CBS's Rose to Gingrich: Are You 'Questioning the Patriotism' of Obama?
Charlie Rose sparred again with Newt Gingrich on Tuesday's CBS This Morning, hounding the former House Speaker for apparently casting aspersions on President Obama's patriotism: "By saying...that the President of the United States is running over the Constitution...you seem to be saying that the President is not patriotic. You seem to be questioning [his] patriotism" [audio available here; video below the jump].
During his two previous interviews of Gingrich on the morning newscast, Rose threw the race card at the Republican for a supposedly insensitive remark about food stamps, and hammered him over prominent conservatives opposing his presidential campaign. The anchor also highlighted how apparently "there are those who say that you [Gingrich] are angry and you want to get even with Romney."
Gingrich answered Rose's "patriotism" barrage by accusing the President and his administration of acting in an unconstitutional manner in four areas. Only two have been visible issues in the media since Obama was inaugurated:
GINGRICH: The President of the United States is patriotic in a worldview that involves the writing of Saul Alinsky, and involves a radical reinterpretation. Clearly, his czars were unconstitutional; clearly, his recess appointments, when there was no recess, is unconstitutional; clearly, the use of the U.S. attorney in North Dakota to selectively prosecute oil companies over eight migratory birds is unconstitutional. Again and again, this is a president who routinely only obeys those laws he personally deems fit. I think that his attack on the Catholic Church is unconstitutional. It's a violation of the First Amendment. Now, I think that's an important debate for us to have as a country.
Earlier in the segment, the CBS journalist prodded Gingrich over his criticism of the President's national security policy, name-dropping two prominent Cabinet members who supposedly unassailable in that area:
ROSE: ...[W]hat did you mean when you said it's a duty to defeat President Obama because of America's national security, because one would assume that if, in fact, President Obama was a risk to America's national security, that people like Bob Gates and Secretary [Hillary] Clinton and lots of other people would not have been serving in that administration?
The GOP candidate cited two examples that also haven't gotten much press in his answer:
GINGRICH: Unless they agree with his worldview- I mean, ask Secretary Clinton, why would she hold a meeting with the Organization of Islamic Countries at the State Department to talk about censoring anti-Islamic talk? Why is it that when a Moroccan man is picked up as he's trying to bomb the U.S. Capitol, the Obama administration can't even accurately describe him? It's against the rules of the federal government today to talk accurately about radical Islam.
Rose followed up citing the White House talking point that "this administration proudly claims, not only, that it killed Osama bin Laden, but it has killed more al Qaeda people than any previous administration....and that their anti-terror campaign- anti-al Qaeda campaign- has been very effective, and they're at the heart of radical, fundamentalist Islam."
The CBS anchor seems to have a tough time with any criticism of the President. Just under a month earlier, on the January 26 edition of CBS This Morning, Rose took issue with Senator Marco Rubio labeling the Democrat "divisive." When the Florida senator tried to highlight Mr. Obama's State of the Union as an example, the on-air personality interrupted and replied, "I saw him honoring the military of America and a lot other things where we should be coming together. That doesn't seem to be divisive."
The full transcript of Charlie Rose's interview of Newt Gingrich, which began seven minutes into the 7 am Eastern hour of Tuesday's CBS This Morning, is available at MRC.org.
- Matthew Balan's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Hey Charlie, ol' Newt isn't
Submitted by killa37 on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 5:14pm.
Hey Charlie, ol' Newt isn't the only one 'questioning Boy Barry's patriotism', in case someone needs to clue you in. This guy's view of the USA is pretty well documented, and the policies that he has enacted, or is trying to enact, or wishes he could enact, are also further proof of this belief. Of course, Charlie - you live in Beltway Delusionville - and you're a bona fide member of the StateRun Media, so how would you know these things???
It is Charlie Rose
Submitted by John21 on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 5:16pm.
It is Charlie Rose a proven and reliable moron.
This man has been wrong so many ways and so many times that credibility is a very far distant memory for him. He is a devout drinker of the liberal Kool-Aid, normally a gallon at a time. His total lack of intellectual integrity is without question. He can almost never justify his commentary with facts or evidence. His moral values are clearly displayed on the joke of a show. His morals are limited to a devotion to the liberal agenda and whatever it takes to convince the brain dead that it is right. He has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that he has no personal integrity and totally lacking in logic. He repeats the talking point given to him by his DNC handler without question or concern.
