Newt Gingrich on super committee: ‘Told you so’

This reminder is coming today from the GOP presidential campaign of Newt Gingrich:

In New Hampshire on Sunday, while picking up an important endorsement from U.S. Sen. Kelly Ayotte, Mitt Romney declared – apparently – that Republicans had been snookered by President Barack Obama. From Politico.com:

“He’s done nothing,” Romney claimed. “It is another example of failed leadership. He has not taken personal responsibility to get the supercommittee to find ways to balance the budget and cut spending.”

The Republican presidential front-runner also claimed Obama had “set a trap” by including an automatic $600 billion dollar cut in defense spending in the case the supercommittee failed to agree on a deficit reduction package.

- By Jim Galloway, Political Insider

For instant updates, follow me on Twitter, or connect with me on Facebook.

183 comments Add your comment

Wally

November 21st, 2011
8:12 am

Karen

November 21st, 2011
8:12 am

He called their bluff. Grover owns the pubs.

wow

November 21st, 2011
8:17 am

This could be a good opportunity. Obama needs to play tough and let the triggers go into effect. Hammer Kyl and the rest of the Repub leadership if they attempt to modify any of the triggers, including DOD cuts.

findog

November 21st, 2011
8:20 am

Poor Mitt, the republicans refuse to pay for military spending and if they can’t consider raising taxes then their official favorite portion of the budget gets cut. Newt told you that he has poisened the well of bipartisianship long ago and nothing will bring it back.

Aquagirl

November 21st, 2011
8:23 am

Congress fails and it’s Obama’s fault. Riiiiight. This is the same Newt-logic that leads one to lecture others on government-imposed morality while discarding wives and families like a used tissue.

honested

November 21st, 2011
8:25 am

I hope the President puts a laser focus on the GrandObstructionistParty for their failure to accept the need for adequate revenue. Ten years of unfunded expenditures including two unfunded wars cannot be ‘cut’ into balance.
It also allows an opportunity to ‘out’ a certain self-important hostage taker in the ‘tax pledge’ department and show the American Voters may be smarter than a two bit huckster with a bogus contract (newt are you listening too?).

oldtimer

November 21st, 2011
8:27 am

Good commercial…used to not like the guy, coming around. I think there is a good chance it will be Romeny and Newt to lead the charge against the Democratic party.

BlueMoon

November 21st, 2011
8:30 am

Okay, so it seems all of you want to raise taxes? So…based on the fact that spending is at historic levels are we to just raise taxes every time the govt needs it? Because revenues are not that far off from pre-great depression levels. Based on that logic the govt just continues to take until we have nothing left.

Where does it stop? Or does it matter as long as you’re able to create your govt utopia? Anyone without an agenda can see this is a spending problem, not a revenue one. You could seize all of the top 1%’s assets and it would only run our govt 6 months at current spending levels. So the only real reason to seize more money from people that have either earned/inherited it is because of wealth envy.

Jay

November 21st, 2011
8:31 am

Why are you quoting this dissipated little man? No Newt is a good Newt. If you want to write something readable, why not explain how this man attracted even one woman – much less three wives and only the Lord knows how many sides? Now THAT’S a story.

Wally

November 21st, 2011
8:31 am

Good call oldtimer, that would be the GOP ticket I wanted to see all along.I believe it to be a slam dunk. Have you noticed how they have been real nice to each other, unlike with the other candidates?

Jon

November 21st, 2011
8:31 am

Newt has never been wrong. Just ask him.

carlosgvv

November 21st, 2011
8:32 am

If you translate Romney’s comments, they read “he has refused to make the rich his number one priority”.

The Kid

November 21st, 2011
8:33 am

Old impotent Newtie Baby is at it again. How low can you go? If this is the direction of the Republican Party, then ;’happy landing’; at the bottom of the proverbial moral cliff. Faux News is higher morally than Newtie Baby, and thats saying a lot.

roughrider

November 21st, 2011
8:34 am

I don’t see how you can fault one branch of government for another branch’s shortcomings.

Doogsga

November 21st, 2011
8:40 am

Is the best his opposition can come up with “his morality”? RE: Slick Willy

Sorry, I’ll take brains over the community organizer.

clem

November 21st, 2011
8:41 am

oldtimer, time to get some ginkgo biloba…..

Metfan Lou

November 21st, 2011
8:43 am

If Gingrich was hired by the coimmittee as a lobbyist and paid 5 million dollars it would have been a success. Het, you get what you pay for.

Daniel Ahonen

November 21st, 2011
8:46 am

This president ran for office on transparency and leadership, so far this president has forced health care plan down our throats, created deficits that have reached 1/5 of the worlds output (per BBC), and lectured the right about civility and at the same time describe the right as financial mongers. As Newt stated, the president should have been transparent about the debt reduction process and went through legislative channels and showed leadership for the good of the country, not his political agenda. So much of this president’s decisions and actions have been enacted through executive order that has under minded the legislative process that our representatives (us) have input on.

clem

November 21st, 2011
8:51 am

newt to unviel new social security program….

here’s a typical response:

Newt said: “This gives Americans ownership over their retirement­…”

No it doesn’t, it gives Wall Street ownership over our retirement­.

