Newt Gingrich Steams Over Affair Question from College student

[Agorism]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/23/newt-gingrich-affair_n_826970.html

"You adamantly oppose gay rights... but you've also been married three times and admitted to having an affair with your current wife while you were still married to your second," Isabel Friedman, president of the Penn Democrats, asked Gingrich after a speech at the University of Pennsylvania, according to Politico. "As a successful politician who's considering running for president, who would set the bar for moral conduct and be the voice of the American people, how do you reconcile this hypocritical interpretation of the religious values that you so vigorously defend?"

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/250520/thumbs/r-NEWT-GINGRICH-AFFAIR-large570.jpg

[Sola_Fide]

He gave a stupid answer too.

Why don't people look to the TRUE social conservative, Ron Paul?

[angelatc]

It's a good question except for the special rights for gays tossed in there. That has nothing to do with his infidelity.

[sync]

pwned...

[TonySutton]

It's a good question except for the special rights for gays tossed in there. That has nothing to do with his infidelity.

No, but it has a lot to do with his hypocrisy.

[YumYum]

Great post!! He hates homosexuality but loves fornicating!

[Tax the Fed]

"Reports of extramarital affairs have dogged him for years as a result of two messy divorces,
but he has refused to discuss them publicly.

Gingrich, who frequently campaigned on family values issues, divorced his second wife,
Marianne, in 2000 after his attorneys acknowledged Gingrich's relationship with his current wife,
Callista Bisek, a former congressional aide more than 20 years younger than he is.

His first marriage, to his former high school geometry teacher, Jackie Battley,
ended in divorce in 1981. Although Gingrich has said he doesn't remember it,
Battley has said Gingrich discussed divorce terms with her while she was
recuperating in the hospital from cancer surgery."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258001,00.html

[Freedom 4 all]

Great post!! He hates homosexuality but loves fornicating!

Not exactly, he tried to get Clinton impeached for it. He only likes fornicating when he's the one doing it.

[specsaregood]

I guess it works, I would have rather phrased it something like, "if you are willing to lie and cheat on a person that you claimed to love and cherish and marry, why should the american people have any reason to think you aren't lying to them?"

[specsaregood]

Not exactly, he tried to get Clinton impeached for it. He only likes fornicating when he's the one doing it.

He didn't get Clinton impeached for the act itself, just lying about it, under oath.

[ARealConservative]

Not exactly, he tried to get Clinton impeached for it. He only likes fornicating when he's the one doing it.

actually, the impeachment was for lying under oath.

[malkusm]

Although Gingrich has said he doesn't remember it,
Battley has said Gingrich discussed divorce terms with her while she was
recuperating in the hospital from cancer surgery."

Wow....

[erowe1]

Not exactly, he tried to get Clinton impeached for it. He only likes fornicating when he's the one doing it.

He tried to get Clinton impeached for lying under oath and obstructing justice, not for sexual immorality.

[Batman]

That's one of the reasons why McCain and Guiliani were off the table for me, and one reason why I won't consider the Newt. It's a reason why I couldn't back up Barr or Vitter, despite their other impeccable standards. These folks are slimeballs of the lowest kind. Dr. Paul is man of integrity and an example of loyalty that just seems to be lacking in today's candidates.

[freshjiva]

Romney and Gingrich both have some serious flaws:

Romney: Romneycare and other flipfops
Gingrich: way beyond his prime and questionable moral standards

This leaves Palin and Huckabee:

Palin: generally well-liked by the Tea party, but polls show they wouldn't vote for her for President

Huckabee is the last remaining candidate without any serious flaws or electability questions. However, Romney, Gingrich, and Palin will all take votes away from him.

Pawlenty is the only other open question.

All these candidates will battle each other for votes, leaving Ron Paul's libertarian revolution the most space to run wild.

Chances for Ron Paul winning the GOP nomination have never been higher.

[lester1/2jr]

Even without this, he really doesn't have the temperment for the job. too thin skinned as he no doubt demonstrated here.

[ItsTime]

Remember when making attacks towards these candidates we need to show how Ron Paul is none of what they are.

[TonySutton]

He tried to get Clinton impeached for lying under oath and obstructing justice, not for sexual immorality.

Isn't that what Martha Stewart was convicted of and served jail time for?

