Does Newt Gingrich understand how threats work? He has worked himself into a lather over the part during last night’s GOP debate when moderator Brian Williams went all Mother Superior and instructed the Republican audience to hush for once in its life and wait for a commercial break to applaud, which meant that all of Newt’s usual smirking laugh lines about poors and minorities were met with a giant room full of awkward silence, AS THEY SHOULD BE. He therefore officially threatens to no longer participate in any future Republican debates if the audience is asked to behave itself. Which, REALLY? In that case, we’d say the media basically has a moral obligation to America to take him up on his offer.
Whine whine whine whine whine, via the NYTimes:
“I wish in retrospect I’d protested when Brian Williams took them out of it because I think it’s wrong,” Mr. Gingrich said. “And I think he took them out of it because the media is terrified that the audience is going to side with the candidates against the media, which is what they’ve done in every debate.”
No, Newt, a presidential debate is not a contest between the candidates and the moderator. The debates are a contest between the candidates. This is a Fundamental Historical Fact that Newt Gingrich does not understand, like so many others.
“We’re going to serve notice on future debates,” he told Fox. “We’re just not going to allow that to happen. That’s wrong. The media doesn’t control free speech. People ought to be allowed to applaud if they want to.”
Hahahaha and here is the fun correction at the bottom of the NYTimes story, because even they cannot keep all of Newt’s affairs/wives/lies straight:
An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated whom Newt Gingrich is said to have asked for an “open marriage.” It was an ex-wife, not his current wife.
FOR ALL WE KNOW, at this moment. [NYTimes]Related