Yeah, that’s what I want….a bunch of white collar criminals playing with my retirement money. After the tidal wave of mortgage and securities fraud, price fixing, cooking the books, insider trading, embezzleme­nt, etc., you have to be of unsound mind to believe Wall Street is going to take care of you in your senior years. I don’t know what right-wing­ers are smoking, but it must be some pretty powerful stuff…

findog

November 21st, 2011
8:59 am

Blue Moon,
Where were you when the last president got a tax cut through the republican controlled congress based on projected surpluses that were already fictional without triggers to protect the deficit? Where were you when a second round of red ink tax cuts were passes, along with a war of choice, after the 2002 midterms just because the GOP won an election? How much of the current red ink the budget is bleeding is from that coalition of tax cuts and increased spending our first MBA president delivered with gems like Medicare prescription drug benefit?
Republicans gave away their moral authority as deficit hawks in their desire to destroy our economy to prove the New Deal and Great Society are bad. If Newt is the answer I truly fear what the question was…

don

November 21st, 2011
9:03 am

@ daniel; the lefty’s on here don’t want to hear that….its all Bush’s fault. But, of course you are correct. To those wondering why all the leftist comments here, the AJC is a notorious left leaning publication. No real surprise that most of their remaining subscribers are also left leaning.

Mitzymy

November 21st, 2011
9:07 am

Grover was on “60 Minutes” patting himself on the back so much that I think he broke his arm. He was grinning because he is winning. He has the Repubs in the palm of his hands and they will never cross him, because if they do, he said he will take them out of office. Who gave this man all of his power? He said the voters gave him the authority to do what he does, and at the end of the interview he had a big smile on his face. If taxes for the richest 1% are not raised, the whole country will go down in dust, and it doesn’t matter to him at all.

don

November 21st, 2011
9:08 am

@ Blue Moon; you are also correct, but good luck presenting you facts to this crowd! They all want to raise taxes, even thought that will not help, none of them talk about cutting spending.
Spending is the problem. Not revenue.

thank the GOP for unemployment

November 21st, 2011
9:13 am

I like put the poor kids to work and the protesters should all just get a job.

The Snark

November 21st, 2011
9:14 am

If Mitt gets elected President, I look forward to seeing exactly how he plans to “taken personal responsibility to get Congress to find ways to balance the budget and cut spending.” Or, for that matter, to get Congress to do anything.

Congress has a history of being independent of the President. A history of about 230+ years.

DannyX

November 21st, 2011
9:16 am

“you are also correct, but good luck presenting you facts to this crowd! They all want to raise taxes, even thought that will not help, none of them talk about cutting spending.”

This crowd and about 75% of the American public. It’s the Republicans that are out of touch and will get crushed on this issue.

The Snark

November 21st, 2011
9:17 am

Don: I agree with you that there is a spending problem. But not that there is no revenue problem. It’s no secret that a staggeringly huge chunk of our deficit is due to tax cuts. Until the voters grow up and stop falling for the “have your cake and eat it too” pitch, we’re doing to have a deficit.

KevinM

November 21st, 2011
9:17 am

ABO, anybody but Obama…..a total disaster.

The on-the-job training is not working, and its very clear.

Flaws are aplenty, but enough with the current train wreck.

The Warden

November 21st, 2011
9:18 am

So What!!! If that’s true, THEN the so-called Super Committee had even more cause to get it done!. If I missed deadlines at my job and couldn’t find a way to “get it done”, I’d be fired.

Mitzymy

November 21st, 2011
9:18 am

When you mention raising taxes, you make it sound like taxes will be raised on everyone, which is not true. Evidently this affects you, or you would state it correctly. Raising taxes on rich people, not middle class or poor. If you make less than a million dollars per year, your taxes will remain the same. Grover Norquist, who owns the Republican party, said he wants to take us back to pre-Medicare, and Social Security levels of spending. That would be back to the 40’s. This would be ok if prices for gas, groceries, cars clothes and other things would also go back to that level. I bought a brand new car in 1973 for $3000.00. Can I do that now? “NO”

Question

November 21st, 2011
9:20 am

Everyone knows we have to cut spending..

Can someone tell what they are ready to give up personally? Please don’t volunteer for others to take a cut.

DannyX

November 21st, 2011
9:20 am

IMPEACH NORQUIST !!!!

Danny O

November 21st, 2011
9:21 am

Perhaps Mr. Romney forgot, but the Supercommittee was the idea of Congress, not the President. And Congress will have no choice but to continually kick the can down the road unless the Republicans are willing to stop governing by ideology and start taking a pragmatic approach to problem-solving.