But wait, I thought he was a
Submitted by Schofield Kid on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 5:34pm.
But wait, I thought he was a high-brow intellectual having come from PBS, surely he must have reasoned, thoughtful analysis about current issues? Ha! just kidding, he's just another DNC talking head. I honestly think he's clueless about Obowtome's sidestepping of the Consitution and nearly every other negative aspect of his administration. This now seems to be a common tactic they think will work if candidates are accused of calling the president "unpatriotic" which seems to apply to any criticism.
FDR was un-Constitutional as well
Submitted by Galvanic on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 5:35pm.
Much of his New Deal program was deemed un-Constitutional by the Supreme Court.
FDR's responses was to try to get an Constitutional amendment expanding the Court from 11 to 13 so he could appointed two more Justices and get what he wanted.
Like Obama, FDR found the Constitutional to be problematic.
Galv, right on!
Submitted by retrocon on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 6:00pm.
Minor correction, though, for those thinking that SCOTUS changes require going through the amendment process... they don't.
The constitution established the branch for the court, but left it to congress to define. The Judiciary Act of 1789 did just that, with 6 Justices (three circuits, each with one district judge and 2 supreme court justices).
In 1807 raised dto 7 justices, No need for an amendment, since the constitution gives congress the ability to "establish the courts."
In 1837, the number went to 9,
In the civil war, to 10,
In 1866, to 8
In 1869 back to 9. Might have been one or two other stops in there ;-)
FDR nearly owned congress, so he was just going to have them expand the court and confirm liberal judges. Thus blackmailing Hughes, who caved and supported the New Deal.
or something like that....
charlie
Submitted by east tennessee john on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 5:35pm.
Is this the same Charlie Rose who sat there with Brokaw telling us all how little we knew about BO? Tell me Charlie, the AP reports that BO is thinking about reducing our strategic arsenal to 300 weapons while the Russians stay at 1500, we don't know what China has and Iran is ready to go. Is such a unilateral act by ANY AMERICAN President unpatriotic? Spit or swallow Charlie?
"there are those who say that
Submitted by celator on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 5:35pm.
"there are those who say that you [Gingrich] are angry...."
See, this old dog has some life left in it yet. Some say, anyway.
Well, Charlie,
Submitted by Quasi-socialist on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 9:33pm.
there are those who say Barack Obama is a Marxist.
Marxist
Submitted by jackiestbird on Wed, 02/22/2012 - 3:07pm.
And rightly so
Charlie Rose
Submitted by pockets64 on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 5:37pm.
There are those who say that Charlie Rose is a special kind of stupid.
Of course, _I_ would not go down that road...
Oh, my.....
Submitted by motherbelt on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 5:42pm.
Here I've been saying for days that How dare you question his Christianity! is 2012's How dare you question his patriotism!
and along comes Charlie Rose with the old standby.
This is just an attempt to divert the argument from the real complaints about Obama.
A patriot respects the Constitution this country is founded upon. After his catalogue, I wish Gingrich had asked Rose, do you think those are the actions of a patriot who respects our Constitution?
Charlie Rose is a tool.
National Security has been
Submitted by goldwater89 on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 5:43pm.
National Security has been Obama's ONLY strong-point. He's continued the War on Terror and OK'd the Bin Laden take-out (even while people in his own camp advised against it). Let's give credit where credit is due.
But to play Devil's Advocate; Bush had czars and made recess appointments too, Newt. C'mon now.
But Bush's recess appointments were made....
Submitted by Blonde on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 5:45pm.
....when Congress was actually in recess, unlike The Won's appointments.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
You're right, Au89
Submitted by Galvanic on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 5:50pm.
This is why I don't hold out much hope for the GOP. Their track record isn't much better than the Dems, though the Dems seem to want to accelerate the runaway train.
It's time for new political parties.
I don't see national security
Submitted by killa37 on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 5:58pm.
