Posted on 01/20/2012 5:18:17 PM PST by chessplayer
Rick Santorum walked a fine line in his response to questions about Marianne Gingrich’s accusations against her ex-husband and Santorum’s GOP rival, Newt.
“Personal matters are personal matters, but they are matters that are — particularly when you are in public life as he was at the time and the people involved were also in a sense in public life — those issues are issues that people will look at,” Santorum responded.
“I believe in forgiveness, I’m called to believe in forgiveness,” he continued. “I do believe having some accountability to a higher calling other than self is a very, very important aspect and perspective that is important for leaders.
“To make the final comment, these are issues of character and these are issues that people will consider based upon the time, when, where, how all those thing will factor in and I’ll let people make that decision, I’m certainly not going to make it for them,” he said to a crowd of about 150 people.
Huckabee did not knock out my candidate, Thompson, the slight chance Fred had was killed by the media, for instance just as he was gaining his momentum, they released the false story that he was pulling out, they ambushed him everytime his slow but steady, growth strategy paid off.
Besides since when does a Lt. Gov, and 3 time Governor candidate, have to pull out to make way for Mitt Romney, who spent $110,000,000.00 yet was beaten by Huckabee.
Let's face it - anyone who tries to compare Newt's case with Clinton's is a moron of ground-thumping proportions.
Newt's marital indiscretions were a decade and a half age. Despite her being his third wife, he does appear, by all evidences, to be as happily and monogamously married as the other three candidates, including good Mormon Mitt Romney.
Newt has said he repented of his past sins. From everything we can see, this appears to be genuine, so I'm not sure why it's still an issue, other than the fact that it serves as a cheap, sleaze attack campaign tactic for supporters of other candidates.
Mmmm....mmmm....mmmm
One of the Seven Deadly -- the Bible doesn't call pride, envy, anger, sloth, avarice, gluttony, and lust "moral failings" for nothing.
And just what is trustworthy about Mitt?
At least Newt admits his past failings while Mitt denies them or lies about them.
I have to admit, this is probably one of the stupidest and most arrogant pieces of drek I've seen posted on FR - and that's saying something.
Newt's behaviour indicates that he repented and has genuinely changed his ways. Neither Clinton's nor Edwards' says the same. Further, if Santorum had had an affair, but genuinely appeared to have repented and tried to change his ways, then I'd extend to him the same willingness to say "Hey, yeah, you screwed up, but you put it away." as I am to Newt.
What gets me is all these sanctimonious, holier-than-thou types who don't seem to understand that if they've ever looked at a women to lust, then they're just as guilty as Newt is, scripturally speaking. And if they haven't, well, then they've got a sodomy problem to deal with.
But what *really* gets me is all these sanctimonious libertarian types who support legalising prostitution, yet suddenly think Newt's marital history is a big deal.
Well said, and might I add this: Doug Hoffman was an extraordinarily flawed candidate. Some upstate New Yorkers, big Reagan folks, said that Hoffman as this pure tea party type guy was a huge bunch of BS. So no, support of Dee Dee was not a good thing, but Hoffman had many many flaws too .
Speaking for this Christian -- if they asked me for it, YES.
What kind of a Christian are you, anyway?
EXCUSE ME???
THAT is the SICKEST RUDEST POST I HAVE EVER READ!
I have been married to the same man for 33 years and have defended Newt Gingrich and will continue whole heartedly!
I have NEVER CHEATED ON MY HUSBAND.
HOW DEAR YOU!
No, sir. You can't.
“Somebody”
Uh oh. :-D
Now that you’ve kicked Santorum to the curb, don’t forget to grind your heel into his cheek. Maybe he’ll show his geeky depravity by offering you the other one. lol
The subtle ripping Santorum into shreds on a personal level continues....
Toomey had a chance to win.
McCain was not going to be defeated, and for the 2008 ticket to have turned on itself would have dominated media coverage of the election cycle, proven that the nation was saved by electing the stable Obama rather than a sham/cuthroat, secretly divided GOP ticket and it would have laid waste to the gains of 2010.
Yes. If they say they were wrong, if they say they sinned, if they say they have gone to God in forgiveness, and if they sought reconciliation in their lives with all the people they have hurt. IF they said that - and neither Clinton, nor Edwards, have, then we have no right to judge what is truly in their hearts. And if it was a republican opponent of Newt, that would be off limits as far as I was concerned. Newt is a converted practicing Catholic, he has written books about restoring God to America. He has been married to the same woman for 11 years.
And he seems to take his faith very seriously - with the washington post actually agreeing:
WHAT KIND OF CATHOLIC IS NEWT GINGRICH? very worth the time to read...
Yep. In any case, Huckabee was not a conservative, so the entire charge that Thompson caused a “conservative” to lose is nonsense. Huckabee was pro-life and PRO GOVERNMENT. Some people think that being pro-life is the only thing required to be “conservative.” Such people are behaving stupidly, IMO.
What gets me is that your post is excellent!! :) Well stated.
WHAT YOU SAID!
Didn’t his wife Karen, live -OUT OF WEDLOCK- with an abortion doctor for several years?
She we can forgive her sin and move on.. but not Newt’s?
That’s why people think he’s so sanctimonious.
you don’t get it, do you? Sanctimonorum is judged harshly because he goes out of his way to project a goody two shoes perfection that is just nauseating. His fans are much the same. Newts followers knew exactly what they were signing up for - good and bad - when they signed up.
And there’s another little harsh reality: it’s called ABILITY versus STABILITY. Santorum admitted last night he “can’t get a rise out of the crowd” or make folks laugh - but he’s slow and steady, or something like that. Well guess what, slow and steady ain’t gonna win in the arena of ideas in 2012.
Ricks’ a nice guy. Wouldn’t mind living on his street. But I don’t see bigtime ability there. I just don’t.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.