Newt Gingrich’s Mom was Bipolar
Via The Daily Beast…
BTW, Mood disorders run in families:
Newt’s was a rootless boyhood as his stepfather’s military career moved the family around the U.S. and abroad. His mother became more and more emotionally fragile. How did she survive? I asked Kit Gingrich.
“I almost didn’t,” she blurted out. “I had manic-depressive illness.”
“Oh, sure. My life was moving from one post to another and another doctor and more medicine,” she told me. “You name it,” she said, referring to all the medications she was given for bipolar disorder, “and I was on it.” When a new doctor took her off all medication, she said, “I almost fell apart.” Bob Gingrich was furious and demanded that she be medicated again. But in that brief window of clarity, she told me, she saw him with new eyes. “Bob is a tyrant,” she declared. “No question about it.”
Newt grew to the age of 15 believing that Bob Gingrich was his real father. When he found out that his real father was named Newt McPherson, a fine Scottish name, a great fantasy grew in his mind. “Robert the Bruce,” Gingrich rhapsodized, “is the guy who would not, could not, avoid fighting … He carried the burden of being Scotland.” To be called Newt the McPherson would be hugely significant. It would mean that Newt was head of the tribe, the supreme leader.
I wrote an article a few weeks ago making the case against Gingrich because of his radical, unreliable temperament.
Some might mistake my passionate opposition to Gingrich as a personal distaste for the man. Nothing could be further from the truth. Gingrich is one of the giants of modern conservatism. His accomplishments deserve our respect. His encyclopedic erudition inspires us all to strive for a deeper intellectual understanding of our world. And on a personal level he stands as an example of a man who has been able to fall and build himself back up again to aid in the defense of freedom.
But you still don’t give the keys to the kingdom to someone who can’t be trusted.
One can judge a man’s character and ethics as not being at the A level necessary for the presidency. That’s not a personal slam against Gingrich. That just means he’s normal. He’s flawed like most Americans are flawed. (And I do not look down in judgment.) But for president we need to look for moral character that is well ABOVE average. That was how conservatives more or less succeeded on the ethical front with both Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush.
So Newt, can’t you just go back to being one of the top pundits again instead of trying to be president? We’d very much appreciate more books and Fox News appearances and bold policy proposals. Come on, better to reign in intellectual hell than serve in political heaven, right? Then at least you’d put the country in less danger and less reliance on blind faith that your Catholicism has finally tamed your Radical Spirit.
What an ending:
Marianne raged at Newt for his sanctimony in giving high-minded speeches about family values—how could he stand up and say such things and do what he was doing? His retort, she said: “People need to hear what I have to say … It doesn’t matter what I live.”
RTWT.
A blog post that Nixon’s Dirty Tricks squad would be proud of. This guy should be writing for the New York Times.
I didn’t need to bust into Gingrich’s psychiatrist’s office to point out that the supposed elephant emperor in the room is naked. The man’s admitted he’s bipolar. It’s plain as day. Read the Daily Beast piece for the quotes from interviews of him. He thinks he’s going to be the next Churchill, another bipolar politician.
I referred to the dirty tricks squad, not the “white house plumbers”. I know, you’re behind Newt 100%, otherwise you couldn’t get the knife in. And it wouldn’t do if we had a leader of Churchill’s caliber today, now would it? I love all this anti-Newt sniping from the talking heads and punditry. How rude of the damned rank and file to ignore their betters in DC and NYC. I like and read Coulter, Steyn, Krauthammer, Hanson, but I’ll decide for myself who I support. Newt’s not perfect, of course, but unlike the professional pundits he’s actually accomplished something. He does grasp the purpose of the bully pulpit.
Mr. Swindle’s need to respond to every comment that he perceives to be critical is elucidatory. I generally skip past the smug, agenda-driven content of his posts as these are mostly pretentious codswallop but it can be fun to watch his invariable push back should someone dare to disagree with him.
That Mr Swindle reads and replies to the comments to his posts seem to me to be a willingness to discuss or debate if you will what he has written. I see nothing wrong with that. That he defends his words is only right as you also have a right to disagree. I’ve said before, I’m a Perry supporter so it doesn’t matter to me at this point if Newt is crazy as a loon but it is good to get such information out there as he has a good chance of getting the nomination and this could effect how he handles himself. If you would care to make an intelligent post Mr. Swindle might even reply to you.
Tina Brown’s latest left wing drivel is irreverent. This is the cousin to the outlet that photoshopped pics of Princess Diana. Stellar sourcing.
Better a bipolar than a non-polar like Romney.