Pepper sprayed for public safety.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Gattigap

Newt: Sure, he wishes that his various adulteries would not have occurred, but at least this stuff makes him more normal than a *certain someone* you might know.

Awesome. "Pussy-Hounds For Newt" should be the new bumper-sticker.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Gattigap

Newt: Sure, he wishes that his various adulteries would not have occurred, but at least this stuff makes him more normal than a *certain someone* you might know.



This is almost as good as the loving his country too much rationale. I love this country.

Actually, this resonates with me. We need a pragmatic discussion in this country about how people really live. Newt kicks a few doors open in this regard. Romney represents an unrealistic, patriarchal, suppressed ideal of a perfect nuclear family that simple isn't a realistic possibility for 90% of humanity. Particularly those who weren't born on home plate, and into a cult where their wives were brainwashed to be obedient baby-vessels from childhood.

Say what you will about Newt, but throughout his life, he has always respected and enlisted the counsel of women. Yes, part of that involves treating them as shabbily as he does men. But that does show a blindness to sex, which is respect. And it's a hell of an improvement over treating females like breeding mares, which is what Romney, following the teachings of a lunatic pedophile and con-artist like Joseph Smith, has done.

[Fugee]

Originally Posted by Adder

I have no doubt that those of the religious right who vote will vote for him. I'm question whether some of them will stay home instead.

Again, my track record of predicting what the religious right will do when it comes to Newt has been crappy, but I don't see them staying home on election night just because he's a serial cheater if they think they can elect someone who will promote their social agenda.

If Newt is the eventual candidate, I know my brother, SIL and their kids will all be at the polls pulling the GOP lever on matter what they think of his personal life as long as he says the right things about the issue(s) they care about. Well, actually coloring in the GOP circles but that doesn't sound as good.

[Fugee]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Actually, this resonates with me. We need a pragmatic discussion in this country about how people really live. Newt kicks a few doors open in this regard. Romney represents an unrealistic, patriarchal, suppressed ideal of a perfect nuclear family that simple isn't a realistic possibility for 90% of humanity. Particularly those who weren't born on home plate, and into a cult where their wives were brainwashed to be obedient baby-vessels from childhood.

Say what you will about Newt, but throughout his life, he has always respected and enlisted the counsel of women. Yes, part of that involves treating them as shabbily as he does men. But that does show a blindness to sex, which is respect. And it's a hell of an improvement over treating females like breeding mares, which is what Romney, following the teachings of a lunatic pedophile and con-artist like Joseph Smith, has done.

I completely disagree that Newt represents a more realistic or better idea of how people live. And that's not just looking at the religious people I know.

Part of what makes Newt's actions so repulsive is how he treated his ex-wives (and in one case the mother of his children) when they were sick.

I worked with a senior partner who, years earlier had been having a hot & heavy affair with an associate. The scuttlebutt was that he was deeply in love with the associate and going to divorce his wife for her. But then his wife got cancer. He ended the affair and stayed married to support his wife through her illness -- they're still married and from what I could see very happy with each other. This guy isn't even remotely religious.

Newt was almost sociopathic in his single minded focus on getting what he wanted when he wanted it and to hell with the fact that he was leaving sick women in the lurch.

People get divorced and people cheat, but it's not 90% of the population.

I'm not a fan of the MOs at all but think it is disgusting for Newt to say he's more "normal" than Mitt because he's a serial cheater and dumper of seriously ill wives.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Fugee

People get divorced and people cheat, but it's not 90% of the population.

You know, it might be close. Okay, well, not 90% of the population, but divorce or infidelity might be right for something close to the percentage of marriages. Isn't the divorce rate north of 50%? Infidelity probably doesn't touch another 40%, but it might be 20%.

Anyway, I think you are right that cheating won't make Newt more normal, but any time he gets to dog whistle "Mitt's a Mo," he will take it.

I also think you are right Newt real problem isn't that he cheated or got divorced, it's how big a dick he was to his sick spouses to do it.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Fugee

I completely disagree that Newt represents a more realistic or better idea of how people live. And that's not just looking at the religious people I know.

Part of what makes Newt's actions so repulsive is how he treated his ex-wives (and in one case the mother of his children) when they were sick.

