The American Spectator : The Tiffany Times

Text Size

The Tiffany Times

By Ben Stein on 5.26.11 @ 6:09AM

Such disdain for Newt Republican money.

Now, I think I've seen it all. The absolutely most mystifying and at the same time obvious gibberish from my former employer, the New York Times. This once mighty newspaper ran a story on page one on Wednesday, May 25, 2011, about the totally, unimaginably trivial fact that Newt Gingrich has bought his wife certain pieces of jewelry that some people consider lavish and has a charge account at Tiffany. This, strongly insinuates the Times, shows that Newt is a hypocrite in calling for budgetary discipline and restraint in the federal government.

What? How does that go again? What does the nature and cost of a politician's wife's jewelry have to do with anything at all about policy? Accompanying the story is an immense photo of a simply beautiful Mrs. Gingrich wearing what the Times purports to be an expensive diamond necklace. What does that have to do with anything at all?

Who cares what his wife's jewelry looks like? Who cares what it cost unless he paid for it illegally, which no one says he did? Who cares what his wife looks like? What does any of this have to do with taxation or expenditure of the federal government?

Why is this in any way whatsoever relevant to the national debate over debt and taxes?

Franklin Roosevelt's family ate off gold (yes, gold, not gold-colored) plates with gold utensils. That had nothing to do with his fiscal policies. John F. Kennedy's wife wore designer outfits that were mind-bogglingly expensive for the day. What did that have to do with anything at all?

Pat Nixon wore a "good Republican cloth coat," not a fur. I didn't notice the Times cutting Richard M. Nixon any slack for that.

Abe Lincoln was one of the most highly paid lawyers (mostly for railroads) in the nation in 1860. His wife was mocked for her lavish spending on furniture at the White House. What did that have to do with anything?

The New York Times story might just as well have said, "We don't really have anything smart to say about Republicans today, so we'll just try to generate some hostile envy from our readers by insinuating that a Republican candidate for President is rich and extravagant. Then we'll have a 'Two Minute Hate' right out of 1984 for Republicans generally. We'll ignore the billionaire liberals like George Soros and the dozens of others, and we'll just concentrate on mocking and humiliating the wife of a Republican politician who wanted to please his lovely wife."

A few inches away, there is an affectionate story of a billionaire heiress, obviously as nutty as a fruit cake, who died recently. No mockery there because she's not a candidate for anything. If it's old, non-Republican money, we at the Times worship it.

Then we'll bury a story about a standing ovation for Netanyahu in Congress on page six, because unless he's a Palestinian, the Times cannot pay much attention to anyone from Israel. Then we'll have what is actually a darned good story about wealth and the nation's universities by David Leonhardt, and then we'll call it a day.

I was a columnist for the Times for several years and never set foot in the building. I wonder what it would have been like.

I imagine immense posters of Che Guevara, but then I could be wrong. Now, I have to swim.

About the Author

Ben Stein is a writer, actor, economist, and lawyer living in Beverly Hills and Malibu. He writes "Ben Stein's Diary" for every issue of The American Spectator.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (89) | Leave a comment

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 5.26.11 @ 6:37AM

As long as Newt doesn't stay at a $3,000 night hotel with attractive maids I believe that there is nothing newsworthy to report on this issue.

Occam's Tool| 5.26.11 @ 1:43PM

Now, Bill, it's as long as he "did not have sex with that woman."

Kitty| 5.26.11 @ 6:38AM

To be 'fair and balanced,' maybe the Times should look into the cost of Michelle Obama's designer duds: http://mrs-o.org/

Ed White| 5.26.11 @ 6:52AM

Benny Boy's cause celebre Dominique Strauss-Kahn has moved into luxury digs ($50,000 per month) in lower Manhatten.

I know this bit of news warms Benny Boy's heart, for his heart is always bleeding for the super rich, especially if their reputations are notorious.

AmSpec. Yech!

You always know what you'll get from reading this rag.

Bob K.| 5.26.11 @ 7:15AM

Hope reading it helped ruin your day, Eddie boy!

Drunken Sailor| 5.26.11 @ 12:04PM

Then by all means stop reading it.

SonOfSam| 5.26.11 @ 1:54PM

I'm sure your mommie doesn't feel like reading it to you anymore either. How about something more your speed, like "Goodnight moon" or "Harold and the Purple Crayon"? Or maybe an even bigger fairy tale, like "How Obama saved 3 million jobs" or "High gas prices are caused by SUVs"?

