E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSCalling himself “the legitimate heir to the Reagan movement,” Newt Gingrich recently cited a 1995 speech by Nancy Reagan in which the former First Lady said that her husband “passed on the torch” to him.
“In 1995, Nancy Reagan at the Goldwater Institute was very generous,” Gingrich told voters in Florida on Sunday. “And she said ‘Just as Barry gave the torch to Ronny, Ronny has passed on the torch to Newt.’”
But as NBC’s Andrea Mitchell reports, Gingrich appears to be taking that comment out of context.
Sources close to Nancy Reagan said the speech itself was written by the host at the Goldwater Organization – where Mrs. Reagan delivered the remarks - and that she was referring generally to Congress and not specifically to the former Speaker, Mitchell reported on her MSNBC program.
Gingrich’s claim that he was a key figure in the Reagan revolution in 1980s is “patently false,” added Al Hunt, executive editor of Bloomberg News, during an appearance on Mitchell’s show.
Hunt said that Reagan biographer Lou Cannon has contended that Gingrich had nothing to do with the “Reagan Revolution.”
“He was a backbencher. Lou’s not even sure Reagan knew who Gingrich was,” Hunt said.
Hunt painted a stark contrast between “can-do optimist” Reagan and Gingrich, whose appeal derives from being able to “attack Democrats better than anybody.”
“I think they are quite different people. And certainly at a minimum, the Speaker’s claims -- or his latter-day Reaganism -- are exaggerated” Hunt added.
In Florida, Gingrich has taken a hard line on stem cell research, a contrast to Nancy Reagan’s position and his own stance in 2001, when he said some excess cells from in vitro fertilization could be used for research.
The former first lady has championed for stem cell research, an issue that was inspired by her husband’s Alzheimer’s treatment.
“I would eliminate all funding for any stem cell research which came from the killing of life,” Gingrich said Saturday at the Baptist Church in Winter Park. “This was never an argument about science. This was the use of science to justify desensitizing the society to killing babies.”
Leave a Comment:
A prospective from the slanted establishment media elite, Andrea Mitchell. What else you got to promote your liberal service.
Hey Newts Army .. are you an Army of God?
Her own words are pretty convincing to me Andrea. Plus Michael Reagan is also endorsing. Nice try though.
There are several others who can attest to the accuracy of Newt claims on his role during the Reagan admin. Look up Jeffrey Lord He has two good articles over at the American Spectator. Also just listen to Mark Levins podcast of his 1/26/12 show. The first two segments tell a whole lot about this ridiculousness.
Going to Democrats Andrea Mitchell and Al Hunt for "facts" about their conservative and libertarian political enemies is like going to Typhoid Mary for a fkg flu shot.
This seems to be an 11th hour lie intended to smear Mr. Gingrich. There is a video clearly showing Nancy Reagan and she says the exact words, Ronnie passed the torch to Newt. It may be on You Tube as well. Nice to come out with this the night before the vote, so it can't be discounted although it's a complete fabrication. The 1995 video is all the proof you need. It's not taken out of context, it's all there to see.
Yes there is!!
By the time this Gingrich is done we're going to have to exhume Ronald Reagan and ask him directly who he wants his heir to be! I say it's Arinna Huffington :) Ron Reagan Jr. thinks it's Kucinich; Nancy says it was the Congress in the 1990s and the adopted son (not exactly close to Ronnie) thinks it's Newt. Between Michael and Newt - they're the only two left that believe it's him. As for me - I'm for keeping Ronnie in the ground unless we can clone him to end the nightmare that is Obama.
Gingrich never claimed to have been a "key figure" in the Reagan adminstration. The suggestion by anyone that he has said that is patently false. He has never claimed to have been anything other than a junior Congressman helping to move the Reagan agenda forward in the House of Representatives. In 1995, Gingrich was the Congress and Nancy Reagan knew it.
i lived the reagan years .... i even lived the kennedy years.
i remember nancy reagans speech. she did say what newt claims she said. i read about it in the printed news paper!