I worked with a senior partner who, years earlier had been having a hot & heavy affair with an associate. The scuttlebutt was that he was deeply in love with the associate and going to divorce his wife for her. But then his wife got cancer. He ended the affair and stayed married to support his wife through her illness -- they're still married and from what I could see very happy with each other. This guy isn't even remotely religious.

Newt was almost sociopathic in his single minded focus on getting what he wanted when he wanted it and to hell with the fact that he was leaving sick women in the lurch.

People get divorced and people cheat, but it's not 90% of the population.

I'm not a fan of the MOs at all but think it is disgusting for Newt to say he's more "normal" than Mitt because he's a serial cheater and dumper of seriously ill wives.

Leaving the wife with cancer as the media has suggested it happened (a thing we'll never know, as differing stories about what happened abound) would be deplorable.

However, this man is not running for Moral Exemplar in Chief. He is running for Manager of the Biggest Economy in the Free World. And one in deep trouble.

The days of fixating on vice, or lack of morality as it's judged in Iowa, are over. Abortion, Bans on Gay Marriage, School Prayer... these are scrap heap issues, controversies for the frivolous. In much the same way Obama does not deserve scorn, but in fact credit, for being cool and detached and focusing on the job, rather than being a "warm and fuzzy communicator," Gingrich deserves credit for offering real solutions and refusing to be what everybody wants. He's an ugly, petty, deeply flawed man. But he's smart. And he's a lot more centrist than he's letting on right now. And he knows how to play the game in DC.

He can't win against Obama, but I'm glad to see someone as messed up as Newt being allowed to get as far as he has. It heartens me with the notion, or perhaps delusion, that a bigger part of this country than I'd thought can look past personal issues and see ideas. In this twisted way, Newt assures me there's hope.

(But if I had my way, it'd be Roemer 2012, with Gary Johnson as VP. And Ron Paul as Secretary of Defense... You need to read Buddy Roemer's stuff on removal of corporate money from politics. It's just fucking brilliant. Simple, honest, and immune to rebuttal.)

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I'm glad to see someone as messed up as Newt being allowed to get as far as he has. It heartens me with the notion, or perhaps delusion, that a bigger part of this country than I'd thought can look past personal issues and see ideas. In this twisted way, Newt assures me there's hope.

I hope you're not mistaking the current ability of a significant portion of the R base to ignore Newt Gingrich's, shall we say, personal failings as some sort of societal shift toward unbiased rationality and sober debate of the issues, divorced (ha!) from personal acrimony. They just like Newt, and are willing to give him a pass. For now.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

However, this man is not running for Moral Exemplar in Chief.

No, he's running for president. And key to that is being someone that a big enough chunk of the public likes, or at least doesn't loathe, which will be a challenge for him.

You need to read Buddy Roemer's stuff on removal of corporate money from politics. It's just fucking brilliant. Simple, honest, and immune to rebuttal.)

I've seen a few TV appearances and been impressed, but never put in any more research given that he doesn't seem to be going anywhere.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

You know, it might be close. Okay, well, not 90% of the population, but divorce or infidelity might be right for something close to the percentage of marriages. Isn't the divorce rate north of 50%? Infidelity probably doesn't touch another 40%, but it might be 20%.

Anyway, I think you are right that cheating won't make Newt more normal, but any time he gets to dog whistle "Mitt's a Mo," he will take it.

I also think you are right Newt real problem isn't that he cheated or got divorced, it's how big a dick he was to his sick spouses to do it.

The point isn't whether cheating is normal or not. That's inherently subjective to the person deciding. The point is whether it happens all the time, and it does. And a sub-point in that is the overly-moralistic in this country need to grow up and realize we're electing a President, not a fucking pastor. Numerous European politicians have had affairs and suffered no political backlash for it. We need to reach a similarly pragmatic consensus on our politicians. Obama brought us forward by admitting his youthful vices. Newt moves us a little further by admitting he's got a screwed up sexual past, and is a selfish boor of a man. Perhaps, maybe if we're lucky, and more politicians admit private vices, we'll hear more of this conversation:

Idiot A: "Obama did coke. How can this man be President?"

Idiot B: "Newt's a serial philanderer. How can he be elected President."