Take a deep breath Eddie, one that isnt totally befouled with dope fumes, and then go to the back of the class and sit DOWN

sonofsamisadope| 5.26.11 @ 5:16PM

This son of sam guy is a dumbass and reflects how low our political discourse has become.

Nunya| 5.26.11 @ 9:36PM

Oh, and you're the perfect example of how "our political discourse" is wonderful? Ad hominem attacks? Um.... might want to rethink that one.

Oh, and you'll have to find a Latin dictionary to look up "ad hominem"... (just sayin')

SonOfSam| 5.26.11 @ 11:16PM

Hey Eddy,
Changing your name to pretend that someone else agrees with your spineless sniveling nonsense will never work. But then, I suppose that living in your mommie's basement means you don't have to work, ever.

Run along, you finger pointing crybaby. Go suck on your thumb and keep muttering "yes we can" to make that goshdarn real world just go away

Anita| 5.27.11 @ 10:18AM

God, SonofSam, I just love you. No one says it quite like you kid.
Keep up the good words. Makes my day.

TrueBlue| 5.26.11 @ 5:29PM

What does it matter what someone spends their own personal cash on? It's theirs, they can spend it how they like. It's only when it is wasted government funds that I care at all.

D| 5.26.11 @ 7:17AM

At the same time, the media celebrates Michelle O'Bama's gaudy "bling" at the dinner with Queen Elizabeth.

Teaghan| 5.26.11 @ 12:25PM

She needs a new dresser because she is beastly looking in her "designer" outfits. No, she is just beastly, period.

Patrick| 5.30.11 @ 5:05PM

No outfit can take the hostile sneer off that face.

Dee See| 5.26.11 @ 7:28AM

---Gingrich is an 'on board' 'brought in'
servant of the capstone Globalism and
EUGENICS agenda ---with a mighty backlog
of RED China TREASON op compliance.

--------------------------ALLLLLL you need to know.

Patrick| 5.30.11 @ 5:09PM

Dee See,

Put the crack pipe down. Turn off the "Coast to Coast". You are taking crazy waaaay too seriously.

Newt is a tool and a whore - and we all know it. Your blithering conspiracies just make US look bad. Get out, breath some fresh air, and learn that neither evil nor stupid require a conspiracy.

Nancy G Murdoch| 5.26.11 @ 7:35AM

Anyone who would bother reading the NYT is suspect in my book. What a liberal rag!

Gingrich's spending on jewelry is the least of his problems. His ethics and thinking are of a bigger concern to me. I just want him to go away before he damages the GOP further.

canuckistani| 5.26.11 @ 8:33AM

The right wing social engineering shot was a doozy.
I believe Ryan was attempting to de-engineer the system and get it back to a program that supports the neediest and inserts responsibility into the equation. Imagine that?

Now the left has their soundbite to raise up the flagpole - in terms that can be understood within 3 seconds.

Ryan admits he needs 30 minutes to explain the program, that's 29 min and 57 sec too long for the ADHD electorate.

The dems faced it with death panels, now Ryan can face it thanks to his his close friend Newtie handing over the knife to the enemy.

kurt2088| 5.26.11 @ 9:45AM

I, at one time, thought Newt was the answer but he succeeded in pulling the wool over my eyes! I get sick to my stomach anytime I see or hear anything about this traitor to the real people(true conservatives) of this nation!

Patrick| 5.30.11 @ 5:11PM

There will always be opportunists and parasites. You are neither the first nor the last. I only ask that you are a little bit wiser from it.

Patrick| 5.30.11 @ 5:11PM

There will always be opportunists and parasites. You are neither the first nor the last. I only ask that you are a little bit wiser from it.

Kathryn of Wyoming| 5.27.11 @ 11:49AM

I could care less how much Newt spends on either himself or Calypso. The problem is that every time I look at her I see a woman who was his mistress for SIX years. The guy has no moral compass and is nothing but a political hack.

LindaF| 5.26.11 @ 8:30AM

How clever! To imply that, because Ben noted that what a private citizen spends on his family is none of our business, that, of course, he must ally with the notorious DSK's case.

Ed White, find a job besides trolling this blog.