Newt is telling the truth. the rest of you are sick in the head with hate! pure hate!!!!
I hate NBC and MSNBC. Tens of millions actually do.
You people and NBC (MSNBC) are sick .... here is the video of Nancy Reagan Praising Newt Gingrich.
Nancy Reagan 1995: Ronnie turned that torch over to Newt ... It's On Youtube now. You evil demons. You got another thing coming. All of you.
These media people are going to get themselves shot at with so many tens of millions of people angry at the Liberal Media.
You stupid fools. We see that you are tying to insure that Obama gets to debate who he wants too. With the mood of the nation and so many tens of millions boiling mad at Obama, are you really willing to risk your own lives for the pos? People out here are angry as it is with you liberal reporters. Please dont push them to shooting at you! PLEASE!
Sheeshus!
This article is a fraud. Go listen to the actual speech Nancy gave...she spoke to Newt. Obviously Drudge has joined the bed with the establishment...hope he isn't too sore to walk later on.
The writer attempts to accuse the Gingrich campaign of taking Nancy Reagan's quote about passing the torch to Newt out of context. Yet in the same article he cites Nancy Reagan's later support for stem cells and Newt's opposition as supporting his idea that Newt was not part of the Reagan Revolution. One has nothing to do with the other. There is no conflict between Newt's proven loyalty to the Reagan Revolution and his later stand on stem cell research.
The writer presents no name to support the headline that "Reagan sources" might disagree with Newt's use of the quote. He opnly presents the opinions of two reporters, one of whom, Al Hunt, a notorious liberal and whose only connection to the Reagan era was his clear opposition to Reagan's policies.
As someone who worked in the Reagan White House I strenously object to these liberals and other establishment types trying to hijack the Reagan legacy and also for distorting the history that I witnessed first hand. Newt Gingrich was a strong advocate of the Reagan Revolution. The writer of this article is either misinformed or willing to pass along the false statements of Newt's detractors without any critical investigation into their truthfullness.
This author gets a "D" for this sloppy, transparent smear!
NBC lies!!!!
Who are these "Sources" they quote? Romney's people? You people believe everything you read. The fact is she said it. He used it and he should considering the lies told about him. He was the Speaker of the House and got things done. He's done it before and he can do it again. Flip flop Romney will be another Obama!
hahahahahahahahahahahaha Boy are the dumbascraps afraid of Newt. Well, that is a least ONE thing they have in common with the Republican establishment's power brokers. The primary source of the article is Al Hunt. Al Hunt? Yeah, Al freakin Hunt. One of the most far left, far out dumbascrap propagandists of the main stream liberal media. There is NOTHING provable in this article other than MAYBE "NBC’s Andrea Mitchell reports". But Mitchell is another far left, far out dumbascrap propagandists of the main stream liberal media.
"Sources close to Nancy Reagan, Al Hunt, and Ike Clanton, now there's a credible bunch of "huckelberries" for ya.
Here we go again the Liberal Democrats and the Liberal Republican machine rewriting history one more time to suit their needs.
It makes you wonder why both the Liberal left hates Newt and the Republican RINO establishment hates Newt. Makes me think he is the person who will HOPE AND CHANGE things.
Hunt and Mitchell are grabbing at broken straws, as proven here by Jeffrey Lord in his article, "Reagan's Young Lieutenant", that defines Newt Gingrich's role in the Reagan Revolution. But never expect the Socialist Dems/DeMSM to tell the truth about the man who stopped their Spending train in the '90s. See it here:
Obama’s Osawatomie Kansas Speech on December 7, 2011 primarily advocated the redistribution of wealth. Redistribution of wealth is the basis of Communism and Socialism.
www.nytimes.com/2011/12/07/us/politics/text-obamas-speech...
Charles Krauthammer, MD is an American Pulitzer Prize–winning syndicated political commentator, and physician. Dr. Krauthammer is probably the most respected and intelligent of all the political commentators on television. He said this article was an insult to Teddy Roosevelt, and it would be more appropriate to compare Obama to Hugo Chavez.
