(CNN) - Asked how he plans to engage the gay community in his bid for president, Newt Gingrich on Tuesday told a voter he wouldn't be the right choice for those basing their decision on the issue of same-sex marriage.
"If that's the most important (issue) to you, then you should be for Obama," Gingrich told Scott Arnold, a man who identified himself as gay.
"Okay. I am, but thank you," Arnold replied.
The comment ended a rather cordial exchange between the two at a campaign stop in Oskaloosa, Iowa.
Arnold, an adjunct professor at William Penn University, approached the former speaker, asking Gingrich how he would sway voters who disagreed with him on same-sex marriage.
"How do you plan to engage and get the hope of gay Americans and those who support them?" Arnold asked.
Gingrich replied saying he doesn't expect to get the backing from voters solely focused on changing the definition of marriage.
"And I accept that that's a reality," Gingrich said.
Gingrich has frequently taken a conservative line on the issue. Last week, he signed a pledge with the National Organization for Marriage, promising, among many things, to back a constitutional amendment defining marriage between a man and woman.
"On the other hand, for those for whom it's not the central issue in their life –if they care about job creation, if they care about national security, if they care about a better future for the country at large-then I think I'll get their support," Gingrich said.
Iowa faith leader asked Bachmann to consider dropping out, campaign says
Poll: Paul in top spot in Iowa GOP battle
Romney defends negative ads
Gingrich: Super PAC hypocrisy
The old "catholic" adulterer is wrong as usual. What the gay man should do is go see Bachmanns husband. His "clinic"
converts gay people into straight people!!!
Obama does not need the old adulterers help.
Oh yeah, no gay guys or gals in the Rethuglican party. And when you throw in the child molesters, you start talking about a majority. Wasn't the former Rethulglican chairman Melmann who so effectively used the marriage issue to get the closeted, repressed right-wingers out in the 2004 election and who himself "came out" recently.
Of course, his patriotism compelled him to give that answer. If Newt felt that being gay was an expression of patriotism and a way iof making a quick buck, he would show up at the nearest pride parade.
so instead of telling a person why they should vote for you and what you can do for them, you tell him to go vote for the other guy.......SWEET!
Dr. Paul's philosophy on freedom and govt. borders anarchy. No one is ever "free". When a person chooses to live in a society or under any govt., he/she inadvertently agrees to follow rules that everyone in the society must abide by. When you want to enjoy all the benefits of a society, but don't want to abide by the rules, you get vacuous ideas of freedom, anarchy disguised as half-baked principles of libertarianism, and personal responsibility that neither involves the society nor requires it. If true freedom is that important to you, Dr. Paul and his supporters should just leave this collective society, form their own country and live in a mutually-agreed upon collective where everyone is responsible for self-governance. We will see how that works out.
@melmor why are you republican to begin with? I can get with being fiscally conservative but that doesn't mean I have to be a conservative which I am not. The right doesn't accept you as someone who is gay. They have made that clear. You are welcome over here on the left and we are fine with you continuing to embrace your fiscal conservative principles. We only ask that you support President Obama.Nobody on the left is or can argue with cutting wasteful spending and balancing the budget. So we will support your views on that.
Here's how the rest of that conversation could easily have played out:
"Mr. Gingrich, how do you plan to engage the working class and our concerns in your bid for President?"
"If that's important to you, vote for Obama."
"Mr. Gingrich, how do you plan to engage those concerned about the environment?"
"If that's important to you, vote for Obama."
"Mr. Gingrich, how do you plan to engage those who are concerned about 1st Amendment rights?"
"if that's important to you, vote for Obama."
I don't vote for adulterers anyway so no Gingrinch you do not have my vote and rest asured you never ever will
So, which of Newt's 3 marriages is using to support his view of marriage?
You would think since he was actually once in an elected office, he would know that you have to represent ALL the people. I guess if you don't agree with his policies (whichever ones he is promoting today), you just don't matter.
Typical Gingrich . . . Out of touch with most Americans!
You don't have to tell me to vote for Obama, Newt. None of the Republican clowns deserve anyone with half a brain's vote. They are all idiots!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! OBAMA............................., FOUR MORE YEARS, FOUR MORE YEARS, FOUR MORE YEARS, FOUR MORE YEARS!!!!
@Keeping It Real
Dominican mama 4 Obama
My question is: How many times can Newt shoot himself in the foot(feet?) before he keels over? How many bullets does he have in that gun of his?
I guess I had two questions.
I guess you'd rather have Obama lies than the truth from Newt.