Vern Crisler| 5.26.11 @ 8:51AM

In the socialist mindset, the world is divided up into the poor and the rich (or in a Marxist view, workers and capitalist exploiters, the ruling class). The fast-fading Times works with this template, too. The Republicans are seen as being on the side of the rich and capitalist exploiters; so they receive no benefit of the doubt. Liberal Democrats can spend wildly and selfishly and will be seen as "helping the economy." Republicans are, and will always be, regarded by liberals as heartless suits. Let us therefore continue to hope that the Times will go out of business in our lifetime.

Eddie Greenberg| 5.26.11 @ 8:52AM

At the same time Tiffany & Co. was extending Callista (Bisek) Gingrich a virtual interest-free loan of tens of thousands of dollars, the diamond and silverware firm was spending big bucks to influence mining policy in Congress and in agencies over which the House Agriculture Committee–where she worked–had jurisdiction, official records show…

Tiffany’s annual lobbying expenditures rose from about $100,000 to $360,000 between 2005 and 2009, according to records assembled by the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan government watchdog organization.

Sylvia| 5.26.11 @ 12:15PM

You wouldn't expect Ben to know --or print--this enticing tidbit, would you?

Carol| 5.26.11 @ 10:03PM

Who/what funds the Center for Responsive Politics? "...a nonpartisan government watchdog
organization"? Like Center for Public Integrity?
Free Press? Another Soros front?

vtwin| 5.26.11 @ 8:57AM

Do you really want a “man” in the Whitehouse that has to spend half-million dollars on jewelry to get laid?

Kitty| 5.26.11 @ 9:10AM

HA HA HA !!!

Jarhead76| 5.26.11 @ 9:22AM

We all pay one way or another to get laid...

W| 5.26.11 @ 9:41AM

Dems prefer one who uses cigars on interns, right?

D| 5.26.11 @ 10:49AM

Well, assuming that you have been laid at some point in your life ...... how much have you spent on jewelry for your wife? Or, conversely, if you are a woman, has anybody ever spent any money on you? How much are YOU worth?

Occam's Tool| 5.26.11 @ 2:01PM

Dear D,

In my twenties I stopped counting coup. I knew I was not going to be as successful as some of my medical school classmates (one of the most successful swordsmen in my med school class has committed suicide), but I also stopped giving a damn. I was looking for more than a piece of tail, and I found a simply magnificent woman, much better than I deserved.

My wife at one time put a moratorium on further diamonds. On the other hand, I had not bought any of them the first time we were the recipients of Biblical knowledge. I have no exact idea of how much I'm worth. When she asks for diamonds or jewelry, I buy them for her. I have never bought a piece more expensive than $15,000 for her. We don't live in an area where we would have anything to go to with that.

On the other hand, both my kids were adopted, and all the costs for that is borne by me. She's teaching them at home and is a stay at home mom because I work and earn well enough for her to do so. We spend our wealth in ways that matter to us, and live in a place were there is no need for ostentation deliberately. It's boring.

D, my dad's best friend lives in a neighborhood made famous by the fact that a former basketball player who wore the number 23 for the Bulls lives a few doors down. He also maintains a beautiful home in Florida, and plays golf with one of the former CEOs of AT&T. One of the women my wife had to dislodge to get me---who was chasing me hard to get married---well, her daddy was the VEEP for The New Jersey Nets at one time.

I am not mentioning this to brag. I am simply stating that I chose my simple life by choice, and I could be swanning around in Ben's circles if I had chosen that path. I find it, as do many of the readers of this magazine, mind numbingly boring.

The true measure of the quality of a person's life is to be found in the number of lives saved or people helped or children inspired. All else is dross. Ben specializes in dross, such as this article, because he's a very sad person who is warped by Hollywood (I left SoCal in 1993. Next to marrying the greatest lady imaginable, I have never made a better decision.)

Getting back to Newt, well, he pisses me off because he's a flip-flopper with a mouth that runneth over, and no definite policies that I can see that he would not change in an instant if the polls commanded.

What he buys for his wife or wives, I careth not. Thus, I sort of agree with Ben on this one. Except that the story would not have been considered important enough by me to write about, as you should note by this reply.
Work on your 12 steps, Ben. You're not there yet.