Do you remember when Obama said he wanted a “national security force”? Not the national guard, but a civilian one that has not sworn to uphold the Constitution? On July 2, 2008 in a speech in Colorado Springs, Barrack Obama called for a police state.
Here it is in his own words:
Why would he need his own private army? If he gets a second term, will he have his own army.. Why do they feel that they need to monitor our posts on this website? When will they knock on our door?
Have you ever seen the video of the officers of the Third Reich swearing allegiance to Adolph Hitler in 1934.. The oath pledged personal loyalty to the person of Adolf Hitler in place of loyalty to the constitution. Sound familiar?
We are on the verge of losing the greatest Democracy in the history of the world. This election is going to be a choice between Communism and Freedom. PLEASE get out and vote regardless of who the GOP nominee is. Turnout is the only thing that is going to prevent this from becoming a bankrupt Communist State within the next five years, As Ann Coulter said, Jeffery Dahmer would be better than what we have. This is going to be the most important election in the history of the United States, and it is going to be so close, that turnout will determine if we remain a democracy, or become a Communist state.
Radical anarchists and Communists such as David Axelrod, William Ayers, Saul Lewinsky, the “Rev” Wright and other ne’er-do-well’s, have been grooming Obama to take over this country for 20 years. Is that what you want? If not, PLEASE email this to every one you know.
This has been endorsed in my facebook by an individual with a MBA in political science and History from the United States Air Force Academy. (Available upon request).
"Communism is a philosophy of failure,
The creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." Winston Churchill
This is funny. Andrea Mitchell names some unknown people who say that Nancy Reagan didn't know what she was talking about? Then, we have Al Hunt channeling Lou Cannon (Lou not available?) saying that Nancy Reagan didn't know what she was talking about?
The Reasons to Vote for Newt.
Fellow Conservatives,
Gingrich's economic plan is much more robust than Romney's. Newt's business tax is 12.5%, Mitt's is 25%, which is still higher than our nearest economic competitor Canada which is at 16.5%. Ask yourself this, if Romney is the nominee, and his corporate tax rate is 25%, and Canada's is 16.5%, why would any company choose to open for business in the U.S. When they can do it in Canada 8.5% cheaper? This is just one example of how much more robust Newt's plan is which has a corporate tax rate of 12.5% compared to Romney's 25%. Newt's plan calls for a 15% optional Flat income tax, Mitt keeps the top rate at 35%. Newt’s plan abolishes the capital gains tax for everyone, knowing that the best way to increase investment is to make it worthwhile for those with resources to invest. Mitt keeps the rate at 35% for those making over $200,000, thus producing little to no impact on job creation. Mitt has not expressed any plan to deal with the fed, Newt does. Check out what the Wall Street Journal says about Newt's Plan . Newt is the only candidate with a plan to stand up to activist judges in defense of religious freedom, life, marriage, national security, and property rights. Newt is the only candidate in my 50 year lifetime, other than Reagan who has succeeded in moving this country to the Right, and is exactly what this country needs right now. The reason he was not liked by some in DC, is he pushed for radical change and was not there to win a popularity contest.
As Rush Limbaugh always says, you can tell who liberals fear the most by who the Democrats and the media try to destroy the most. Just look at the onslaught of attacks in the last two weeks. Newt is being attacked worse than Sarah Palin has. The state run liberal media and the "establishment right wing media", will do their best to see to it that Newt is not the nominee. This tells me that Newt is the right candidate. Obama will be effectively "Newtered" after Newt is done with him in the debates. It is up to us in the Silent Majority and Tea Party to stand up for Newt and not let the Liberal Media, Establishment Right Wing Media, and Elite Republican Power Brokers choose our candidate by trying to convince us that Newt would lose against Obama. Obama is toast! The majority of candidates in the current republican field could defeat him. We do not need to settle for a moderate watered down conservative. You always hear candidates refer you to their websites, but how many people actually take the time to do that? I urge everyone that reads this to check out Newt's 21st Century Contract with America on his website at www(dot)newt(dot)org. In it you will find some of the most common sense solutions and ideas along with a well thought out plan to implement them. On of my favorites, is a plan to legally and constitutionally abolish courts that behave in a unconstitutional manner, and the 9th circuit will be the first in the cross-hairs. This will send chills down the spines on the left, as this is how get their agendas through that are contrary to the will of the people.