Bootnewt

November 21st, 2011
9:23 am

I blame the D. C. GOP’ers for swallowing Grover Norquist’s Pledge, be damned, hell or high water. Like Steve Kroft said to him last night on “60 Minutes”….”You have the GOP by the short-hairs.”

Wally

November 21st, 2011
9:24 am

Yes sir a Romney/Gingrich 2012 ticket would work just fine to run that no leadership President we have in office now. Get use to hearing it…Romney/Gingrich in 2012.

GT/MIT

November 21st, 2011
9:26 am

honested
November 21st, 2011
8:25 am

“I hope the President puts a laser focus on the GrandObstructionistParty for their failure to accept the need for adequate revenue. Ten years of unfunded expenditures including two unfunded wars cannot be ‘cut’ into balance.”

Wake up my friend, the premise that a raise in taxes is going to do anything to alleviate
the fiscal crisis we are in today is not only false but foolish. There does not exist, as you
so eloquently put it, “adequate revenue” to pull the economy out of the dumper. The nations
spending already equals the GNP so there’s nowhere else to go. The ten years of “unfunded ” expenditures, including two unfunded wars” is blatantly false also. The last budget out of
Washington was in 2008, and it did provide, A DEFENSE BUDGET. If your selective recollection will allow you to so, recall that it is your President that wants to cut funding to these two funded wars.

clem

November 21st, 2011
9:31 am

wally it is a minus plus a minus = a minus…..it’s not a minus x minus= +

z

November 21st, 2011
9:32 am

LOl..Clem you have a crooked gov”t taking care of it now…Son name one thing just one that the govt has run correctly?

GT/MIT

November 21st, 2011
9:33 am

Today our National Debt passed FIFTEEN TRILLION DOLLARS. Doubling the tax on every man, woman, and child in the country, will not cover this deficit. Some of you dunces need to wake up.

z

November 21st, 2011
9:36 am

All of you idiots that want to raise taxes, send the IRS a check I am sure they will take it..just leave mine alone!

Observer

November 21st, 2011
9:36 am

To all who suggest we have a revenue problem and that our deficits are the result of tax cuts, I ask two questions: 1) How do you reconcile that position with the FACT that every income tax cut in history has resulted in an INCREASE in tax revenue (this can be verified at treasury.gov) and, 2) What do you propose is the optimal tax rate? At one point in this country the highest tax bracket was 95%. Should we return to those days?

This country’s problem is not a lack of revenue – it is too much spending. Period. BOTH parties are equally guilty. The only difference between the two major parties is what programs they want to spend the money on.

Dear Washington, you have enough money. Try spending it prudently.

Hamilton

November 21st, 2011
9:37 am

@BlueMoon – go back to pre-depression spending levels? Sure! Great idea! Pre Social Security, Medicare, FDA, aircraft carriers, troops in 100 countries, space program, CDC, NIH, civil rights, federal highway system, DARPA, SEC, FCC. I’m sure that’ll work out great. None of that stuff is really productive, is it?

Observer

November 21st, 2011
9:38 am

“Government always finds a need for whatever money it gets.” – Ronald Reagan

Streetracer

November 21st, 2011
9:39 am

A few facts for the factually challanged:

The US already has a more progressive tax code than France or Germany. In the US 41% of all tax revenue is income taxes. (It’s 29% in Germany & 21% in France). In the US 45% of all taxes are paid by the richest 10%. (It’s 31% in Germany & 28% in France). Seems pretty progressive to me. (BTW – US Tax Code is 16,000 pages [and attendent Rules & Regulations increase that to 72,000+ pages] – France; about 1900 pages). See the problem here?

clem

November 21st, 2011
9:44 am

z…how bout nasa, know any businesses that landed on moon?

I Love Life Cereal

November 21st, 2011
9:44 am

first again

Dude, that is so 1999. Time to stop trying to be cool on the interwebz.

Shine

November 21st, 2011
9:45 am

Observor thinks if taxes are cut to zero revenue will increase. lmao! Observor says history supports that everytime taxes are cut, revenue increases. lmao! When boy (GOP) when, are you going to get your act together and pay for 30 years of warmongering?

what?

November 21st, 2011
9:49 am

clem
November 21st, 2011
8:51 am

newt to unviel new social security program….

here’s a typical response:

Newt said: “This gives Americans ownership over their retirement­…”

No it doesn’t, it gives Wall Street ownership over our retirement­.

Clem, going through life as a uninformed dumb a$$ must be fun for you. You would rather trust congress with your money. ROTFLAMO at the idiot Clem.

UGA 1999

November 21st, 2011
9:50 am

First of all, God Bless the Munson family. Larry, thank you for all of the memories, you will be missed.

GT/MIT

November 21st, 2011
9:56 am

UGA 1999
November 21st, 2011
9:50 am

“First of all, God Bless the Munson family. Larry, thank you for all of the memories, you will be missed.”

Amen from an old Yellowjacket.