Occam's Tool| 5.26.11 @ 2:03PM

By the way, The Old Texican lives a life considerably more worthy than mine.

D| 5.26.11 @ 3:06PM

Well, I was only pulling vtwin's leg because the original comment was so dumb. I did enjoy your story, though. Myself, I am not the conspicuous consuming type, and I have plenty of everything I need and more.

Nunya| 5.26.11 @ 9:43PM

Occam, good for you. I wish you and your family the best, and I certainly don't see what you've written as some sort of braggadocio, it sounds like you've made some good decisions in your life.

God bless.

Jeamar37| 5.26.11 @ 3:33PM

Ocam. You're so wonderful. Thanks for letting us know.

Occam's Tool| 5.26.11 @ 10:11PM

I did not mean to be sarcastic or snide.

Honestly, Jeamar37, doesn't Ben's goings ons about the hotels he stays in and so on bore the crap out of you?

"The worth of one's life can be measured only by what one does for others." Take, for example, Ken. He's MUCH more affluent than I am. But the reason I ADMIRE him so is that he spends much of his time helping others. I'll leave it at that.

My job involves taking care of a primarily Native American population in an area where the Winter temps regularly hit 30 below, and where Fargo is quite a ways South. I'm hardly wonderful. But my wife and kids are, and it is my privilege to take care of them, even as a schmuck that I am. It is also fantastic that G-d has blessed me with a job where every day I am doing something significant for the least among us.

Not "wonderful." Profoundly bloody lucky and blessed.

W| 5.27.11 @ 10:19AM

OT,
excellent. enjoyed reading it. am now reading about your namesake, William of Occam, a franciscan monk.

Jeamar37| 5.27.11 @ 6:49PM

Occam. As I said, you're wonderful. I stand chastised for making personal comments not related to the article under discussion. Sorry.

Occam's Tool| 5.30.11 @ 8:04PM

My apologies.

Incidentally, Ben specializes in crap. I have read many of his articles, and it goes on and on. Now, as a true expert in psychobabble, let me tell you that noting that Ben has been twisted by Hollywood can be demonstrated by his own writing---his sadness is also noted by his own writing. No psychobabble at all. Now, if I discussed how Ben's relationship with his parents caused this---that would be psycho babble.

But when a guy writes about his thoughts of suicide and how miserable he felt for years, noting that as depression isn't babble. Is that clear?

Occam's Tool| 5.30.11 @ 8:22PM

And I apologize for taking it as snark, Jeamar37. Thanks.

But reading Ben unfortunately sets one up to be dumb about such things. My humblest apologies.

Richard| 5.26.11 @ 8:52PM

Occam, reading your comments is one of the delights of this website, and this is one of your better ones. I agree with you that how Newt and Calista choose to spend their money (or why they chose to borrow, if that is the case) is their business. I do find it sad that too much of Ben Stein's commentary these days conveys the sense of him pressing his nose against the windows within which the rich and the beautiful come and go. He used to be a more interesting observer of the American scene.

Occam's Tool| 5.26.11 @ 10:12PM

Thank you so much, Richard.

shelby new| 5.27.11 @ 1:05AM

".....Ben specializes in dross, such as this article, because he's a very sad person who is warped by Hollywood...." Wow! Is this innocuous over analysis or pernicious psychobabble? Either way, it could have been omitted and still I would have enjoyed reading your bio. With loquacity galore you may well have used more words than Ben to counter his concise and valid premise concerning New York Times duplicity. Dross? Really? A prominent paper's brazen hypocrisy doesn't merit writing about? Yikes!

Occam's Tool| 5.30.11 @ 8:18PM

No. The problem I have with Ben and all of the MSM is the amount of time they spend on crapheads, and the minimal amount of time they spend on worthwhile subjects.

For example, there's a brand new antidepressant coming out using a brand new mechanism and having a much better side effect profile. Agomelatine. It should be available next year. Any interviews with the researchers about how they decided to pursue that particular path of research? The drug may provide hope for millions of people who don't respond to current treatments. Any stories written to inspire young kids to have the researchers as heroes? No? Not surprising.

But I know what amount of jewelry a has-been politician bought his Barbie Doll wife. I know Lady Gaga's view of sex and her (alleged) creativity. (I can't help but know it---it's shoved down my throat.)