Speaker Gingrich will effectively "Newter" Obama, anytime, anyplace. The relentless onslaught of attacks by the state controlled media, the complacent-conservative media (i.e. Krauthammer Stoddard, Etc.) and the Obamabot-Borg commenting on these articles, demonstrates that we finally have the right candidate. They bring up all of Newt's negatives and act like that's what concerns them, and therefore they project the notion that the Republican primary voters should be concerned about the same. Newt's negatives is not what they are concerned about, it is his positives. They have seen this man in action before, and the idea that this man could steal the hearts and minds of Americans and create a sequel to the 1994 Republican Revolution, frightens them to death, because this time it will be a political revolution on steroids. When Newt led Republicans in taking control of the house and senate in 1994, there were members of the concerned media that actually cried on the set, were lost for words, or looked like they needed a laxative. In 1994, Democrat Bill Clinton was President, but a lot of conservative progress was made because the people were behind The Contract with America. Bill Clinton compromised and was able to also take part of the credit, which he should. Then Bush43 gets elected, and slowly but surely Republicans in the house and senate abandon their conservative resolve because they were falling for the lies of the media who said that the people no longer supported a conservative agenda. To top it off, Bush43 was not an effective leader of the Republican party, and did not steer the party back on track. However, the people still wanted the same things they wanted in 1994, and in 2006 fired Republicans in the house and senate for abandoning what they were sent there to do. The people are again hungry for the same kind of conservative change as they were in 1994, and more so, as demonstrated by the Tea Party movement and the 2010 fall elections with Republicans reclaiming control of the house. Speaker Gingrich, and his new 21st Century Contract with America, are resonating with the people just as in 1994. The difference is, this time he is running for President, but he still will have the ability to get new and existing Republican house and senate candidates to sign on to the new contract and once again nationalize the house and senate elections. The end result will be a landslide victory for Republicans in the white-house, house and senate. Now you will have an energized Republican party with a mandate, being led by a strong and charismatic leader in the white-house. Newt will have vested interest in keeping the party in line, because he is the author of the plan and will want to see it succeed. If you haven't checked out the speakers 21st Century Contract with America, You should, at www(dot)newt(dot)org. There you will find the answer to two questions, why You should be voting for Newt, and why the left and the status-quo right is scared to death of him. If implemented, the contract will reverse decades of damage the left has done to this country. Finally, always question the motives of the media, and do not be led by them! Do not let them choose our nominee! What some of the media are saying about Newt's chances for the nomination and the presidency, is only true if we believe them and let them steer us. Despite Newt's flaws, he is by far the most qualified person to lead this country, and The 21st Century Contract with America is the most common-sense well-thought-out plan of all the candidates.
Regards,
Tony
Talk about taking things out of context. What does Nancy Reagan's opinion on embryonic stem cell research have to do with Newt's claim to the Reagan mantle? Anyone who followed Ronald Reagan knows he was 100% pro-life and would not have approved of ESC. So NBC has lifted one Reagan's opinion, Nancy's, and inserted it for Ronald's.
yeah... only one major FLAW in the establishment and pro-romney media...
NANCY REAGAN said it and meant it adn supports NEWT... MIKE REAGAN, Ronald Reagan's son, CONFIRMS it and supports NEWT.
If Romney is the nominee... IT IS TIME FOR A truly Conservative THIRD PARTY. We keep losing nominating the RINO's anyway. At least we could lose with DIGNITY.
As Long As Richard maddow spew lies on NBC I have no use for an America hating network