I heard that too many times from Democrats about Clinton.
44 posted on Thursday, January 19, 2012 10:12:41 AM by TShaunK: “Right. So what? Not ideal but what guy wouldn’t want that arrangment?At least he has the balls and honesty to ask her. Can’t make the sale if you don’t ask for the order.”
I can't believe I'm seeing this on a conservative pro-family website. Do you really think threesomes and open marriages are every man's fantasy? Maybe they are for some people, but if we can't trust a man to remain faithful to his wife, can be trust him to run our country?
50 posted on Thursday, January 19, 2012 10:16:25 AM by Boardwalk: “Don’t mormons have multiple wives?”
Not today. Mormons long ago had a “revelation” ditching that doctrine allowing polygamy. I have no use for Romney politically because of his past advocacy for baby-killing, and religiously speaking, I believe Mormons are a cult, but I can appreciate Romney's repeatedly stated position that he finds the idea of being sexually involved with multiple women to be disgusting.
84 posted on Thursday, January 19, 2012 10:40:13 AM by LibsRJerks: “Well, it’s all scummy and sleazy, and I don’t agree with what he did. However, it was a long time ago and he has since claimed that’s he’s confessed his wrongs and now appears to be in a stable marriage. That’s all I can really fall back on in any of this. We’ve all done horrible scummy sleazy things and we’ve all sought forgiviness for it. I am not exempt in this matter, so therefore, I still don’t believe I can really judge Newt for any of it. It’s truly between Newt and his God (which I believe is the same as mine).”
Yours is one of the few posts defending Newt Gingrich that I can respect.
The issue is that repentance, to be genuine, needs to follow the model of David and Bathsheba ... very public, and with sackcloth and ashes, and with a clear understanding that because repentance can be faked, it will always be suspected of insincerity.
I'd be a lot more inclined to believe Newt Gingrich's repentance if years ago he had gone public with this sort of stuff. I am inclined now both to disbelieve his sincerity and question his political judgment. He certainly knew or should have known that this would blow up in his face if he ever became a credible candidate for president.
But then again, he's the one who couldn't get his people to submit enough signatures to get on the ballot in Virginia. There is a pattern of dropped balls with Gingrich, and a lack of national organization one would not expect for someone in his position. (And yes, I'm well aware that Santorum and Perry had the same problem. I have the same concerns about both that they're “not ready for prime time.”)
110 posted on Thursday, January 19, 2012 10:57:53 AM by Hilda: “Marriage is between ONE MAN AND ONE WOMAN, and I don’t think a REAL conservative can compromise on that!”
Amen, Hilda, and I'm really unhappy to see that isn't something we all can agree on.
173 posted on Thursday, January 19, 2012 11:33:41 AM by Strategerist: “Newt has two options (and I mean this afternoon, and no later). 1) Drop out and endorse Santorum. 2) Give a tearful public apology to Marianne. The second option has maybe a 5% chance of working.”
I'm afraid I agree, with a qualification.
The tearful apology to Marianne Gingrich needed to be made years ago. And if it had been made years ago, this probably would not be coming up now because either 1) the ex-Mrs. Gingrich accepted the apology as sincere, or 2) Newt Gingrich knew from years back that she was a ticking time bomb ready to go off that would keep him from re-entering public life.
Are you assuming what she is saying is true?
Bitter ex wife, bitter divorce = suspect accusations.
Call me when we are voting for a Pope. At least, unlike Clinton, Newts screwing wasnt screwing the legal system and public. Considering the country is getting screwed, might as well get someone who has first hand experience in that.
Why do you automatically assume that the ex-wife is telling the truth?