Social conservatives overwhelmingly supports a serial adulterer for President

[QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"]

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

Okay have at it! His formerly adulterous ways have no bearing on how he will perform as President.

mattbbpl

I did not say that it would. I gave you the reason, or a reason, for people calling him out on being a deplorable human being.

Agreed that libs should focus on things of substance. However, they just can't help themselves when the opportunity arises to deflect, distract, and blame. They're taking the bait. That is exactly why he won South Carolina. Don't you think the masterful politician that Gingrinch is has pocketfuls of carefully-selected "bait" ready to lay out for the libs?

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"]

I did not say that it would. I gave you the reason, or a reason, for people calling him out on being a deplorable human being.

moneymatterz

Agreed that libs should focus on things of substance. They just can't help themselves when the opportunity arises to deflect, distract, and blame. They're taking the bait. That is exactly why he won South Carolina. Don't you think the masterful politician that Gingrinch is has pocketfuls of carefully-selected "bait" ready to lay out for the libs?

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"]

I did not say that it would. I gave you the reason, or a reason, for people calling him out on being a deplorable human being.

moneymatterz

Agreed that libs should focus on things of substance. However, they just can't help themselves when the opportunity arises to deflect, distract, and blame. They're taking the bait. That is exactly why he won South Carolina. Don't you think the masterful politician that Gingrinch is has pocketfuls of carefully-selected "bait" ready to lay out for the libs?

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

[QUOTE="SF_KiLLaMaN"] I don't understand how you can just say "He's probably changed." Why not jump on him for his actions? If he makes extremely poor decision in his life why would you think he wouldn't make poor decisions in the White House? That's just asinine.SF_KiLLaMaN

Seems like you're jumping to conclusions. Please direct me to the post in which I said, "He's probably changed." As I said in my previous post, his personal life has, in fact, been held accountable for his actions. These are non-issues that libs love to bring up to distract the public. No matter. I encourage you to rake the bait and run with this story. CNN's John King tried this tactic at this past Thursday's Presidential Debate. It backfired, causing Gingrinch to further surge in the polls.

The "awful" decisions of one's personal life have no bearing on how they'll perform professionally. Joe Paterno, for instance. Clinton, for instance. Hell, you probably make the "awful" decision of eating artery-clogging mayonnaise with your sandwiches. The point is: none of these personal decisions influenced their decison-making in their professional lives.

i disliked the man before all this about his ex-wives were brought up. now i just dislike him even more. i really, really, hope he doesn't become president.

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"] This is exactly why I'm of the opinion that his ethics violations should be the focus of his opponents. People can always claim that his personal life has no bearing on how he'll govern (outside of the blatant hypocrisy employs, of course), but he's already proven that he's an unethical and ineffective leader. Why bother with his personal life when he's already shown that he's a despicable person in his professional life?mattbbpl

Agreed that libs should focus on things of substance. However, they just can't help themselves when the opportunity arises to deflect, distract, and blame. They're taking the bait. That is exactly why he won South Carolina. Don't you think the masterful politician that Gingrinch is has pocketfuls of carefully-selected "bait" ready to lay out for the libs?

Yes.

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"] This is exactly why I'm of the opinion that his ethics violations should be the focus of his opponents. People can always claim that his personal life has no bearing on how he'll govern (outside of the blatant hypocrisy employs, of course), but he's already proven that he's an unethical and ineffective leader. Why bother with his personal life when he's already shown that he's a despicable person in his professional life?SF_KiLLaMaN

Agreed that libs should focus on things of substance. They just can't help themselves when the opportunity arises to deflect, distract, and blame. They're taking the bait. That is exactly why he won South Carolina. Don't you think the masterful politician that Gingrinch is has pocketfuls of carefully-selected "bait" ready to lay out for the libs?

You think it's stupid to focus on things of substance?

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"] This is exactly why I'm of the opinion that his ethics violations should be the focus of his opponents. People can always claim that his personal life has no bearing on how he'll govern (outside of the blatant hypocrisy employs, of course), but he's already proven that he's an unethical and ineffective leader. Why bother with his personal life when he's already shown that he's a despicable person in his professional life?mattbbpl

Agreed that libs should focus on things of substance. However, they just can't help themselves when the opportunity arises to deflect, distract, and blame. They're taking the bait. That is exactly why he won South Carolina. Don't you think the masterful politician that Gingrinch is has pocketfuls of carefully-selected "bait" ready to lay out for the libs?

Clinton cheats on his wife and impeachment proceedings begin.

Newt repeatedly lies and cheats and yet the Repubs keep giving him power.

God I hate the Republican Party with a passion. Maybe if more intelligent people got involved in the party it might slowly evolve into an actually half-decent option against the Democratic party, but unfortunately right now I don't see how anyone with a brain can support any of the current Republican leaders....

The politics here in the US are in a pretty sad freaking state right now...

so ill just say it, republicans are obviosuly stupid.