It'd be super awesome if you could tell us the ways Obama has lied. Where it's true he hasn't been able to keep ALL promises he made on the campaign trail (and which politician does anyway?), how can you possibly justify it's his fault? Do you know how government works? Obama is the last step, not the first. Congress handles most of the business and Obama signs it in. This includes bills, voting methods on those bills, procedural adjustments, and things like finances and trade. That's called the legislative branch...cuz you know...they legislate. Obama, meanwhile, has all his stuff he's got to send back to Congress for final approval THEN he gets it back for signing into law (if he involves himself in those affairs anyway). Executive Branch...like a CEO overseeing a company, he has little direct control but the little control he has is very broad and is the final say in most decisions, along with being the "face of the company". Other than Executive Orders, Obama doesn't have much power alone and so asking him to create and sign bills without Congress is nonsense. So blame Congress and it's recent historical filibuster usage and underhanded bill combination proficiency (Oil Pipeline + Tax Extension = Store Brand Hot Dogs?).
'd challenge you to look at Obama's accomplishments thus far and compare them to Newts. Heck, compare them to ANY republican in Congress right now, or even Bush Jr, and you'll see who fights for the common man. Democrats. Has been since the republican and democratic ideologies changed around Nixon's administration. Lincoln would associate more with Democrats than Republicans these days and folks educated in history and science would know that.
Speaking of History, Newt's supposed to be big into that. I wonder if he knows who Alexander the Great was? or Richard the Lionheart? Even if he doesn't, he should know that the future always holds more tolerance during generational shifts and throwing votes away isn't how you get elected. All the same, he couldn't get elected to lick the batter bowl if he hired prosti...assistants i mean, to vote for him while his wife was gone.
The problem here is not that Newt has conservative beliefs on marriage, it's how he expresses them. Instead of just saying what his personal views are and what are his primary concerns are, he just dismisses this person. No class. All vitriol and self-importance. This si a man who has a lot of deep seated anger. It's him against the world. Life, for his, is constant war with those who don't think the way he does. No engaging dialogue. Just rancour.
Newt – I hope you read this . You're not going to make it , period. 2nd – The remarks you've been quoted lately, is what everybody has been talking about – when they say you will "implode" Newt – hey Newtr – let me say this plain & simple – You've Been Imploding" so pack your bags – take your money with you, & go home.
If the case was reverse and a Catholic Priest asked Obama what he was doing to make sure only a male/female could marry each other to get his vote. Would people be upset if Obama responded to the priest, ""If that's the most important (issue) to you, then you should be for Gingrich. On the other hand, for those for whom it's not the central issue in their life –if they care about job creation, if they care about national security, if they care about a better future for the country at large-then I think I'll get their support." ??????
It amazes me how many of you don't get it. He doesn't believe in "gay marriage". He's not going to try and convince the gays to vote for him because he's not going to change his mind about that. There are plenty of people on the other side of the argument (pro man and woman marriage) to vote for him. Understand? No? Good, go back to sleep.
He thinks he's popular enough to throw away votes? What an idiot!
This is why Gingrich should not be president... and why Huntsman is the only viable option left. I couldn't imagine Huntsman saying something like that. Obviously gay-marriage is an issue (for some) but right now we need to be working on restoring our economy and the world's view on us. Huntsman is the only candidate who will do this.
If you think the GOP deserves an intelligent, well-versed candidate who truly cares about his nation, go like Jon Huntsman on facebook. He deserves media attention!
Well at least he's honest. Other people who Newt would say should vote for Obama are women, blacks, immigrants, students, the poor, the unemployed, the middle class and the elderly.
I love that Iowan too. I think I will spend the money that I was going to spend in Wisconsin and go spend it in Iowa.
The part I love the most about about these right wing so-called Christian nuts is that they do not follow teachings of Christ. I'm by no means an expert on the Bible but i believe that the portion of the Bible that they all refer to when talking about the gays being wrong and against the teachings of God is in the Old Testament. The teachings of Christ is the New Testament! These idiots don't understand for one minute that if Christ was alive today they would be calling him a flaming Liberal. Christ taught nothing that these so-called Christians claim he did. Everything they quote is from the Old Testament, they talk of nothing from the New Testament.
Gingrich is a fat retarded pig. word.
this is great.
we all have ring side seats for the self destruction of the republican party.
Not one of them is competent. Not one of them has any ability to play nice with others.
And, worst of all they have no understanding of life after about 1959.
I give him credit. Now vote for Obama!
Awesome answer. I realize this would be a headline on CNN. But most people care about issues that really matter.