I don't see national security as being one of Boy Barry's 'strong' points, given our declining status of power in the world, as well as internally - in so many directions that I don't even want to start naming them. And 'continuing the war or terror', while it might be debatable - is NOT somthing that Boy Barry wanted to do - I think it's one of the few things that he HAD to do. As far as Obama bin Laden - check the 'real' story on the whole scene, before you start pumping your boy Barry up. Of course, Bush had nothing to do with either the war or terror or the demise of Obama bin Laden, right??
goldwater 89 conservative
Submitted by east tennessee john on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 5:59pm.
goldwater 89 conservative truth squad. Let's not give BO too much credit. What happens if it came out we OBL ready to be taken, a la Clinton, and he doesn't give the order. It was something any American President would have done and it was one of the few time BO actyed like one. Also, Bush's recess appointments actually came during recesses. Funny how the rules change when demoncrats are involved. C'mon now.
I've got to disagree,
Submitted by killa37 on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 7:35pm.
I've got to disagree, Tennessee..........about Boy Barry' 'acting' like a President - although that's basically what he's been doing since his coronation, so maybe you're right. But as to the Obama bin Laden deal - from all account, Boy BlahBlah had to be TOLD that this was happening.............after playing golf and 'sleeping' on it. And I'm sure a lot of other decisions and acts from the White House happen the same way. He spent close to 4 days before he made any comments on the Underpants Bomber, but he had time to golf over here, and also cause a traffic jam by the beach, coming to check out some minor injuries to a friend of his' son. I could go on and on, but I'm sure you know the same stories................
No mention of the numerous Arab Spring debacles?
Submitted by SickofLibs on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 6:10pm.
Hmmm.
Get ready for Syria.
credit where credit's due
Submitted by cocodrie on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 6:26pm.
Obama deserves credit for the systematic destruction of the United States of America.
Jesus Loves You so much He died for you
Ahhhhhhhh, coco - there you
Submitted by killa37 on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 7:41pm.
Ahhhhhhhh, coco - there you go again, being a 'laughable TEA Party member', a right-wing fringe kook, and not acting like a good Republican.
Gingrich quote...
Submitted by pockets64 on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 5:42pm.
"It's against the rules of the federal government today to talk accurately about radical Islam."
Over at the FBI they are shredding "offensive" training material for counter-terrorism classes.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/02/21/fbi-purges-hundreds-training-...
"There are those who say"
Submitted by Blonde on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 5:44pm.
Oh how I wish any time one of tools use that line, the answer would start with "Who Says?".
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Ha! I was thinking the...
Submitted by TempusFugit on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 6:47pm.
...same thing. My response would be "Nice straw man argument there, dude. Who exactly is 'who say'?" And then refuse to answer anything else until the interviewer says who it is who say.
I question his patriotism
Submitted by rbosque on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 7:26pm.
I question his patriotism ESPECIALLY since he's helping our enemies and shunning our allies.
I question his patriotism.
Submitted by richflanj on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 7:26pm.
All you libs out there who don't doubt the patriotism of BHO:
Let's theorize that he goes to bed one night full of patriotism and love of country. During the night, he undergoes a massive change of heart and wakes up despising the country and all us "religion/gun clingers".
What would he be doing now that he isn't doing already?
Run up a massive, unpayabe debt? Check
Demoralize/degrade the military? Check
Weaken the borders? Check
Support massive voter fraud? Check
Assault Christianity? Check and double check
Create and expand unemployment numbers? Check
Assault job creaters? Check
The list goes on....
Yes
Submitted by H_Tuttle on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 9:28pm.
As should we all.
I love my wife so much
Submitted by Quasi-socialist on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 9:29pm.
I want to fundamentally transform her....
Really?
Submitted by needle on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 9:47pm.
Often it is the other way around.
- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.
The Obama (endorsed by Charlie Rose) claim
Submitted by Gary Hall on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 9:31pm.
I have to wonder out loud here - is this true?
Rose followed up citing the White House talking point that "this administration proudly claims, not only, that it killed Osama bin Laden, but it has killed more al Qaeda people than any previous administration.
I think I understand that because of the ever improving ability for us to use drones successfully, combined with what certainly seems to be the Obama administration's decision to target and kill suspected al Qaeda terrorists - rather than capture them and have to deal with their paranoid fear of where and how to hold them, - that Obama may have killed more of them via the selective use of drones; however, has he actually killed more al Qaeda members than did the Bush administration? On the ground? In the caves?
How many did the Bush administration kill during the opening months of the Afghanistan campaign, during the chase to Tora Bora, and during the 7 years that followed? How about al Qaeda in Iraq?
What in the world is either the Obama administration, or their worker-bees like Rose, basing this data on?