In fact Newt was cheating on his first wife, and lying about it, at the exact time he was trying to impeach Clinton for cheating on his wife, and lying about it. FAMILY VALUES.RandoIph

Clinton was impeached because he lied under oath. Next.

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"][QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

Agreed that libs should focus on things of substance. However, they just can't help themselves when the opportunity arises to deflect, distract, and blame. They're taking the bait. That is exactly why he won South Carolina. Don't you think the masterful politician that Gingrinch is has pocketfuls of carefully-selected "bait" ready to lay out for the libs?

LostProphetFLCL

Clinton cheats on his wife and impeachment proceedings begin.

Newt repeatedly lies and cheats and yet the Repubs keep giving him power.

God I hate the Republican Party with a passion. Maybe if more intelligent people got involved in the party it might slowly evolve into an actually half-decent option against the Democratic party, but unfortunately right now I don't see how anyone with a brain can support any of the current Republican leaders....

The politics here in the US are in a pretty sad freaking state right now...

Hey I like John Hunstmen, he's my main candidate. He's not going to win though....and your generelisng a bit, the Democratic party can be just as bad. And Clinton didn't get impeached because he had an affair, he got impeached because he lied about it.

What the hell is MERICUH?GazaAli

so ill just say it, republicans are obviosuly stupid.

SauceKing

He isn't a gay atheist... so there isn't a problem.foxhound_fox

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]He isn't a gay atheist... so there isn't a problem.LJS9502_basic

He is staunchly opposed to gay marriage, so you could probably just wait for him to get caught walking into a hotel with some rent boy.

[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]He isn't a gay atheist... so there isn't a problem.Dark_Knight6

He is staunchly opposed to gay marriage, so you could probably just wait for him to get caught walking into a hotel with some rent boy.

Okay have at it! His formerly adulterous ways have no bearing on how he will perform as President.moneymatterz

It's not even about how he will perform: we frankly do not know precisely. All we have as voters are perceptions of candidates, which we then weigh up to our standards.

Gingrich is a known hypocrite. He also seems to be prone to recidivism when it comes to acting against "family values". If "family values" is then a major value of his platform, then, I, as a voter have no reason to excuse him for displaying a capricious attitude when he acts contrary to the things he attaches salience to. Just as some Republicans have been accusing Romney of flip-flopping ideologically, I see no reason to excuse Gingrich for flip-flopping morally on his major selling points to the electorate.

The issue is that Gingrich has been selling a political platform and then acting contrary to it. He is a rather bad salesman.

[QUOTE="LostProphetFLCL"]

[QUOTE="mattbbpl"] Are you seriously attacking liberals as a group for pursuing sexual conduct allegations after the Republicans have made it an issue time and time again?ShadowMoses900

Clinton cheats on his wife and impeachment proceedings begin.

Newt repeatedly lies and cheats and yet the Repubs keep giving him power.

God I hate the Republican Party with a passion. Maybe if more intelligent people got involved in the party it might slowly evolve into an actually half-decent option against the Democratic party, but unfortunately right now I don't see how anyone with a brain can support any of the current Republican leaders....

The politics here in the US are in a pretty sad freaking state right now...

Hey I like John Hunstmen, he's my main candidate. He's not going to win though....and your generelisng a bit, the Democratic party can be just as bad. And Clinton didn't get impeached because he had an affair, he got impeached because he lied about it.

The Dems have their own issues, yes, but the current Republican party is the biggest batch of baffoons I have ever seen. I was hoping after Obama won that maybe the Republican party might re-work itself into something good, but instead of becoming TRUE conservatives (AKA actually not spending all over the place) and dropping all the religious BS, they went in the complete OPPOSITE direction...

Really, the Repub party is ruining congress now. They act like freaking babies, and quite frankly some of the views I have seen expressed by candidates like Bachman are flat out FRIGHTENING.

All I can say is God help us all if this current Repub party gains the presidency along with retaining their control over congress...

[QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"]

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

You know, what's funny is that the vast majority of libs would jump at the chance to commit adultery with a woman who is:

• Hotter than what they already have
• Wealthier than what they already have

Why jump on Gingrinch for his formerly adulterous ways?

moneymatterz

Because most of them don't have the audacity to make a public service announcement about the sanctity of marriage shortly before going home and sleeping with their third wife.

Yeah....and? What's the problem? He's only a messenger for an idea that's been lingering throughout modern human history. No one is perfect, but you're implying that it is reprehensible to inspire others to strive for perfection.

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

[QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"]

Because most of them don't have the audacity to make a public service announcement about the sanctity of marriage shortly before going home and sleeping with their third wife.

CaveJohnson1

Yeah....and? What's the problem? He's only a messenger for an idea that's been lingering throughout modern human history. No one is perfect, but you're implying that it is reprehensible to inspire others to strive for perfection.

I don't care about someone's personal life as long as it doesn't affect their ability to lead.

I think dumping your wife in an ungracious manner is irrelevant when deciding who you should vote for.

I don't care about someone's personal life as long as it doesn't affect their ability to lead.

