the homefront

Newt Gingrich Knows *Exactly* Why Barack Obama Thinks Terrorists Are Human Beings

Rejected minor Sorkin character Newt Gingrich went to speak with Bill O’Reilly somewhere inside the tevee yesterday to talk about terrorists and their known proclivity, terrorism. Gingrich, if he is going to be the Republican’s perennial safety nominee, must crack down on terrorism by saying how much Barack Obama loves it, starting now. This is called “appealing to the base,” and it goes a little something like this: “I believe what you have is a group of people centered in the Justice Department and the Attorney General, whose law firms all gave pro bono support to terrorism. They start every day with a presumption that the rights of terrorists are more important than the lives of Americans.” This guy!

Cue Bill O’Reilly with the vaudeville bad-faith mock-hedging:

An incredulous O’Reilly replied that Gingrich’s statement was “impossible to believe” and asked, “Why would any rational person want to extend protections to a terrorist than their own family?”

“You interjected the word ‘rational,’” Gingrich responded.

“We are in much greater danger than we were a year ago,” he also said. “…We have to confront the fact that this is going to be a much bigger, much harder war than we thought.”

Sponsored Video

It is our new fight against the word “rational”—it is “America’s Iraq War.”

[CNN Political Ticker]

Related

About the author

Juli Weiner was Wonkette's beloved intern and books columnist and then morning editor until she was hired away by Vanity Fair in 2010.

View all articles by Juli Weiner

Hola wonkerados.

To improve site performance, we did a thing. It could be up to three minutes before your comment appears. DON'T KEEP RETRYING, OKAY?

Also, if you are a new commenter, your comment may never appear. This is probably because we hate you.

54 comments

  1. Mr Blifil

    I’m not comfortable being confronted with Newt’s obsessions about things that are bigger and harder.

  2. SayItWithWookies

    Oh, that’s it — them libruls just can’t stop takin’ all that there pro bono money. Newt’s a fucking financial genius, he is.

  3. Snarko Marx

    By any chance do people have the right to be proven to be terrorists before we hang them or whatever to protect our families?

  4. Doris Ziffel

    Like Newt is all rational himself. How rational is it to keep getting married after you’ve been divorced 3 or 4 times??

  5. gurukalehuru

    Has anybody ever read “War of the Newts?” (Karel Capek) I’m not making fun of Newt’s name, and I’m not saying he resembles the newts in the book, except that they are both (all)warmongering assholes, it’s just that the name reminds me of the book, which I recommend.

  6. Capitol Hillbilly

    Do you mean to tell me that Barack Obama worries about the rights of terrorists before he has his first cigarette of the day?

    I find that hard to believe.

  7. AnnieGetYourFun

    Republicans would always like you to believe that things are bigger and harder than they really are, amIright?

  8. Neilist

    At least the bear is white. That’s something to hang onto in these troubled times.

    At least, due to global warming, all the polar bears starve to death because there’s no more ice floes on which to hunt gay baby harp seals.

  9. Another DC Lawyer (Again)

    Just starting every day believing that the rights set forth in the Constitution are more important than the individual wishes of Newt and dipshit Magoo O’Reilly. What douche bag.

  10. Berkeley Bear

    [re=489080]Snarko Marx[/re]: NO! Shoot first, burn second, salt the ground third. Repeat as needed. For good measure, teport yourself to Guantanamo at once, you filthy terrorist lover!

  11. norbizness

    For balance, Meet the Press and other gabfests should exhume the smelly corpse of Jim Wright, so long as we’re going with the “disgraced, idea-less former Speaker of the House” paradigm for ratings-death.

    (one Google search later) Holy shit, Jim Wright’s not dead.

  12. JadedDIssonance

    [re=489093]Neilist[/re]: The bear is white…for now. They shall “go green,” for Iran, as the global algaes bloom.

  13. Berkeley Bear

    That pesky Bill of Rights. So hard to keep it in tatters forever, despite the best efforts of the party of “Homeland First.” You know who else kept talking about the safety of the Homeland . . .

  14. JMP

    Hey, it’s a non-Steele post, hooray!

    And dipshit, read the fucking Constitution – you know, the thing you swore to uphold lo those many years ago when you were actually relevant. No one is arguing for “extending” rights to terrorists; the Constitution guarantees certain rights to everybody, no matter what crime they’ve been accused of, even if – and I want to make this perfectly clear! – even if they do say Jehovah.

    Also, pissing your pants and quaking in fear over an incredibly unlikely threat is “rational”.

  15. SlouchingTowardsWasilla

    Man, this guy is freakin’ brilliant, what with that newfangled strategy of scaring everyone half to death and then claiming to have a solution to the scary thing. Brilliant I tells ya.