For example, the number 1 site on the internet that I could find mentioning Tetsuro Kikuchi's work on rat whisker twitching in his discovery of the antipsychotic effects on Abilify, which is one of the most popular antipsychotic drugs used in the world was WRITTEN BY ME and appeared in the online American Spectator.

How friggin' pathetic is that? Major groundbreaking research that saves lives ---no coverage. Newt's wife's jewelry---everyone cares.

And that's what pisses me off about the NYT and Ben. Nothing but crap covered.

Kitty| 5.26.11 @ 9:51AM

First Lady of Bling: Michelle shines at star-studded U.S. party in honour of the Queen (but her sleek up-do's overshadowed by a rather poorly placed plant)

http://gatewaypundit.rightnetw.....al-outing/

Teaghan| 5.26.11 @ 12:28PM

That picture is hysterical! Looks like moochelle is sporting a HUGE afro!!! An Angela Davis do.

Negative Comment| 5.26.11 @ 10:37AM

The NYTs is riding the Obama/Biden high speed rail to extinction.

Bill Diebold| 5.26.11 @ 11:26AM

...also E.J. Dionne has a taxpayer supplied life time rail pass on that train to the septic tank...

Stormy| 5.26.11 @ 10:38AM

"Do you really want a “man” in the Whitehouse that has to spend half-million dollars on jewelry to get laid?"

No, I suppose not. We elected a man in 1992 who could get laid by going to the nearest trailer park. in 1992.

Nunya| 5.26.11 @ 9:45PM

Thanks for the laugh! I am glad I wasn't sipping my drink when I read it! (LOL)

PolishKnight| 5.26.11 @ 11:04AM

I think the story is a typical cheap (pun intended), low-ball shot by the leftists at Newt. It's well known they're religiously devout marxists. The same thing happened with their buddy McCain the second he was a presidential candidate: The white gloves came off and all those years of them working with "The Maverick" didn't mean anything. They cut him down to pieces. Newt continues to buddy up with these people.

And indeed, they are taking a shot at his adulterous past by highlighting how much he spends on jewelry for his current wife. Let's ponder this as a values issue for a moment. I don't know about you guys, but I've spent about a total of $500 on diamond jewelry for my wife. That's it. She stays married to me because I am a reliable breadwinner and keep a roof over my family's head, keep out of trouble, and treat her well on a daily basis. She also knows I'll stay married to her and will continue to love her throughout the years.

That was "good enough" for most women in our culture about 50 years ago. Heck, they admired men like me. Then in the late 1950's, they demanded women "have it all" and Madison Avenue helped out with commercials that set the expectations of men accordingly: Earning a decent living and being a good husband and father was a "given" and not something to earn recognition for doing even as most women would never accept that role as men do. Men were expected to earn high salaries and even criticized as "oppressors" because women earned 70 cents on a dollar. So it was a no-win situation for men. Then on TOP of that injury, the insult is that men should not only still pay the bills while apologizing for earning more than women, but then turn around and have some left over to buy luxury items for women. Her money is "mad money", literally. A hidden kitty for her walk off when it suits her because her man got uppity or if she's just in the mood to "find herself" (Of course, he'll still be expected to pay "child" support and alimony for the "sacrifice" she makes spending his money!)

Pardon me, but yes Ben, his wife's lavish lifestyle does have something to do with backscratching politics in Washington. Men who don't have a grip on their lives at home are going to be traitors in the boardroom and the beltway. I don't trust Newt.

Granted, the political process and the educational system tends to filter out down-to-earth men even in the founding fathers' era. Probably most of the signers of the DoI were lawyers. Nonetheless, the Republican party's survival is dependent upon the castaways of 19th century socialism: Working men and traditional families. They supposedly were the noble backbone worshipped by Lenin and Marx. Today, they're regarded as privileged, lazy losers by the left and outsourced away by the croney elitists on the right.

Start learning how we think, counselor, or else risk us staying home and watching football in the November presidential election. Again.

rightwinger| 5.26.11 @ 11:52AM

Why is Ben shocked that the NYT would try to smear a Republican?

Patrick| 5.30.11 @ 5:25PM

I don't think it's a matter of shock, just observation, even though I'm still amazed at actually seeing a given leftist prove his crookedness by walking under a snake without having to take off his hat.

