Replies

It looks like I misunderstood what I was reading. I understand Jim was/is pretty adamant in his support for Gingrich. I thought you were spelling out the rules backed by the authority to remove posting privileges.

A good way to evaluate a candidate is by his record. If his rhetoric matches his record, we have a winner. However if the campaign speeches are forgotten after election day, then we have a sleazy political animal.

This doesn't sound unreasonable.

As far as a candidate's personal life goes, sometimes it is best to temper what one hears in the Mainly Slime Media with what the candidate says about the situation...

I'm not bringing up the that "wife on deathbed" false story. Nor, am I bringing up that 2nd wife "open marriage" thing.

However, far from ending two marriage and starting three serially, he ran them in parallel. A kind way of saying his marriage vows meant little when presented with something he wanted. I'm no prude, but I just find that behavior distasteful and a real indicator of what makes someone tick.

This decision isn't easy as both have many more policy transgressions than I care to see. So that's why his infidelity is tipping the scales for me as an indicator of his truthfulness. I supported Cain and was furious with him when he pulled the same stunt. My first choice was Pawlenty... the first guy to throw in the towel...

LOL! NO! I can't zot anybody. I just do the after-action reports and know the rules.

Sometimes with age comes wisdom, and even a two-time loser is able to see the destruction that his bad choices have caused. [coughRushLimbaughcough]

I did some bone-headed stuff (that did not involve cheating on my dear Hubby of 32 years) when I was a bit younger, the memory of which absolutely appalls me, and I know better than to pull such stunts now. I'd like to think that a man as brilliant as Speaker Gingrich could figure out the same thing at his age.