[gls]

I guess it works, I would have rather phrased it something like, "if you are willing to lie and cheat on a person that you claimed to love and cherish and marry, why should the american people have any reason to think you aren't lying to them?"

+1

He would probably come up with a stammering response about how the situations are "different" but it wouldn't be very convincing.

[YumYum]

Isn't that what Martha Stewart was convicted of and served jail time for?

I believe Clinton lied to a Grand Jury, while Martha Stewart lied to the FBI.

[MaxPower]

Isn't it amazing that the serial adulterers and divorcees are the ones who run on "family values" platforms, and actually get the "family values" votes?? Meanwhile, Ron Paul, who has been married to the same woman for over 50 years, and about whom there hasn't been so much as the slightest whisper of infidelity that I know of- in fact, Dr. Paul reportedly maintains a personal scruple of not traveling alone with women- is anathema to them.

[Batman]

Romney and Gingrich both have some serious flaws:

Romney: Romneycare and other flipfops
Gingrich: way beyond his prime and questionable moral standards

This leaves Palin and Huckabee:

Palin: generally well-liked by the Tea party, but polls show they wouldn't vote for her for President

Huckabee is the last remaining candidate without any serious flaws or electability questions. However, Romney, Gingrich, and Palin will all take votes away from him.

Pawlenty is the only other open question.

All these candidates will battle each other for votes, leaving Ron Paul's libertarian revolution the most space to run wild.

Chances for Ron Paul winning the GOP nomination have never been higher.

Lord knows they'll still be the most competitive candidates regardless.

[ChaosControl]

I detest adulterers, even if he wasn't otherwise a scumbag there is no way in the universe I'd ever support a cheater.
It is a perfectly fair question, one that should be asked.

[specsaregood]

Dr. Paul reportedly maintains a personal scruple of not traveling alone with women
There is an offchance he does that because he doesn't want to be setup.

[Batman]

There is an offchance he does that because he doesn't want to be setup.

It's just good policy in general.

[ChaosControl]

Isn't it amazing that the serial adulterers and divorcees are the ones who run on "family values" platforms, and actually get the "family values" votes?? Meanwhile, Ron Paul, who has been married to the same woman for over 50 years, and about whom there hasn't been so much as the slightest whisper of infidelity that I know of- in fact, Dr. Paul reportedly maintains a personal scruple of not traveling alone with women- is anathema to them.

That is what keeps me so much a fan of his though. Personal integrity, genuine social conservatism is so incredibly rare that it is refreshing to see it in someone, and a politician of all people. It is like finding that snowball in the middle of hell that is able to maintain its cool.

To me knowing I can trust someone is the most important in earning my respect and support, even if some of his governmental views differed, I'd still support him because of that.

Can't we try to make use of that better this time around in the primary? I think we could pretty easily gain the SoCon support, especially if Huckleberry doesn't run.

[HOLLYWOOD]

FIRST Romney is a dead candidate because history needs to be exposed... forget RomneyCare, it's his founding of BAIL CAPITAL that has destroyed many companies and 10,000's of American jobs. He's a corporate raider that shook every company for every nickle and then sent them to Mexico/China.

Romney's Wealth is from destroying American Business and Jobs... Romney is done

Yeap... this how the propaganda works for the puppets of the Money Masters / Corporations and how the honest representatives are Ostracized.

It's time to challenge the rigged system and bullshit of Media Propaganda and their collaborating crooked criminal politicians racketeering... throw all the pundits(hired mercenaries) in there to challenged every breath.


Isn't it amazing that the serial adulterers and divorcees are the ones who run on "family values" platforms, and actually get the "family values" votes?? Meanwhile, Ron Paul, who has been married to the same woman for over 50 years, and about whom there hasn't been so much as the slightest whisper of infidelity that I know of- in fact, Dr. Paul reportedly maintains a personal scruple of not traveling alone with women- is anathema to them.

[Matt Collins]

http://reason.com/assets/mc/mwelch/2010_01/gingrich_clown.jpg

[fisharmor]

His first marriage, to his former high school geometry teacher, Jackie Battley,
ended in divorce in 1981. Although Gingrich has said he doesn't remember it,
Battley has said Gingrich discussed divorce terms with her while she was
recuperating in the hospital from cancer surgery.