I suspect that it's simply become a popular leftie talking point - and from those who are appalled at the idea of doing it in the first place.
(;~/ gary
⇒ Bush's army killed 'em in droves
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 9:37pm.
They are s-o-o-o-o jealous!
Wasn't is like a million
Submitted by stratman on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 9:49pm.
Wasn't is like a million Iraqis, which worked out to be ~500 per day?
@ stratman . . LOL
Submitted by Gary Hall on Wed, 02/22/2012 - 4:29pm.
You know, I did that math over and over again - posting it over the years.
Pulled it out occasionally, when someone across the dinner table made the million dead claim. Found out, none of them like math.
I also teased numerous journalists over it when they did the "some say perhaps a million civilians died. . . . bla bla."
I discovered, they don't have a good sense of humor.
(;~> gary
Funny But Not Funny
Submitted by stratman on Wed, 02/22/2012 - 7:08pm.
Seems a lot of these "mathletes" keep putting both feet through the same side of their jock strap and can't figure out why it doesn't work right.
Then Senator Obama questioned
Submitted by Liberallies on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 9:36pm.
Then Senator Obama questioned the patriotism and responsability of then President George W. Bush!!! where was the media berating Obama for questioning a President's patriotism?
The media is no longer attempting to hide their Left wing bias and radicalism!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OqMbD6MNf5U&feature=related
⇒ Excellent memory, futbolisgreat!
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 9:44pm.
It's also worth noting Obama opined paying taxes to further enslave people to the government is what Jesus meant when he said "Unto whom much is given, much will be required"
He can twist Scripture better than his father.
Patriot?
Submitted by stratman on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 9:44pm.
Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Castro, Chavez and more would all claim they were/are patriots. So what's your point, Rose?
Charlie, doesn’t know how to handle this
Submitted by needle on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 9:44pm.
Charlie’s basic problem is that the concept of questioning The Great and Way Cool Obama is simply beyond Charlie’s ken.
- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.
I try to ignore the windbag...
Submitted by needle on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 9:51pm.
...but has The Way Cool One ever started wearing American flag lapel pins yet?
- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.
If Charlie Rose actually sees the Dear Ruler as a patriot...
Submitted by Dave. on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 10:36pm.
...then he is the one with the problem.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
can't wait
Submitted by jimtrees on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 10:46pm.
for michelle to show her true colors toward our troops when she is not president anymore. makes me sick as a vet to watch her kiss up to the military.
Once again we see the utter
Submitted by ThePickle on Tue, 02/21/2012 - 11:03pm.
Once again we see the utter willingness of a Obama media sycophant to tout drone attacks in 2012 to defend Obama. This despite the the fact that the words "cowardly" and "illegal" were used by many on the Left to describe President Bush's use of unmanned drone attacks during the course of the Iraq conflict. In fact a large amount of traffic on Leftist web sites are decrying the use of Drones by President Obama as vociferously as they did against President Bush, something the MSM conveniently fails to mention.
And not a word from Rose about the Malaysian War Crimes Tribunal ( a tribunal set up by a disgruntled Muslim leader) that in Nov of 2011 found George Bush as well as Tony Blair guilty of "war crimes".
One of the major points the tribunal focused on was their contention that it is illegal to attack a country that had not first attacked you. By this definition alone that would make President Obama a "war criminal", for his unprovoked attack on Libya, in the eyes of this so called "tribunal".
As of this date the The Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Tribunal has released no plans to bring charges against President Obama.
Funny how that little (D) after a name can make sweeping changes to peoples opinions.
Well, yah, Charlie
Submitted by ROSIE RIGHT on Wed, 02/22/2012 - 1:28am.
I do believe that's what Speaker Gingrich is saying...duh! And many, many other Americans, too. This fool is doing whatever he wants, whenever he wants, in order to break this country..I'd say that pretty much sums up "unpatriotic", wouldn't you? That is, if you weren't part of the liberal, lying media. Thank you for telling it like it is, Newt!
Forefathers
Submitted by m1xram on Wed, 02/22/2012 - 3:23am.
Wasn't BO just complaining that he couldn't screw up the country fast enough because the Forefathers were getting in his way? See, those guys knew what they were doing when they wrote the Constitution. They knew we'd have anti-American Presidents like FDR, Wilson, and Obama. Wish we had Coolidge right now, the recovery would be over and I'd have a great job again.
The opposite of Left is Freedom.