It is a virtue among the GOP.
So this happened
Republican candidates: FAMILY VALUES FAMILY VALUES FAMILY VALUES
Americans: um hey we'd kind of like jobs
Republican candidates: FAMILY VALUES
Americans: or heath care
Republican candidates: FAMILY VALUES FAMILY VALUES
Americans: you're not listening are you
Debate moderator: Did you really ask your second wife for an open marriage as she just announced on national tv tonight?
Republican candidates: GASP
Newt Gingrich: HOW DARE YOU ASK ME ABOUT MY FAMILY VALUES IN A PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE HOW IS THIS RELEVANT
Debate moderator:
Americans:
Bill Clinton:
I got a great note from a friend of mine. “So Newt wanted an open marriage. BFD. At least he asked his wife for permission instead of cheating on her. That’s a mark of character, in my book. Newt’s a victim. We all are. Ours is the horniest generation. We were soldiers in the sex revolution. We were tempted by everything from Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice to Plato’s Retreat, Deep Throat to no-fault divorce. Many of us paid the ultimate price, AIDS, abortion, or alimony for the cultural marching orders we got. Hell, for all I know we should be getting disability from the government.” That’s from a good friend of mine, “Newt’s slogan ought to, ‘Hell, yes, I wanted it.’” (laughing) I’m sharing with you how some people are reacting to this.
“
| — |
Rush Limbaugh (via paxamericana) No, this isn’t from “The Onion” or any other satire site. Good grief. |
Host Chris Matthews, Republican Strategist Ron Christie, and Politico columnist Roger Simon talk about last night’s Republican debate in which Juan Williams, one of the moderators of the debate, ask Newt Gingrich about his comments about African Americans and how they should be asking for jobs instead of food stamps.
Chris asks Ron Christie whether he thought that Newt’s comments were offensive, and Ron claims that he was being clumsy. Roger Simon fires back, saying:
“This is not Newt Gingrich being clumsy. This is Newt Gingrich being arrogant, condescending, and dismissive. The only thing you can say in his favor is that he’s arrogant, condescending, and dismissive to a lot of people, white and black.”
He went on to say that Newt was playing “a dangerous game” with the crowd at the debate.
Newt Gingrich promises to 1) end separation of church and state and 2) cease efforts to protect LGBT students from bullying ON HIS FIRST DAY IN OFFICE. Who sees something wrong with this? The full thing here.
For those who are understandably having a difficult time keeping up with Newt Gingrich’s love life, we’re talking about Jackie Gingrich, the wife he left while she had cancer. This is the wife he refused to pay child support to, even after their lights and heat were shut off, until his constituents and friends started getting angry, all the while he was banging his 28-year-old staffer and wife #2, Marianne Ginther Gingrich. This is the wife (#1) of which he said, “You know and I know that she’s not young enough or pretty enough to be the wife of a president.”
If you can stomach it, read the full story here.
The higher a monkey climbs on the pole the more you can see his butt.
“
| — | Obama adviser David Axelrod, quoted by the Chicago Sun Times, predicting Newt Gingrich will get far greater scrutiny now that he’s the GOP frontrunner. (via liberalsarecool) |
By Rania Khalek | AlterNet
1. No free speech for you!
In 2006, at an awards dinner honoring the preservation of free speech no less, Gingrich unleashed the scary specter of terrorism to argue that free speech must be curtailed, which he admitted would ignite “a serious debate about the First Amendment.”
Gingrich said:
Either before we lose a city or, if we are truly stupid, after we lose a city, we will adopt rules of engagement that use every technology we can find to break up their capacity to use the Internet, to break up their capacity to use free speech, and to go after people who want to kill us to stop them from recruiting people before they get to reach out and convince young people to destroy their lives while destroying us.
His remarks immediately sparked controversy, leading him to write an op-ed days later in which he clarified that the First Amendment should not be used as a shield for terrorists working “to build ‘franchises’ among leftist, antiglobalization groups worldwide, especially in Latin America.” […]