PattyMor| 5.26.11 @ 3:30PM

Well, I don't really care if Newt buys expensive jewelry for his wife or not. But who leaked the story to the press? If it was Tiffanys, I would close my account and never buy from them again.

Interested Conservative| 5.26.11 @ 5:28PM

PM - it arose due to required campaign finance disclosures - lines of credit, assets, debts, etc...

Not that the first amendment or privacy law applies to politicians or anything.

DANSHANTEAL| 5.26.11 @ 3:52PM

You aced it. They're phoney-baloneys. I watched face the nation. I would have told Bob Schieffer to stuff up his Kyber Pass. P.S. Tiffanys reported a nice earnings jump this week.

dp| 5.26.11 @ 5:03PM

Yeah, what a joke. What's next, somebody complain about the cost of a candidate's haircut? Oh wait, the right wing did that already to John Edwards.

Interested Conservative| 5.26.11 @ 5:26PM

I don't remember the complaints so much as the bemused hilarity of it all. Perhaps you're confusing the Breck girl with Bill's Beverly Hills coif and LAX ATC delay? That was complaint worthy, but not so much political as practical.

PolishKnight| 5.27.11 @ 9:56AM

DP, if it was a candidate such as Hillary Clinton, it would be somewhat more understandable since women are expected to put more money into their hair.

What the cost of the haircut revealed was the Breck girl's metrosexuality. It was devestating. He never fully recovered.

That said, McCain's expenses for his wife are not surprising. He's a republican after all. The left expects him to blow money on luxury. Also in the news, he's a white male.

doolittle| 5.27.11 @ 10:41AM

how did McCain spending on his wife get into this?

Patrick| 5.30.11 @ 5:30PM

Perhaps it has to do with the fact that elite, wealthy leftists are given total free passes to navigate special loopholes in the tax code just for them, then spend said money all while "feeling your pain".

Your kvetching about how rich Republicans are is based upon your raging envy for money that you don't want to work for. Our disgust for wealthy leftists is because, if they cared so ****ing much about the poor, how come they aren't giving a *** **** cent to their own cause!?

Interested Conservative| 5.26.11 @ 5:24PM

I still do the NYT crosswords. Even the Sunday Book Review is getting weak, and I can't bring myself to pick up the NYRB.

Seek| 5.26.11 @ 7:05PM

Show me a woman anywhere who doesn't love jewelry. She doesn't exist. Mrs. Gingrich has expensive tastes and she married a man who can afford them. This might not seem "fair" -- oh, perennially envious class-struggle and culture-war types -- but that's life. Some guys can afford women like that, even if most can't.

Ben Stein is right on the money. This is a non-story. Diamonds are a girl's best friend, and have been for thousands of years. Nothing's changed.

Au Contraire| 5.26.11 @ 8:27PM

But it's interesting how someone like Newt can "afford it." He's been an apparatchik all his life, not like he's really earned any real money. It's kind of tawdry. Even Michelle O. wears costume bling. Comes across as more authentic at the end of the day.

beebop| 5.27.11 @ 5:34AM

I hope you meant costume as in halloween ...

beebop| 5.26.11 @ 7:24PM

The best use for the NYT in its current form is puppy training. How the hell do they stay afloat?

Freeman| 5.26.11 @ 8:13PM

What was that article about Michele's shoes? $600 sneakers? And she's telling us we all have to sacrifice.!?! Oops, they missed that one. This is just another "us vs. them" article in the Times and their bobble-head readers say "yep, yep".
I wonder how Tom Friedman spends his, er, his wife's, money. And to say he doesn't talk policy, well, BS. That's all he talks.

sub| 5.26.11 @ 8:48PM

the nyt is a complete piece of shite. a million miles from the great newspaper it used to be, it is no populated by idiotic jounalism students in their 20s and 30s, people who have no idea what it means to ascribe to a standard of journalistic excellence or discipline. These jokers should be working at TMZ, except that TMZ doesn't care that they went to Yale, and does care that they're arrogant, lazy, and elitist. What a joke....

florin| 5.26.11 @ 8:53PM

I have no use for gingrich but I too wondered why the heck we should care what he spends on his wife's jewelry. There's enough authentic news out there...

