Prometheus 6

I am listening to Newt Gingrich right now, and you know what?  If I believed him, I'd vote for him.

The trouble is, I've seen how Newt operates.

Government shutdown and the Air Force One "snub"

The momentum of the Republican Revolution stalled in late 1995 and early 1996 as a result of a budget fight between Congressional Republicans and President Bill Clinton. Without enough votes to override President Clinton's veto, Gingrich led the Republicans to not submit a revised budget, allowing the previously-approved appropriations to expire on schedule, and causing parts of the Federal government to shut down for lack of funds.

Gingrich inflicted a temporary blow to his public image by suggesting that the Republican hard-line stance over the budget was in part due to his feeling "snubbed" by the President the day before, after being forced to leave Air Force One via the back door during his return from Yitzhak Rabin's funeral in Israel. Gingrich was lampooned in the media as a petulant figure with an inflated self-image, and editorial cartoons depicted him as having thrown a temper tantrum. Democratic leaders took the opportunity to attack Gingrich's motives for the budget stand-off, and the shutdown ultimately contributed to Clinton's re-election in November of that year.[7][8]

Ethics charges

Gingrich was accused of hypocrisy and unethical behavior when he accepted a $4.5 million advance as part of a book deal, in light of his previous role in the investigation of Jim Wright. Following the accusations, Gingrich returned the advance.

Including charges related to the book deal, Democrats filed 84 ethics charges against Speaker Gingrich during his term, including claiming tax-exempt status for a college course run for political purposes and using the GOPAC political action committee as a slush fund. All charges were eventually dropped following an investigation by the Republican-led House Ethics Committee. However, Gingrich admitted to "unintentionally" giving inaccurate information to the House Ethics Committee during the course of the investigation. The committee did not indict him on charges of intentional perjury.[9] The matter was settled when he agreed to reimburse the Committee $300,000 for the cost of prolonging the investigation. The payment was described as a "cost assessment" and not a fine by the Committee.[10] He also agreed to not "spin" the story in the media, but admit publicly to his transgressions.

On January 10, 1997, the New York Times printed a story that revealed Gingrich, in collusion with other House Republicans, planned to abrogate his agreement by misrepresenting the ethics violations he committed. The story was supported by quotes from a taped phone conversation between Gingrich and his fellow Republicans. A firestorm of controversy ensued, with Republicans insisting that the privacy of the participants in the conversation has been breached, and others insisting that the public has a need to know about Gingrich's intent to violate his agreement with the Ethics Committee. The couple who taped the conversation, John and Alice Martin, who claimed that they "lucked" into it over their police scanner while driving in their car and who "just happened" to have a recorder available, pled guilty to charges surrounding the taping and paid a $500 fine. Five years later, Democratic representative Jim McDermott publicly admitted that he leaked the tape. Republican John Boehner, one of the participants in the conversation, sued McDermott for $10,000 in civil damages; as of May 2006, that court case is in the US Court of Appeals in Washington, possibly heading for the Supreme Court. Many media organizations and watchdog groups support McDermott for political reasons; claiming that if Boehner prevails, the ability of news organizations to reveal embarrassing and potentially criminal behavior of government officials will be drastically curtailed.[11].