Andy Martin says the Union Leader’s endorsement of Newt Gingrich for president shames the people of New Hampshire
Andy says Union Leader executives are out of touch with reality, and incompetent journalists who did no meaningful research and analysis before backing Gingrich
Andy says the Union Leader’s arrogance and contempt for New Hampshire voters may backfire
(NEW YORK) (November 30, 2011) I call myself the “Favorite Son” candidate for New Hampshire Republicans and there is a reasonable basis for this claim. My mother was born in Manchester, my grandparents are buried there and I have spent my entire life coming to New Hampshire for vacations and family events. My memories of Manchester go back to 1951 when I attended he funeral of Father Emilianos Paschalakis at Assumption G. O. Church. So unlike the other presidential candidates who breeze in and breeze out, I was raised with New Hampshire values in my veins.
I have also grown up for the past sixty years listening to ridicule and complaints about the New Hampshire Union Leader (then the Manchester Union Leader). While the rest of the journalism and media world moved on to responsible reporting and commentary, the Union Leader has retained its crackpot orientation as a “voice” without any roots in rationality or reason.
I have been campaigning across the state for almost a year and I find no evidence the UL has any measurable influence. Rather, the newspaper’s reputation has become like a “Cheshire Cat” situation where only the smile remains. To provide local “color” the national media report on the UL's activity. But New Hampshire residents completely ignore the newspaper. The Union Leader's circulation (40,000 - 60,000 newspapers, six days a week) has shrunk to the point of irrelevance.
The UL’s latest outburst also confirms why the print media are dying in America. Print editors tend to be pompous, self-important asses. While all news coverage is to some extent slanted, the UL glories in presenting biased and unbalanced coverage of both its perceived friends and enemies.
Unfortunately for the Union Leader’s writers, the real world exists alongside the parallel delusional universe of the UL and its editors.
That is why the “endorsement” of Newton Gingrich for president shames New Hampshire residents and to some extent shames legitimate journalism as well.
TAKE ONE: The Union Leader is entitled to its opinions. I do not for one minute suggests that the newspaper should support someone they don’t believe in, or that we have anything more than a “buyer’s veto” of the paper by ignoring the UL as so much of New Hampshire does today.
TAKE TWO: Just as the UL is entitled to its opinions, I am also entitled to my opinion. My opinion is based on extensive research and analysis of both Newt Gingrich's past and, more importantly, his current methods of operation (2000 – 2011). In my opinion Newton Gingrich is a professional political crook whose whole career up to the present day and present month has been characterized by unethical conduct and corrupt activity. Political crooks don’t go to jail as often as ordinary burglars and muggers; perhaps that is why American government is in such a sad state today.
TAKE THREE: By endorsing Gingrich, the Union Leader is shaming the state and suggesting that New Hampshire residents are ignoramuses and sympathizers with corruption and ethical misconduct. On the contrary, New Hampshire is a state that has traditionally held to the highest standards of public integrity. There is a complete disconnect between Newton Gingrich’s sleazy political career and the ethics and values of New Hampshire residents.
Take Four: Is the Union leader endorsement likely to sway many votes? It is more likely to backfire, by forcing voters to look behind the endorsement and consider the reality of Newt Gingrich's sordid political career. If Joe McQuaid and his self-styled conservative weenies have any influence on the primary they may create an unintended anti-Gingrich backlash. (Reminder: when I am not a presidential candidate I am the executive editor of an Internet newspaper called www.ContrarianCommentary.com.)
TAKE FIVE: Why do I think the Union Leader’s endorsement of Gingrich is not merely wrong but actually “shameful.” Because the UL’s analysis of why it is supporting Gingrich is not anchored in factual reality or political reality.
TAKE SIX: In addition to making a laughingstock of New Hampshire, the Gingrich campaign is also likely to humiliate evangelical Christians. Especially in Iowa where conservative Christians are an influential part of the Republican base, the “explanations” that are being given for Gingrich’s immorality and his habitual traducing of his marital vows are a disgrace to conservative Christianity. “Forgiveness” is Christian. But just because you forgive someone’s transgressions does not mean you then ignore the past and promote the transgressor into an even higher level of temptation.
Gingrich has admitted he could not handle the stresses and temptations of high office. In fact, he gave his official duties and his “love for America” as excuses for committing adultery. Do Republican Christians now propose to support Gingrich so he can be temped again, and fail again? Bill Clinton was a moral failure in Arkansas. Moving him into the White house did not improve his morals. The same is true for Gingrich.
TAKE SEVEN: Recently, in denying that he had served his first wife with divorce papers in a hospital, Gingrich admitted he had taken a check list for their divorce to the hospital for her to sign while she was still recovering from surgery. While a check list may not be a legal document, the callous disregard for his wife's illness was confirmed, not denied, by Gingrich’s latest round of excuses. Who takes a divorce checklist for a hospital patient to sign? Newt Gingrich. It is commendable that Gingrich's daughters have forgiven their father and established a strong relationship with him. But the fact that Gingrich is a “grandfather” has no logical connection to his fitness to serve in the Oval Office. Conservative Christians are undermining their own moral authority by flirting with Gingrich for president.
TAKE EIGHT: I began exposing Gingrich’s corruption was back in March:
The facts about Gingrich’s contempt for the law are well known if not yet widely circulated. I am not suggesting I have “secret” reasons for exposing his criminality.