McCain dumped his first wife for getting in a debilitating car accident and losing her swimsuit model figure.
Newt isn't guilty of anything that others haven't done and gotten away with.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1024927/The-wife-John-McCain-callously-left-behind.html

[McBell]

Why don't people look to the TRUE social conservative, Ron Paul?
*gag*

I detest adulterers, even if he wasn't otherwise a scumbag there is no way in the universe I'd ever support a cheater.
It is a perfectly fair question, one that should be asked.
Because it's very obviously relevant to policy.

[Icymudpuppy]

*gag*

Because it's very obviously relevant to policy.

It is relevant because it shows the character of a person.

1> They don't ascribe to one of the most basic moral laws in history
2> They don't feel bound by any oath they may have taken regardless of what it was sworn on (this would include both their marriage vows, and their oath to the constitution.
3> They have no loyalty to anyone but themselves and their own desires for power and pleasure.
4> Individual people mean nothing to them, and are to be cast aside whenever they are no longer useful to the personal desire for power and pleasure.

[McBell]

Or they messed up and you shouldn't judge them by a single (admittedly huge) mistake.

[ChaosControl]

*gag*

Because it's very obviously relevant to policy.

It is in many ways. If a person is not trustworthy, they should NOT be leader of the nation. An adulterer is one of the greatest violators of trust.

[Batman]

Or they messed up and you shouldn't judge them by a single (admittedly huge) mistake.

They can go to a monastery and repent. I don't trust them either way.

[malkusm]

Or they messed up and you shouldn't judge them by a single (admittedly huge) mistake.

Newt is on his third marriage. Two (admittedly huge) mistakes? :confused:

[Icymudpuppy]

I detest adulterers, even if he wasn't otherwise a scumbag there is no way in the universe I'd ever support a cheater.
It is a perfectly fair question, one that should be asked.

I'm just curious, since it's unlikely that you'll ever get together with your dream japanese model girl, is it adultery if you continue to pine after her while engaged in a real relationship?

I don't know if you are christian, but may I direct you to Matthew 5:27-32

How strict is your interpretation? Is the thought of infidelity enough to condemn, or must there be an act?

[Icymudpuppy]

Or they messed up and you shouldn't judge them by a single (admittedly huge) mistake.

If that were the case, they could have severed the old relationship before starting a new one.

[specsaregood]

Newt is on his third marriage. Two (admittedly huge) mistakes? :confused:

I think sitting on that couch with pelosi, pushing global warming BS should count as at least a 3rd huge mistake.

[ChaosControl]

I'm just curious, since it's unlikely that you'll ever get together with your dream japanese model girl, is it adultery if you continue to pine after her while engaged in a real relationship?

I don't know if you are christian, but may I direct you to Matthew 5:27-32

How strict is your interpretation? Is the thought of infidelity enough to condemn, or must there be an act?

Why do you think I pine after a a Japanese model girl?

But dismissing that, I'll answer your question. If one was to lust after another, be it a model, a person they knew, or even just a fictional entity, I do consider that wrong when they are in a relationship. I think it is most deplorable when there is an act, but even impure thoughts should be discouraged and we should do all we can to refrain from them. It can be more difficult to refrain from thoughts, a slip here and there while something to a void isn't I think something absolutely horrible. Adultery isn't just a physical act though, say a spouse could enter into an emotional-only relationship, such as an online relationship, and that is just as bad as a physical act of adultery.

[erowe1]

I think sitting on that couch with pelosi, pushing global warming BS should count as at least a 3rd huge mistake.

I think if we go back and dig a little, we'll find lots of those moments where Newt joined up with some leftist for some lefty cause over the years he was out of office (this non-debate with John Kerry (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/10/AR2007041001457.html) also comes to mind, as does this education initiative with Al Sharpton (http://www.usnews.com/education/blogs/on-education/2009/08/17/arne-duncan-al-sharpton-and-newt-gingrich-join-forces)). I think that's the image he was trying to make for himself before he stuck his finger in the wind and decided he'd have better success if he got on the tea party train. Somebody could probably make a pretty decent youtube video about Newt, the environmental wacko. Newt probably isn't going to plug this book (http://www.amazon.com/Contract-Earth-Newt-Gingrich/dp/B001RNI39Y/ref=sr_1_24?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1298589214&sr=1-24) very much out on the campaign trail over the next year, so it will be up to us to do that for him.