Newt was appalled? O'rlly?

[Prometheus]

How does anyone fall for that nonsense?

 

[sepe]

I believe he was offended because she was lying. He NEVER wanted an open marriage. He just wanted his half of the marriage to be open. I think that was the offensive part to the Gingrich family.

 

[24Carat]

How does anyone fall for that nonsense?

The only nonsense here is comparing one situation of a man fessing up to ALL of his infidelities years ago and the other sitting behind his desk pounding his fist and blatantly lying on national TV about his cigar dipping escapades and making a ridiculous attempt to rewrite Webster's Dictionary about what the meaning of the word "is" is.

 

[indykid]

Point, was clinton impeached over "extramarital affairs" or for lying to congress?

 

[sepe]

It is quite embarrassing for the country for Newt to be trying to run on family values and morals when his have been pretty much non-existent. I'd rather not ever hear a candidate mention religion or garbage like that. Just be a man that lives a decent life and can show that you live a decent life. Nobody has to be perfect but you also shouldn't attack others for actions you've done as well.

 

[IndyGal65]

It is quite embarrassing for the country for Newt to be trying to run on family values and morals when his have been pretty much non-existent. I'd rather not ever hear a candidate mention religion or garbage like that. Just be a man that lives a decent life and can show that you live a decent life. Nobody has to be perfect but you also shouldn't attack others for actions you've done as well.

Very well said.

 

[24Carat]

It is quite embarrassing for the country for Newt to be trying to run on family values and morals when his have been pretty much non-existent. I'd rather not ever hear a candidate mention religion or garbage like that. Just be a man that lives a decent life and can show that you live a decent life. Nobody has to be perfect but you also shouldn't attack others for actions you've done as well.

Well, with that as the measuring stick for qualification you can chuck 3/4's of your legislatures, judges, police and clergy out on their tush today. Or is ignorance bliss?

 

[Bummer]

... Or is ignorance bliss?

Whose ignorance? Didn't you just make an excuse for Newt's conduct using the misdeeds of others as the measuring stick? Clinton's infidelity does not make Gingrich's conduct any less dishonorable.

I think that we would all be better off if the 3/4 in question were in the streets. You?

 

[buckstopshere]

Whose ignorance? Didn't you just make an excuse for Newt's conduct using the misdeeds of others as the measuring stick? Clinton's infidelity does not make Gingrich's conduct any less dishonorable.

I think that we would all be better off if the 3/4 in question were in the streets. You?

This. Rep inbound!

 

[sepe]

Well, with that as the measuring stick for qualification you can chuck 3/4's of your legislatures, judges, police and clergy out on their tush today. Or is ignorance bliss?

I am more than fine throwing 3/4's of them out. If they're trying to tell me how I should live, they better be leading by example or they can take a hike. I've been mentioning to people how they've got far too low of standards for the people they'll elect. Elect a liar and a cheater and then wonder why they lie and cheat? Get real...stop voting for those people.

 

[ATM]

Well, with that as the measuring stick for qualification you can chuck 3/4's of your legislatures, judges, police and clergy out on their tush today. Or is ignorance bliss?

HEY, HEY, HEY!

If you're going to paint with the broad brush...







you forgot lawyers.

 

[24Carat]

Whose ignorance? Didn't you just make an excuse Uh, no for Newt's conduct using the misdeeds of others as the measuring stick? Clinton's infidelity does not make Gingrich's conduct any less dishonorable.

I think that we would all be better off if the 3/4 in question were in the streets. You?

Yep, or higher!

My ignorance is bliss comment followed this: "I'd rather not ever hear a candidate mention religion or garbage like that."

My contention was it was nonsense to compare one man who consistently fessed up his foibles verses Clinton the LIAR.

We need chalk boards and chalk on this sight !!!

 

[sepe]

Yep, or higher!

My ignorance is bliss comment followed this: "I'd rather not ever hear a candidate mention religion or garbage like that."

My contention was it was nonsense to compare one man who consistently fessed up his foibles verses Clinton the LIAR.

We need chalk boards and chalk on this sight !!!

I'd rather not ever hear a candidate mention religion simply because I don't believe in organized religions or a "god". If you want to call that ignorance, fine. Personally, I wouldn't defend Newt or Clinton. If you think cheating on your wife (whether you admit to it or lie about it) is perfectly fine (Newt must have because he has done it to several wives), you probably won't qualify as someone worthy of my vote ESPECIALLY when you try running on morals and family values.

 

[EvilBlackGun]

No original quote says, "ignorance is bliss"

The original includes, "'tis folly to be wise," but I'll let you look it up yourself. That way you will learn something. (Think: Thomas Gray.)

 

[Whosyer]

Clinton's actions were a disgrace to the office of President !!!!!!!!!!!









I mean, c'mon now, JFK had Marylin Monroe .

But seriously........... it was a valid question, for another time and place. I mean, aren't the questions suppose to bring about debate of the issues ? What the heck does Newt's , or any other candidates sex life, have to do with running the Country ?That being said, here's an idea for a way to avoid such further lines of questioning....... how about the idiots in DC quit worrying about the sex lives of the American people, and maybe the American people will return the favor. Then everyone can mind their own freakin' business. Just a thought.

 

[dross]

Clinton wasn't impeached for extramarital affairs.

Whether or not Gingrich actually asked his wife for an open marriage is irrelevant to anything except the people who have a personal relationship with him. Same with Clinton's affairs.

But the two things have nothing in common whatsoever.

 

[Bummer]

Wasn't Clinton really impeached for not being a Republican?

 

[sepe]

Wasn't Clinton really impeached for not being a Republican?

I think it was partly because everyone was a bit upset when they realized what the strange flavor was on the cigars he always handed out.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

For the record - if any CEO of a public company would have done what Clinton had done (with a subordinate) - there would certainly be pressure and a call for his ouster. If looked at in that light, it at least makes sense. And then lying to Congress about it.

And yes, lots of CEO's do it, and when caught, it often comes back to get them thrown out. Ask Mark Hurd of HP fame.

agree with dross that the two scenarios have nothing in common.

Say what people will about the odds of people playing around. ALL of the current candidates have been vetted and investigated pretty harshly, you can bet. By their opponents if no one else. And what do we know?

Gingrich - See above - well known issues - claims to be reformed
Ron Paul - No appearance of impropriety - none reported that I'm aware of
Santorum - No appearance of impropriety - none reported that I'm aware of
Romney - No appearance of impropriety - none reported that I'm aware of
Cain - apparent Member of Clinton's Bimbo of the Month club - got him out of the race


Whether this matters to you - is up to you.
It IS indicative of the degree to which a person will tell the truth in all matters. Period. I is also indicative of how much the person in question is led around by their uhhh.. "Johnson" ...

It would appear that in THIS PARTICULAR AREA - one would have to give the edge to Paul, Santorum, and Romney. On the simple logic that we haven't seen smoke in that particular area - and there's no doubt that they have been vetted pretty thoroughly.

Again - I don't know if this matters to anyone here - OR INDEED IF IT SHOULD. But them's the facts that we've got.

 

[Bummer]

I think it was partly because everyone was a bit upset when they realized what the strange flavor was on the cigars he always handed out.

Now there's something to be upset about.