about 80% of what he says….pity I wouldn’t trust him with a can opener.


  2. I’d never heard of Newt Gingrich until now. Doing a search, I find he and his wife are responsible for the following film:

    Personally I think it’s better to speak rather than walk out. And in this case, it’s getting him a lot more air time over the internet because he did just that.


  3. “All of the Republican candidates should have just said, “this is BS” and walked out”
    The reason they don’t is that all of them are looking for the tacit endorsement of the lefty media, because like it or not the media controls the political battlefield. No candidate is willing to give up the advantage media approval (or lack of explicit disapproval) confers, and because of that they’ve conceded the field to the left before the battle even begins.


  4. One of the fascinating things about this contest so far is the extent to which the pundits disagree. It seems they can only agree on 2 things:
    (1) B. Hussein Osama MUST be defeated, and
    (2) Uncle Doofus is nuts.

    Apart from that it appears open slather. Coulter reckons it has to be Romney (although her reasoning is, at best, a little tortured). Barnhardt says it’s anyone BUT Romney. Sowell is suggesting Newt. Perhaps Joe Hicks from PJTV got it right when he said (to the effect that) this is the worst Republican field ever assembled. And maybe that’s the commentators’ problem – they’re all so bad they’re trying to figure which is the least-worst option?


  5. Newt has said he’ll appoint John Boulton as Secretary of State.

    Boulton will ensure a strategic solution to the middle east “problem”

    on those grounds alone, voting against Newt is close to treason.


  6. they are Democrat Party agents, and they deserve nothing but contempt and derision

    I think the old line goes “but names will never hurt me”

    DemocRAT party agents deserve much, much more than just “contempt and derision”.

    One day soon, the law will ensure that they, their friends, fellow-travellers, facilitators, operatives, proxies – get everything that they deserve: a great, great day!


  7. “One day soon, the law will ensure that….”

    Let’s hope not. That would mean a police state, sort of a mirror of East Germany run by Stasi enforcers who used the ‘law’ against their opponents.

    You loon.


  8. When you read that “it’s the worst line-up ever” it is usually the left saying this, and hoping the GOP voters pick up on this. It’s just another standard progressive tactic for making you question making any kind of choice.

    Typically, the one the liberals loathe and hate the most is the one worth promoting, if only to see just how hypocritical the left are when it comes to preaching polite discourse.

    And in a general sense, all politicians tend to be failures – either victims of the bureaucratic systems they inherit or hamstrung by internal division and lack of clarity. Parties campaign on a couple of issues, rather than well thought out manifestos that will guide action, and this only makes things worse once they get in.

    Obama was going to end GITMO and any form of interrogation of terrorists, and has had to do the usual about face once confronted with the complexity of the situation (you mean to say some of these guys are terrorists and they do kill people?) and in the end, his high ideas got swallowed up by the system. Voting in one party or another is usually just a matter of small adjustments to the general course, no-one has the will, power or resolve to make the major changes required to get us back on a safer course.


  9. “…had to do the usual about face once confronted with the complexity of the situation reality…”

    And, it was Joe Hicks who said it, on PJTV. Not exactly MSNBC.


Comments are closed.