  16. WadISay

    Nothing better than listening to two right wing nuts trying to out-insult each other, viz:

    BOR: What rational basis is there to give terrorists rights?
    NG: Haha, you said these were “rational” persons.
    BOR: Haha yourself, fuck you, I never said they were “persons”.

  17. queeraselvis v 2.0

    You know who else interjected the word “rational”?

    Also, that bear looks WAY more terrified than does Michael Steele’s boxer pup. If that’s possible.

  18. JMP

    [re=489080]Snarko Marx[/re]: Of course they do. The test is simple; you throw them in the water, if they float, they’re a terrorist and must be killed; if they drown, they’re innocent.

  19. Berkeley Bear

    Polar Bears are the least predictable creature in zoos – they have no hesitancy about attacking people, even when the bears are hand raised in captivity. So we can always hope the little critter in the picture will someday grow up and maul some white haired asshole.

  20. norbizness

    Why does Barack Obama want to give terrorists a new Playstation III and he kicked me down a flight of stairs?

  21. UnattendedConsequence

    Why’s he mixing in this pro bono stuff, anyway? What difference does it make if there are some U2 fans in the guvmint? Newt-if that is his name-needs to start making sense.

  22. ManchuCandidate

    If I were an alien from another world and had to watch this instead of “Single Female Lawyer” then I’d get the idea that guys like Newty were big crazy wussies whose own bellicose braying was masking the deep seated chickenshit within.

  23. Paterlanger

    [re=489102]SlouchingTowardsWasilla[/re]: Well, he certainly sounds brilliant when the auto-tune is switched on.

  24. Advocatus_Diaboli

    I’m pretty sure USMerika won the war against rationality a while ago.

    Like November 2, 2004, at least.

  25. Ducksworthy

    What’s the Newtster planning to do to Pedo Bear? Or has he already done it. That would explain the grin on Gnut and the disgusted/terrified look on the bear’s face.

  26. user-of-owls

    Newt is absolutely right. We need to go back to the old ways, just like when we sent Timothy McViegh off to a black site in Belarus and tortured the bejeesus out of him to gather intelligence on white militias.

    What?

  27. pampl

    [re=489116]UnattendedConsequence[/re]: U2 is Irish, Irish are terrists. U2 is musicians, musicians are liberals, liberals are terrists. Therefore U2 = al Qaida squared

  28. JMP

    [re=489077]SayItWithWookies[/re]: Hey, the pro bono thing makes it even worse. Republicans know that anything is OK if you’re paid enough, even defending an accused terrorist; but only a monster would try to uphold the Constitution over mere principle. It’s a violation of the Gospel of Rand.

  29. Cape Clod

    For balance, O’Reily really should get someone from the liberal perspective who is equally relevant and morally upstanding, like Gary Hart.

  30. Way Cool Larry

    “It is our new fight against the word “rational” — it is “America’s Iraq War.””

    Were truer words ever written?

  31. Naked Bunny with a Whip

    @ManchuCandidate: Aliens are known for their intelligence, especially the ones watching Earth TV.

  32. TGY

    What Gnute meant to say was that some people just get a pro bono from terrorist underpants, that’s all. Hey, is that a pic of two gnutes and a holler?

  33. betterDeadThanRed

    Where are the health care death panels? Will Congress get off its butt and pass the death panels law already. Clearly irrational olds like this need death panels. WE WERE PROMISED DEATH PANELS!

  34. PrairiePossum

    What rational basis is there to extend rights?

    Well, we could try reading the U.S. Constitution, or maybe the Geneva Conventions, or perhaps a U.S. Supreme Court opinion or two. But that assumes the authors of those documents are “rational.”

  35. chaste everywhere

    [re=489114]Birdcrash[/re]: [re=489205]donner_froh[/re]: It’s where he keeps his list of the names of 57 card-carryin’ terroris’ bearhuggers.

  36. BarackMyWorld

    “Why would any rational person want to extend protections to a terrorist than their own family?”

    Man, what a screwed up hybrid of a straw man argument and loaded question that is.

  37. BarackMyWorld

    “I believe what you have is a group of people centered in the Justice Department and the Attorney General, whose law firms all gave pro bono support to terrorism. They start every day with a presumption that the rights of terrorists are more important than the lives of Americans.”

    Apparently Newt really thinks Eric Holder was a lawyer for al Qaeda and that there is a literal either/or choice between observing due process in the courts and protecting American lives. Or he is a lying sack of shit.

  38. Oldskool

    “We have to confront the fact that this is going to be a much bigger, much harder war than we thought.”

    Not bad, only eight years late. Sadly, the lowbrows love that stuff. Barry needs to ridicule those dipshits every day, like FDR. People loved his snarkability.

  39. glamourdammerung

    Never before have I wanted a polar bear to destroy someone’s face then make violent “surprise sex” love to the hole.

Comments are closed.