I guess it doesn't count if it was Wife-#2 that he asked for an "open relationship" with so he could start schtupping Wife-#3... (One wonders if he bothered to ask Wife-#1 for an "open relationship" so he could start schtupping Wife-#2?)
Come now, how long have the power elite in Washington D.C., not to mention other nations, kept a mistress in addition to their wife? Wasn't it FDR who died when his mistress was with him down at Warm Springs while Elanor was in Washington? There is no doubt, is there, that Elanor knew her husband had had a mistress during the course of their marriage? Need we go down the list of JFK's dalliances during the course of his marriage and his wife's knowledge of them? Is there any among us that don't accept the reality that Bill was in the midst of yet another long term affair during Hillary's run for the presidency in 2008, an affair one might add that she was just as aware of as the one with Monica as she sat by her husband as he looked straight into the camera and lied to the populace of the union, that the media decided not to report on at the time?
Given the near deity status that the left worships these "giants" of American politics with, in full knowledge of their individual failures, why are these mere peccadilloes and Newt's actions ascribed to gargantuan moral failings? Do we not have sufficient evidence before us that the marital situation, especially one that is in the past rather than ongoing in the present, doesn't preclude one from effectively exercising their presidential duties?
Newt would likely not be my first choice, nor would Romney or either of the other two still seeking the nomination for that matter, but any of the four would be preferable to another 4 years of the current executive. No, I wouldn't expect much to change regarding the culture in D.C. if Romney or Gingrich were to be selected to sit behind the Resolute Desk in November, but given the track record of the man who currently sits there, they couldn't do much worse and there is at least the potential for them to do much better.
FredHayek wrote: I don't care he is a philanderer, he is our philanderer?
Newt attacked the media and the audience ate it up although he was pretty much lying. Having an affair while he was ripping Bill Clinton for his immorality with Monica.
I can understand him defending himself, but I am surprised to see the audience support. It will be interesting to see if his current high poll numbers translate into a win in a traditionally religious state.
The liberals, socialist and progressives have done a very good job of inculcating relative morals and Modernism into our society and because of that, this is all going to backfire. The left tries to "outrage" us with these personal character flaws, but in general, society doesn't really care anymore. We've been through Kennedy, Clinton, Edwards and a slew of other philanderers on the right and left and it's not really an issue anymore... even thought the left keeps trying. But the left can't have it both ways... and in this case, the left is winning. Society doesn't care enough about Newts rutting around with various women. Thanks to the left, it's really not important to the leadership of our country.
God, I love watching the Right twist themselves into pretzels trying to justify adultery that they would crucify a Democrat for... But, hey, he's YOUR adulterer.... Right?
LadyJazzer wrote: God, I love watching the Right twist themselves into pretzels trying to justify adultery that they would crucify a Democrat for... But, hey, he's YOUR adulterer.... Right?
:pop
You missed the part about most of us wishing we had another choice other than Newt or Romney. But wishes don't count for anything. One of them will be the nominee, and will run against Obama. Both are vastly superior to our current prez in their ability to run the country, regardless of their personal shortcomings.
Too bad future generations aren't here to see all the great things we are spending their $$ on!!
That doesn't change the explicit "overlooking" of a three-time adulterer's philandering in the pursuit of the "Not-Romney"... I could watch GOP hypocrisy for hours...
You enjoy it almost as much as I enjoy the hypocrisy of the "progressives". Gingrich's philandering is a big deal, but Clinton's sexual escapades had no bearing on his ability to do his job, right? Evidently, neither did Gingrich's. He was still able to effectively push the only balanced budgets through the Congress that the union has seen for the last 40 years.
BearMtnHIB wrote: Look if a man and his wife are not getting along and the relationship is falling apart- the guy has a right to tap into some additional tail.
Wow, really?
There is no excuse, none in the entire world, for cheating. Not happy with your husband/wife? You have the keys to end your marriage, and to do it with dignity and respect to both parties. It's this thing called divorce, and it's not hard, nor complicated.
There is no greater disrespect to a partner or spouse than climbing into bed with another becuase you're "unhappy". Man up, and end it. Then tell me about your "needs".
LadyJazzer wrote: God, I love watching the Right twist themselves into pretzels trying to justify adultery that they would crucify a Democrat for... But, hey, he's YOUR adulterer.... Right?
:pop
Right... and I have no problem with it. No more than I give a crap about Clinton or any of the other political asshats who like to rut around like pigs. But hey... go ahead and look stupid painting everyone with a broad brush.
Like I say... the left has minimized this sort of behavior that your right... it doesn't matter to the right... and you perceive it as twisting oneself into a pretzel... no... we're taking the lead from the left... many of us don't care... Obama's going down and Newt would be fine with many of us.
It's so funny seeing your own leftist tactics now working against you.