I think dumping your wife in an ungracious manner is irrelevant when deciding who you should vote for.

Shadow4020

I don't care about someone's personal life as long as it doesn't affect their ability to lead.

I think dumping your wife in an ungracious manner is irrelevant when deciding who you should vote for.

Shadow4020

Normally I would agree. But when a politician pushes a "family values" agenda as a huge part of his platform, yet has never lived up to these values in his own life it becomes an issue.

[QUOTE="Shadow4020"]

I don't care about someone's personal life as long as it doesn't affect their ability to lead.

I think dumping your wife in an ungracious manner is irrelevant when deciding who you should vote for.

worlock77

Normally I would agree. But when a politician pushes a "family values" agenda as a huge part of his platform, yet has never lived up to these values in his own life it becomes an issue.

Yeah, I normally don't care about the personal lives of politicians. Mitt Romney putting a dog on his cars roof? Don't care. Barrack Obama going to a church that had a pastor that might not have been completely loving? Don't care.

But when a politician takes a vow for life, one that should be the most important vow in a persons life, then just ignores it and goes against his "values"? How can we possibly trust someone who disregards their most sacred vow? We can't.

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="Shadow4020"]

I don't care about someone's personal life as long as it doesn't affect their ability to lead.

I think dumping your wife in an ungracious manner is irrelevant when deciding who you should vote for.

hoola

Normally I would agree. But when a politician pushes a "family values" agenda as a huge part of his platform, yet has never lived up to these values in his own life it becomes an issue.

Yeah, I normally don't care about the personal lives of politicians. Mitt Romney putting a dog on his cars roof? Don't care. Barrack Obama going to a church that had a pastor that might not have been completely loving? Don't care.

But when a politician takes a vow for life, one that should be the most important vow in a persons life, then just ignores it and goes against his "values"? How can we possibly trust someone who disregards their most sacred vow? We can't.

It's not the infidelity that concerns me. That in-and-of-itself is between him and his family. It's the hypocrisy that bothers me.

[QUOTE="CaveJohnson1"]

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

Yeah....and? What's the problem? He's only a messenger for an idea that's been lingering throughout modern human history. No one is perfect, but you're implying that it is reprehensible to inspire others to strive for perfection.

DarkOfKnight

He's a vile human being. I'm a liberal, and I know exactly why someone would vote for Romney and Paul. They're not bad reasons either, but Newt is just a terrible person. It would be one thing if he was this revolutionary politician with an attrocious past but he's not even that. He's just a strong, opinionated d*ck.

[QUOTE="Shadow4020"]

I don't care about someone's personal life as long as it doesn't affect their ability to lead.

I think dumping your wife in an ungracious manner is irrelevant when deciding who you should vote for.

worlock77

Normally I would agree. But when a politician pushes a "family values" agenda as a huge part of his platform, yet has never lived up to these values in his own life it becomes an issue.

True, the hypocrisy isn't lost on me. I just hate when people let personal things sway their voting opinion. Some people won't vote for Romney because he's a Mormon, some won't vote for Obama because he's black, and some won't vote for Newt because he's an unfaithful jerk.

Or you know, people could just stop f*cking around and just vote for Romney/Obama...

[QUOTE="worlock77"]

[QUOTE="Shadow4020"]

I don't care about someone's personal life as long as it doesn't affect their ability to lead.

I think dumping your wife in an ungracious manner is irrelevant when deciding who you should vote for.

Shadow4020

Normally I would agree. But when a politician pushes a "family values" agenda as a huge part of his platform, yet has never lived up to these values in his own life it becomes an issue.

True, the hypocrisy isn't lost on me. I just hate when people let personal things sway their voting opinion. Some people won't vote for Romney because he's a Mormon, some won't vote for Obama because he's black, and some won't vote for Newt because he's an unfaithful jerk.

It's kinda f*cked up, but I know some people who wouldn't support Newt not because of his affairs or ethics violations, but because of his conversion to Catholicism.

Ron Paul is better than all of them.

GameShtopper

[QUOTE="Dark_Knight6"]

[QUOTE="moneymatterz"]

You know, what's funny is that the vast majority of libs would jump at the chance to commit adultery with a woman who is:

• Hotter than what they already have
• Wealthier than what they already have

Why jump on Gingrinch for his formerly adulterous ways?

moneymatterz

Because most of them don't have the audacity to make a public service announcement about the sanctity of marriage shortly before going home and sleeping with their third wife.

Yeah....and? What's the problem? He's only a messenger for an idea that's been lingering throughout modern human history. No one is perfect, but you're implying that it is reprehensible to inspire others to strive for perfection.

Because we know there is a direct correlation between a politician's personal life, and his ability to lead a country :roll:

Because we know there is a direct correlation between a politician's personal life, and his ability to lead a country :roll:

monkeytoes61

[QUOTE="monkeytoes61"]

Because we know there is a direct correlation between a politician's personal life, and his ability to lead a country :roll:

EsYuGee