Matt Drudge “Jumping The Shark” Attacking Newt Gingrich With Obvious Pro-Romney Bias

Added Screen Shot #4 – Below are three four screen shots from Drudge captured January 25th at 11:00pm.  We have been pointing out how biased the Pro-Romney Drudge Report is toward Newt Gingrich, but they are really taking things to entirely new levels.     Ask yourself this question:

How much difference is there between Newt Gingrich and Ronald Reagan regarding conservative ideas and policy?  I can’t find any.

Screen Shot #1

Click on screen shots to make them bigger and easier to read (2 more below)   

Then consider that when President Reagan was in office Mitt Romney wasn’t even a Republican!

Screen Shot #2

Screen Shot #3


Screen Shot #4

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

39 Responses to Matt Drudge “Jumping The Shark” Attacking Newt Gingrich With Obvious Pro-Romney Bias

  1. Sharon says:

    That’s just irritating. Jumped the shark indeed.


  2. Awesome work, SD. I take particular offense at Drudge’s distortions of the Reagan days. When Newt criticized the “Reagan Administration,” he was not just criticizing Reagan, or even chiefly Reagan, but mainly the White House leadership that caused so many of the failures during that time. That includes GHW Bush, who (big surprise) is a big fat Romney supporter now. That’s friggin’ dishonest of Drudge. Remember “Let Reagan be Reagan?” That’s because there were plenty of forces in that WH pulling Reagan off his center.


  3. John says:

    I hate newt on every level…but the smear today from drudge is uncalled for and a bit on the absurd side. This actually makes me dislike Romney more than I already did and I didn’t think that was possible.


  4. Ronpaul2012 says:

    So you guys want bias! Ron Paul is getting blasted by all the the favorites! Newt,limbaugh,Hannity,levin! Oh and the biggest offender The MSM! Welcome to Ron Paul’s world! Pick the real candidate! Ron Paul 2012!


    • Tigerclaw says:

      Ron Paul is the pied piper, especially for the 18-3 male demographic. His number one biggest detractor is his loony fan base. Whenever they call into these shows, they sound just like the stereotypical whiny liberal.


      • zmalfoy says:

        Amen, bro! (or Sistah, as the case may be. . .) That is exactly it– the first thing that turned me away from Paul was the people who associated themselves with him, and he didn’t deny. Then, plenty of other stuff followed, but the supporters were the first thing. . .


  5. Matt Drudge must be getting serious payment from Mittens. I just dropped by his site at 3:20am and he has four more negative attacks added to the site in addition to the ones highlighted in this post. For a total of 10 simultaneous stories highlighted. How many of them negative?

    Yeah, of course. ALL TEN.

    Drudge is beginning to draw similarities to Think Progress, or Slate. It’s totally wrong when the left does it, and the same applies when the right does it.

    Bias with the specific intent to manipulate opinion is a horrid agenda. This type of bias is not advocacy. Advocacy would be highlighting the positives of your candidate. This is SMEAR.


    • Pointing out the negatives is acceptable if it’s done honestly and reasonably. Drudge is relying on distortion almost 100% of the time here. Just like Stink Progress and the leftist sites. Dishonest. Wrong. Evil. One of those pesky ten commandments has something to do with bearing false hipness? Or something? Personally I think it’s one of the more serious of all the ten. You don’t lie about people. Even when you disagree with them.


      • Well said. I totally agree. Indeed when you chase down those stories from the provided links you find “excerpts”, out of context “sound bites”, half truths, or just flat out opinion pieces from the likes of Coulter. etc. False witness and distortion indeed.

        One of the links is to a Buzzfeed video in 1988 about George HW Bush campaign and how Newt felt that Bush needed his own vision, not the vision of Reagan 80, or 84′. He said if Bush runs on a continuation of Reagan he would lose because people will vote for what might be good change, and instead he needed to define his administration from his own views and not Reagans.

        Of course Drudge has spun that into Gingrich Bashing Reagan circa 1988…. Ridiculous.


  6. AFinch says:

    Josh Painter has a pro-Newt site up He also left a comment over at Legal Insurrection that links to a bunch of people from the Reagan administration praising Newt.


  7. AFinch says:

    Here is his comment:

    Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan Nat’l Security Advisor Bud McFarlane:

    Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan Economist Art Laffer:

    Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan WH political director Jeffrey Lord:

    Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials/Ask Reagan Policy Analyst Peter Ferrara

    Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan bonafides. Ask Reagan media consultant Richard Quinn:

    Dont ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan’s Speechwriting Dir. Bently Elliott:

    Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Reagan’s older son Michael Reagan:

    Don’t ask NRO about Newt’s Reagan credentials. Ask Ronald Reagan’s beloved wife Nancy:


  8. Tigerclaw says:

    Drudge has become increasingly sensationalistic and misleading, rivaling AOL or Yahoo (AOL being so deceptive that The Onion must be taking notes). Additionally, the incessant NFL headlines are inane. I think we are watching the decay of a once quality product. It’s a shame, but I think it’s time to put the Drudge Report in a home with Grandma.


  9. Wraith says:

    I can’t prove that Matt and Mitt are engaged in a secret and passionate affair involving darkened rooms in cheap motels, amyl nitrate, Wesson oil and possibly a goat…

    …but that’s the rumor. 😉


  10. Frank says:

    Well, well, now attacking Drudge – ask yourself this: shouldn’t the main stream media and Obama be highlighting what Drudge is showcasing???? Nooooo. They want Newt to be the nominee. Don’t you get it????? Drudge is the only one vetting Newt.


  11. Frank says:

    Additionally — you ingrates! After all the years Drudge has informed us. Just shameful.


  12. Risa L. says:

    I am SOOO surprised that Matt Drudge, Marco Rubio, and others are bashing Newt. Maybe they have already “placed their bets” on Mitt Romney that they stand to “LOSE” if Newt wins…


  13. Pingback: Drudge can’t hate on Newt without Citizens United | Atheists For Santorum

  14. Sundance’s critique of Drudge is being echoed in more and more places today. BFH had 2 posts on it, and Legal Insurrection had this great post:
    The endorsements for Newt are pouring in, and they all have one thing in common: Legitimate Reagan credentials. Unlike Drudge.


  15. Ronny Reago says:

    Drudge and Coulter finally realizing they only get 2 votes…. The common conservative is with NEWT.


  16. Ronny Reago says:

    How come DRUDGE didn’t report the FRED THOMPSON endorsement?


  17. Druge posts the following article to defend himself. *Note it is from the liberal “Daily Beast”. You know you’ve jumped the shark when you are relying on progs to defend you….. 😦


  18. Pingback: Drudge Report Slams Gingrich for Romney; Censored Ads on Obama’s Communist Mentor

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s