What IS the real difference between polygamy or polyandry and serial marriage practiced by so many “good Christians” in America? Well, then there are those evangelical ministers fighting homosexuality with the sword of their own “gay blade”.
^ Which is the party of “Family Values?” Adultery is one’s own business, but when you say that you’re better than someone else and they don’t deserve the same government-provided rights as you because God says so, and then turn around and do what else God says not to do, you’re due to get called out on your hypocrisy.
I have no problem with Newt’s adultery. I have a problem with Newt attacking monogamous gay couples who merely want the same rights he gets on each of his 3 marriages.
Edwards also quit running for president, and never claimed he was unfaithful to his wife because he was a patriot, one of the most incredible lines out of a politician’s mouth since “I am not a crook.”
You righties clearly don’t get it. People’s private lives are their own (though I can and do despise people who sleep around on their spouses on EITHER side of the aisle), but the GOP has had an ongoing policy of putting themselves forward as the party of morals, of traditional marriage, and of conservative Christianity. Well, I’m a Catholic (as Newt supposedly is now), and I want to see some old-fashioned penance going on here before I forgive!
Yeah Howdy, but only the Repubs get standing ovations from their fellows when they can’t keep it zipped..
( Ensign and Vitter )
But do we see you having any trouble with THAT bit of hyprocrisy. Nope….your outrage is reserved only for Dems.
Edwards also wasn’t bashing another pol for his infidelities while committing them himself. Never forget that Newt was attacking Clinton over Monica Lewinsky while he himself was having affairs on the side
That’s where we have the problem…not with the infidelity, but with the double standard.
I just find it amusing that Howie just can’t let go of Edwards, but whines anytime anyone points out the disaster that “W”, his dad, and Reagan created. Now, if Edwards was asking taxpayers to support his bastard child? Nope, that would be Republicans asking support for Newt.
HOWIE, Edwards got hammered and lost his political career. Gingrich was making his career by criticizing Clinton for infidelity while sleeping around on his wife, and is trying to run for president again. Do you really not see the difference here? I never said Edwards was a good guy, quit pretending that we do. But you can’t seem to handle the idea that Newt is much worse, and FAR more of a hypocrite.
Are right wing defenders too stupid to see the difference between heading up a witch hunt whilst doing the same as his target and currently running for an elected office and not touting family values and also not currently running for office?
Or have you guys just reached parity in the hypocrisy department with your leaders?
My, my, you sure do love hypocritical RIGHT-wing weasels like Newt, don’t you? churchill, your only response to Newt’s stunning hypocrisy and opportunism is to claim that “Being a lying, philandering hypocrite are character traits the left usually champion,” which besides being untrue and snotty is also dodging the fundamental objection to him! Nice try: FAIL.
Let’s try this once more. If Newt were a Democrat who moralistically accused others of violating the santity of marriage (e.g., gays) allthewhile personally cheating on each of his wives, he would get the same disrespect that he gets from me now. Cheating on your spouse apparently knows no party preference. However, those who combine cheating with moralistic attacks on others seem to feel more comfortable in the GOP. It’s ironic but it seems to be true.
^Wrong again, churchill. Sorry, you can’t read my mind. The reality is that Newt was a rabble-rouser with no real interest in getting things passed. Note that none of the elements in the Contract got passed, though they did claim victory because they proposed on schedule. I disagreed with it anyway, so that didn’t bother me, but it certainly indicates Newt’s ability to actually get things done as Speaker of the House as opposed to making dramatic statements for effect.
A number of pundits feel confident that Newt’s real reason for running for president is to shill his books,which wouldn’t surprise me at all.
So truthfully my fundamental objection is twofold:
He’s an incompetent leader - all smoke and mirrors
He’s utterly untrustworthy and dishonest.
Those are traits independent of party. I respected Bob Dole, for example, because he got things done in the Senate, and even Orrin Hatch, who is about as far as can be from me on the political spectrum, because he could collaborate with Ted Kennedy when something needed to be done. Gingrich just reflects the increasing polarization for political purposes, which I think is detrimental to our government and our country.
Though he is a cheating hypocrite, as I guess you agree.
The contract met with mixed results in 1995. The House Republican leadership did indeed put each item to a vote within the first one hundred days. It divided each item into one or more bills, and thirty-one of the resulting thirty-two measures passed—only one, for congressional term limits, failed. The Senate moved much more slowly. In part, this was because the Senate, as a debating body, customarily proceeds more cautiously. Another reason was that the senators, unlike their first-year counterparts in the House, were far less eager to pass sweeping reforms: the Senate killed the proposal for a constitutional amendment on the budget, for example, and simply delayed action on several other bills. President Clinton’s promise to veto any farranging welfare and budgetary proposals also crimped Republican plans, and by November 1995 this threat had produced a bitter standoff that resulted in the temporary closing of the federal government.
Three contract proposals became law:
the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (Pub. L. No. 104-1, 109 Stat. 3), which requires Congress to follow eleven workplace laws;
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. No. 104-4, 109 Stat. 48), which restricts Congress from imposing mandates on states that are not adequately funded; and
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. No. 104-13, 109 Stat. 163), which reduces federal paperwork requirements.
Motivemagus about 13 years ago
Har!! Though he should have started it M+F+F before - F, since Newt was sleeping with his new one while married to the old one. Twice.
Dtroutma about 13 years ago
What IS the real difference between polygamy or polyandry and serial marriage practiced by so many “good Christians” in America? Well, then there are those evangelical ministers fighting homosexuality with the sword of their own “gay blade”.
Jaedabee Premium Member about 13 years ago
^ Which is the party of “Family Values?” Adultery is one’s own business, but when you say that you’re better than someone else and they don’t deserve the same government-provided rights as you because God says so, and then turn around and do what else God says not to do, you’re due to get called out on your hypocrisy.