Replica handbags&wallet;| 5.26.11 @ 9:08PM

label associated to the mark inside a definitely remarkable provide a good deal greater than a single. Replica Hermes Birbin/Platinum 40cm Cowhide Bags [handbag543] : Replica,Fake,designer
Replica Hermes Birbin/Platinum 40cm Alligator Veins Cowhide Bags [handbag545] : Replica,Fake,designer
Replica Hermes Birbin/Platinum 40cm Alligator Veins Cowhide Bags [handbag546] : Replica,Fake,designer
Replica Hermes Birbin/Platinum 40cm Cowhide Bags [handbag542] : Replica,Fake,designer

caroline| 5.26.11 @ 9:32PM

This story is too good to drop -- aging, adulterous politician and much younger home-wrecking tagger-on blonde who combine their ambition to lead the country, while admitting expensive tastes in high-end goodies (with no interest charged!), barging into the spotlight as in-love innocents, and providing much humor and eye-rolling among friend and foe alike. It's like one of those trashy romance novels, only real life! Keep it coming.

Bob| 5.26.11 @ 10:07PM

Scratch Newt, another GOP presidential hopeful done in by an odd ball wife. Didn't Gingrich convert to Catholicism at the behest of his wife? That won't sit well with Baptists in Macon.

theduke| 5.26.11 @ 10:27PM

This is just another example of the liberal press getting it both ways. They get to recoil in horror and slam Gingrich for mistreating his former wives, but now that he's treating his wife with love and adoration by lavishing gifts upon her, he's accused of being a hypocrite of some kind.

It's fascinating to watch the NYT continue to marginalize itself on a daily basis with this kind of tripe.

Dee See| 5.26.11 @ 11:50PM

"Democracy is finished. It's only being
used now as a tool to pull the last of the
agenda through..."
-ALAN WATT
(essential, ON target, fearless coverage online)

And the 'last' items on that agenda?

Final seal to the RED China TREASON op,
deindustrialization and 'awe-stare-IT-he'
(we are the ITs) and NAU franchise slum 'A-mal-game-shun'.

And long term?

'Population easing' (ie MASSIVE covert
incremental extermination to the tune of
100 MILLION by 2050).

-------And for those who are giggling, surprise
---you're included!

rich| 5.27.11 @ 12:27AM

i agree with ben - who cares how much newt spends at tiffany's. of course, if the story was about a half mill account the prez had for michelle, ben's head would be exploding with righteous rage. for ben, and many of the commenters, it all depends on whose ox is being gored.

beebop| 5.27.11 @ 5:31AM

Perhaps you don't understand the issues of free economy? No one here gives a rat's butt what the resident spends HIS money on ... what we care about is his bony fingers in our pockets ... and then calling it health care.

angelgirl| 5.27.11 @ 1:03AM

I certainly enjoyed the way you explore your experience and knowledge of the subject! Keep up on it. Thanks for sharing the info.gucci designer replica handbags

Richard Baker| 5.27.11 @ 11:52AM

When Nancy Reagan took up a subscription to replace the wornout White House formal china without a penny spent by the government, what did that have to do with anything (to keep the theme going)? I guess the Presidents since then
have AGONIZED over their use, right?

Jed Clampett | 5.27.11 @ 2:24PM

Notwithstanding the adventures, misadventures, anecdotes and convolutions of Occam's Tool here, I have faith in Mr. Stein's ability to see through the New York Times as my proxy sharp eye. Recapping his premise: if Newtie's purported excesses with his Tiffany account matter to his ability to govern, than so it should with others, like B.H.O. or anyone else holding or aspiring to high office. I trust Mr. Stein's clarity of vision completely on this. Consider also, this is the same Ben Stein who did those Clear Eyes commercials.

Josephine| 5.27.11 @ 6:09PM

I can forgive lots of Ben's schmucky wucky poo just for his imagining the immense posters of Che Guevara at the NYT.

Gretchen| 5.29.11 @ 6:41PM

I bet if Obama were to give Michelle the Hope Diamond, the Times would go into rapturous extasies -- after all Michelle deserves nothing less! Besides, why should it moulder away in the Smithsonian when it could be hanging around HER neck???

ALH| 5.30.11 @ 5:02AM

Pity Mr Gingrich didn't take care of his first wife. She's the one he dumped at her hospital bedside as she was being treated for cancer. He is pond scum as far as I am concerned. When is he going to realize his 15 minutes of fame are up? Hasta la Vista, Dirtbag.