In a nutshell, what Gingrich does is collect money from “little people,” through his blathering self-important tax exempt organizations and then siphon those tax-exempt contributions into his private, profit-making operations so he can live the life of Washington royalty. Gingrich spent millions on jewelry and millions more on private jets, all courtesy of the little people who are duped into supporting his lifestyle by making small donations to “Newt, Inc.”
Gingrich is famous for issuing bogus invitations to people, trying to get recipients to donate $5,000 to him so they can be recognized as “leaders.” Gingrich targets senior citizens with his blarney, because seniors are especially vulnerable to his form of mail order flattery and seduction.
When I call Gingrich a crook, I mean crook.
So why did the Union Leader endorse a crook for president?
Well, if you read between the lines of Joe McQuaid's commentaries, Union Leader writers seem to “know” and “like” Gingrich. In other words, Gingrich's flattery works. Is “liking” and “knowing” a sound basis to endorse someone for the presidency? I think not.
All of the presidential candidates (with the possible exception of Herman Cain) come to New Hampshire on their “best behavior” (including present company). We aim to please, we aim to promise and we aim to profit from our pleasing and promising. That’s politics.
But the presidency is not about “politics.” The presidency is where the rubber hits the road. The presidency is a crucible where leaders are tested beyond the limits of expectation and endurance. Barack Obama thought it would be nice to live in “public housing” for four or eight years, living la vida loca in the White House, enjoying the benefits of the presidency and cementing his financial future some day as a former president. Obama is learning that the White House is not a resort hotel and, in Gingrich’s case, it is not a retirement home.
Did the Union leader look into the way Gingrich siphons cash from tax-exempt organizations into his own profit-making pockets? No. Did they look into how Gingrich “makes his money?” No. (McQuaid apparently accepted Gingrich’s nonsense that Newton is a “job-creator.”) Did the Union Leader do any investigative journalism before issuing an endorsement? No. In effect the Union Leader just casually tossed off an endorsement in the presidential primary with no meaningful research and reflection.
The Union Leader manifested contempt for its conservative New Hampshire roots and values, and contempt for the American people that look to New Hampshire for guidance in presidential politics.
None of the current presidential candidates have led perfect lives. (In Obama's case we don't even know yet who he really is.) I have been involved in controversy from time to time, usually as a result of exposing corruption. The New York Times’ dirt diggers ran a fine tooth comb over my life in 2008 and were forced to use thirty and forty year-old smut to schmutz me up as best they could (the effort failed).
Gingrich on the other hand has led an official life, a public life that is essentially one ongoing ethical violation and corruption of the tax laws. Gingrich’s corruption is a time bomb waiting to explode at the Republican National Convention.
And guess what? I knew David Axelrod way back when he was a beat reporter for the Chicago Tribune, back when Barack Obama was still living in Honolulu. Axelrod is probably salivating at the prospect of goofy Republicans and two-faced evangelic Christians nominating a crook for the presidency. Axelrod is a master dirt-digger. When Ax reads these remarks he will be smiling. The Ax knows I have been investigating and exposing crooked politicians in Illinois since the 1960’s. Axelrod knows that he would cook Gingrich's goose in a heartbeat if Gingrich won the nomination. Republicans would be humiliated.
Can this country really take four more years of Barack Obama? McQuaid and his coterie do not seem to have thought of the implications of their casually tossing off a presidential endorsement of a Republican crook to lead the party. That’s why the Union Leader’s endorsement of Newton Gingrich is a humiliation to New Hampshire residents and a disgrace to the honorable traditions of New Hampshire’s presidential primary.
With all due respect, I became a candidate for president because I had the qualifications necessary in a conservative candidate. My record of corruption-fighting is unique in national politics. My foreign experience and my experience in Washington have trained me how to do right, not how to do wrong. Nevertheless, being a second-tier presidential candidate as I am is a thankless task. It’s not easy. But I will continue to campaign for myself and campaign against Newt Gingrich because a President Gingrich would represent evil incarnate for the American people.
The Union Leader ought to be ashamed of its endorsement. I am not ashamed to tell the truth abut Gingrich and to continue the battle against this bold-faced liar and crook.
Watch for my anti-Gingrich TV and radio ads which have been prepared and which will begin airing in New Hampshire next week.
LINKS TO THIS STORY (cut and paste the entire link below and not just the underlined portion):
ABOUT ANDY: Andy Martin’s family immigrated to Manchester, New Hampshire 100 years ago. His mom was born in Manchester. Growing up, Andy spent summers in New Hampshire. That’s why he’s New Hampshire’s “Favorite Son” presidential candidate in the 2012 presidential primary election.
Today Andy is a legendary New York and Chicago-based muckraker, author, Internet columnist, talk television pioneer, radio talk show host, broadcaster and media critic. Chicago Public Radio calls Andy a “boisterous Internet activist.” The Chicago Tribune calls him “Chicago’s own…political activist.” He has over forty years of background in radio and television. He is the author of “Obama: The Man Behind The Mask” [www.OrangeStatePress.com] and he produced the Internet film "Obama: The Hawaii’ Years” [www.BoycottHawaii.com]. Andy is the Executive Editor and publisher of the “Internet Powerhouse,” www.ContrarianCommentary.com. He comments on regional, national and international events with more than four decades of investigative and analytical experience both in the USA and around the world.
Andy has been a leading corruption fighter in Illinois and American politics and courts for over forty years. [www.AndyMartin.com] He is currently sponsoring www.AmericaisReadyforReform.com. See also www.FirstRespondersOnline.us; www.EnglishforAmerica.org