I have no problem with Newt’s adultery. I have a problem with Newt attacking monogamous gay couples who merely want the same rights he gets on each of his 3 marriages.
Motivemagus about 13 years ago
Edwards also quit running for president, and never claimed he was unfaithful to his wife because he was a patriot, one of the most incredible lines out of a politician’s mouth since “I am not a crook.” You righties clearly don’t get it. People’s private lives are their own (though I can and do despise people who sleep around on their spouses on EITHER side of the aisle), but the GOP has had an ongoing policy of putting themselves forward as the party of morals, of traditional marriage, and of conservative Christianity. Well, I’m a Catholic (as Newt supposedly is now), and I want to see some old-fashioned penance going on here before I forgive!
rockngolfer about 13 years ago
I was just watching a show on the History channel about Augustus Caesar, Calligula, and Tiberius, and thought of the “Family Values Republicans,”
Simon_Jester about 13 years ago
Yeah Howdy, but only the Repubs get standing ovations from their fellows when they can’t keep it zipped..
( Ensign and Vitter )
But do we see you having any trouble with THAT bit of hyprocrisy. Nope….your outrage is reserved only for Dems.
Edwards also wasn’t bashing another pol for his infidelities while committing them himself. Never forget that Newt was attacking Clinton over Monica Lewinsky while he himself was having affairs on the side
That’s where we have the problem…not with the infidelity, but with the double standard.
Dtroutma about 13 years ago
I just find it amusing that Howie just can’t let go of Edwards, but whines anytime anyone points out the disaster that “W”, his dad, and Reagan created. Now, if Edwards was asking taxpayers to support his bastard child? Nope, that would be Republicans asking support for Newt.
Motivemagus about 13 years ago
HOWIE, Edwards got hammered and lost his political career. Gingrich was making his career by criticizing Clinton for infidelity while sleeping around on his wife, and is trying to run for president again. Do you really not see the difference here? I never said Edwards was a good guy, quit pretending that we do. But you can’t seem to handle the idea that Newt is much worse, and FAR more of a hypocrite.
tpenna about 13 years ago
Geez, I come back after being away for months, and HOWGOZIT is still spewing nonsense?
JoyceBV65 about 13 years ago
Welcome back!
halfabug about 13 years ago
Democrates don’t lie,they just misspeak.
dannysixpack about 13 years ago
the whole government was working much better while clinton was getting blowjobs in the oval office.
clinton was the greatest president in my lifetime.
i say, bring back blowjobs in the oval office.
pirate227 about 13 years ago
Are right wing defenders too stupid to see the difference between heading up a witch hunt whilst doing the same as his target and currently running for an elected office and not touting family values and also not currently running for office?
Or have you guys just reached parity in the hypocrisy department with your leaders?
Motivemagus about 13 years ago
My, my, you sure do love hypocritical RIGHT-wing weasels like Newt, don’t you? churchill, your only response to Newt’s stunning hypocrisy and opportunism is to claim that “Being a lying, philandering hypocrite are character traits the left usually champion,” which besides being untrue and snotty is also dodging the fundamental objection to him! Nice try: FAIL.
babbie Premium Member about 13 years ago
Let’s try this once more. If Newt were a Democrat who moralistically accused others of violating the santity of marriage (e.g., gays) allthewhile personally cheating on each of his wives, he would get the same disrespect that he gets from me now. Cheating on your spouse apparently knows no party preference. However, those who combine cheating with moralistic attacks on others seem to feel more comfortable in the GOP. It’s ironic but it seems to be true.
Motivemagus about 13 years ago
^Wrong again, churchill. Sorry, you can’t read my mind. The reality is that Newt was a rabble-rouser with no real interest in getting things passed. Note that none of the elements in the Contract got passed, though they did claim victory because they proposed on schedule. I disagreed with it anyway, so that didn’t bother me, but it certainly indicates Newt’s ability to actually get things done as Speaker of the House as opposed to making dramatic statements for effect. A number of pundits feel confident that Newt’s real reason for running for president is to shill his books,which wouldn’t surprise me at all. So truthfully my fundamental objection is twofold:
He’s an incompetent leader - all smoke and mirrors He’s utterly untrustworthy and dishonest.Those are traits independent of party. I respected Bob Dole, for example, because he got things done in the Senate, and even Orrin Hatch, who is about as far as can be from me on the political spectrum, because he could collaborate with Ted Kennedy when something needed to be done. Gingrich just reflects the increasing polarization for political purposes, which I think is detrimental to our government and our country. Though he is a cheating hypocrite, as I guess you agree.
charliekane about 13 years ago
From:
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Contract+with+America
The contract met with mixed results in 1995. The House Republican leadership did indeed put each item to a vote within the first one hundred days. It divided each item into one or more bills, and thirty-one of the resulting thirty-two measures passed—only one, for congressional term limits, failed. The Senate moved much more slowly. In part, this was because the Senate, as a debating body, customarily proceeds more cautiously. Another reason was that the senators, unlike their first-year counterparts in the House, were far less eager to pass sweeping reforms: the Senate killed the proposal for a constitutional amendment on the budget, for example, and simply delayed action on several other bills. President Clinton’s promise to veto any farranging welfare and budgetary proposals also crimped Republican plans, and by November 1995 this threat had produced a bitter standoff that resulted in the temporary closing of the federal government.
Three contract proposals became law:
the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (Pub. L. No. 104-1, 109 Stat. 3), which requires Congress to follow eleven workplace laws;
the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. No. 104-4, 109 Stat. 48), which restricts Congress from imposing mandates on states that are not adequately funded; and
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Pub. L. No. 104-13, 109 Stat. 163), which reduces federal paperwork requirements.