Non-Idiot: "The same way Obama can be President. By offering ideas and convincing people he can run the government well. Who gives a damn about either of their personal lives?"

[Fugee]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Leaving the wife with cancer as the media has suggested it happened (a thing we'll never know, as differing stories about what happened abound) would be deplorable.

However, this man is not running for Moral Exemplar in Chief. He is running for Manager of the Biggest Economy in the Free World. And one in deep trouble.

That would be fine if (1) he just left it at saying his past personal life was crappy and he's sorry about it and (2) he wasn't currying the support of people to whom one's personal life says something about the person as a whole. Instead he comes out and says it makes him more "normal" and uses his shitty actions as a club to remind the religious right he's currying favor with that Mitt's a MO -- i.e. not a Christian like him & them.

The days of fixating on vice, or lack of morality as it's judged in Iowa, are over. Abortion, Bans on Gay Marriage, School Prayer... these are scrap heap issues, controversies for the frivolous.

As I understand the dynamics of GOP politics, a GOP candidate can't get elected (at least not as president) merely with the votes of people who agree with his or her economic and other non-moral positions. The GOP needs the religious right so what you consider scrap heap issues are critical to keeping those voters sticking with the party.

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Fugee

Again, my track record of predicting what the religious right will do when it comes to Newt has been crappy, but I don't see them staying home on election night just because he's a serial cheater if they think they can elect someone who will promote their social agenda.

If Newt is the eventual candidate, I know my brother, SIL and their kids will all be at the polls pulling the GOP lever on matter what they think of his personal life as long as he says the right things about the issue(s) they care about. Well, actually coloring in the GOP circles but that doesn't sound as good.

They will turn out. They may hold their noses, but they want Obama out.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Fugee

That would be fine if (1) he just left it at saying his past personal life was crappy and he's sorry about it and (2) he wasn't currying the support of people to whom one's personal life says something about the person as a whole. Instead he comes out and says it makes him more "normal" and uses his shitty actions as a club to remind the religious right he's currying favor with that Mitt's a MO -- i.e. not a Christian like him & them.

As I understand the dynamics of GOP politics, a GOP candidate can't get elected (at least not as president) merely with the votes of people who agree with his or her economic and other non-moral positions. The GOP needs the religious right so what you consider scrap heap issues are critical to keeping those voters sticking with the party.

Your second point is unfortunately, for now, irrefutable. But this can change. Hence, my affinity for Newt the Cad.

And Romney's not a Christian. He's a Mormon. If he doesn't like that, he should have disavowed Joseph Smith long ago. Lord knows, it's not difficult. As a matter of historical fact, the man was a con artist and pedophile.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

The point isn't whether cheating is normal or not. That's inherently subjective to the person deciding. The point is whether it happens all the time, and it does. And a sub-point in that is the overly-moralistic in this country need to grow up and realize we're electing a President, not a fucking pastor. Numerous European politicians have had affairs and suffered no political backlash for it. We need to reach a similarly pragmatic consensus on our politicians. Obama brought us forward by admitting his youthful vices. Newt moves us a little further by admitting he's got a screwed up sexual past, and is a selfish boor of a man. Perhaps, maybe if we're lucky, and more politicians admit private vices, we'll hear more of this conversation:

Idiot A: "Obama did coke. How can this man be President?"

Idiot B: "Newt's a serial philanderer. How can he be elected President."

Non-Idiot: "The same way Obama can be President. By offering ideas and convincing people he can run the government well. Who gives a damn about either of their personal lives?"

I think you are not giving Carter due credit for telling Playboy about the lust in his heart.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Your second point is unfortunately, for now, irrefutable. But this can change. Hence, my affinity for Newt the Cad.

And Romney's not a Christian. He's a Mormon. If he doesn't like that, he should have disavowed Joseph Smith long ago. Lord knows, it's not difficult. As a matter of historical fact, the man was a con artist and pedophile.

The juxtaposition of this with your diatriabe on American's excessive moralism is amusing. Yet, I agree with each of them.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

The juxtaposition of this with your diatriabe on American's excessive moralism is amusing. Yet, I agree with each of them.

If Romney thinks he's a Christian, then he's a Christian. On some level, all religious beliefs are a little absurd (hi Less!), but I'm the sort of Christian who can accept that other people have different beliefs.