published Sunday, January 22nd, 2012

Confession

about Clay Bennett...

The son of a career army officer, Bennett led a nomadic life, attending ten different schools before graduating in 1980 from the University of North Alabama with degrees in Art and History. After brief stints as a staff artist at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and the Fayetteville (NC) Times, he went on to serve as the editorial cartoonist for the St. Petersburg Times (1981-1994) and The Christian Science Monitor (1997-2007), before joining the staff of the ...

99
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.

Cue the repetition of the already existing discussion, with a side of complaints about talking about Newt again.

To those who may ask, yes, Gingrich did convert to Catholicism.

January 22, 2012 at 12:07 a.m.

No, Happy, Bennett has taken the cue from the DNC to do another cartoon about Newt now that he seems to have the BIG MO after the S.C. primary. How monumentally boring! You Democrats are boring!

January 22, 2012 at 12:30 a.m.

And there we go, repetition of existing discussion. So you mean "Yes" instead of "No" since you're saying exactly what's already been said, with the side offering as well.

January 22, 2012 at 12:36 a.m.
alprova said...

This 'toon reminds me of a scene in the movie "A League Of Their Own." Madonna's character is in the confessional and the sound of something hitting the floor is heard.

Rosie O'Donnell says, "That's the third time that he's dropped that Bible."

January 22, 2012 at 12:41 a.m.
alprova said...

Newt might soon be claiming to be Jesus Christ because he has had more political resurrections this past year than the son of God.

January 22, 2012 at 12:55 a.m.
fairmon said...

I am trying to decide on who would be the best POTUS not who would be the best pastor for my church.

January 22, 2012 at 3:40 a.m.
EaTn said...

In South Carolina once again the party of conservative religion and family values pinched their noses as they voted. Go Newt--can't wait until November.

January 22, 2012 at 5:57 a.m.
MTJohn said...

harp3339 said...I am trying to decide on who would be the best POTUS not who would be the best pastor for my church.

Agreed! And, character matters. By that standard, Rick Santorum and John Huntsman are the only qualified among the announced Republican candidates. One of those has withdrawn and the other will not get the nomination. But, that really should not be a surprise. We, the people, vote for the candidate who most effectively panders to our selfish interests - not the candidate best qualified to serve all of the people.

January 22, 2012 at 7:34 a.m.
Jack_Dennis said...

And The Church allows this guy to take communion, how?

January 22, 2012 at 7:39 a.m.
davisss13 said...

Christians looove the martyr syndrome. They have no choice but to forgive or they themselves will not be forgiven.

Nice mindscrew, eh?

January 22, 2012 at 7:44 a.m.
GreenKepi said...

The best explanation I've heard, so far, concerning Newt is...I have two dogs. A pretty little poodle, clean, housebroken, nice little dog, so likeable and loving. But, outside...I have a big old nasty looking, dirty, filthy, Saint Bernard - who is anything but a "saint"; however, that old nasty dog...protects my property and family with his life. He will not let anyone, who is not family, come on my property. As with Newt, he stinks and smells...but I believe he will protect this great country of ours from the enemies within and without.....

January 22, 2012 at 8:09 a.m.
davisss13 said...

That's a hell of a strained analogy Greenkepi. Too bad 'Saint' Newt is fouling the floor from the back door to the front, marking his territory and having his way with all the females.

By the way, what did Fannie May pay him 1.3 million for again?

Methinks Newt fits the GOP's PREVIOUS definition of 'enemy within'.

Popcorn, anyone?

January 22, 2012 at 8:21 a.m.

Politicos who want a soap opera are on cloud nine this morning. The thing I most dread about the specter of Gingrich winning the GOP nomination: the self-righteous carping to be elicited by Clay, the popular media, and other disciples of the messiah-in-chief. Gingrich’s self-righteousness is odious, as is that of those who cheer it. If this past week is any indication, though, it is likely to be exceeded only by that of his critics. Only the self-righteous are appalled when sins are confessed.

davisss13 said... “Christians looove the martyr syndrome. They have no choice but to forgive or they themselves will not be forgiven. Nice mindscrew, eh?”

davisss13, your literalism is getting the best of you. To whom much is given, much is required. Christians can only claim to be debtors to grace. It isn’t surprising that you’ve mistaken the popular, cheap variety of easy forgiveness as true grace. The costly, biblical sort actually does produce martyrs, of whom we, whether religious or irreligious, are not worthy. (cf. religion section of BBC website)

January 22, 2012 at 9:06 a.m.
potcat said...

I have been in SC for the last week and spent a week there at Christmas. My Fathers side of my family are from SC, i was born there and lived there off and on for several years, my two Children live there also.

This is what i don't get, newt is grandstanding on Foodstamps and Social Security, almost every one i know in SC gets Foodstamps and Social Security and are RELIGIOUS NUTS,and they vote. My Daughter is the only one that is not a Republican, my Son is brainwashed by the church.

SC is like Tennessee, they vote against their own economic well being. Willful ignorance is wide spread in the South. I know for a fact the Church is Political and they like the "Chamber Of Commerce" should lose all Tax exempt status and the Chamber should NEVER get a penny of Taxpayers money.

January 22, 2012 at 9:25 a.m.
WhitesCreek said...

Newt can't protect us from the "enemies within"...Newt IS the enemy within.

Think real hard and try to remember Newt being kicked out of Congress for a not particularly clever corruption scheme. Try and remember Newt pushing for the impeachment of President Clinton while he himself was busy mauling the ten commandments. Now he wins a primary in a deep southern state by inflaming the worst of our prejudices, fears, and anger.

I wonder if Karl Rove is channeling Dr. Frankenstein as he's losing control of his own monster?

January 22, 2012 at 9:25 a.m.
ricardo said...

When I first saw the cartoon, without reading the caption, I thought it was a caricature of Newt trying to pick up a woman in a church. After all, Calista is getting up in age and it's time for a new young mistress.

January 22, 2012 at 9:35 a.m.
MTJohn said...

whats_wrong_with_the_world said...davisss13, your literalism is getting the best of you. To whom much is given, much is required. Christians can only claim to be debtors to grace.

W4 - I agree with you to that point. However,I'd suggest that the "cost of grace" was not borne by the martyrs, but only by our Lord. It's also important to remember that the promise of Grace is extended to all and is not reserved for or appropriated by people who have done something special to deserve it.

January 22, 2012 at 9:52 a.m.
dude_abides said...

Jack_Dennis said... And The Church allows this guy to take communion, how?

They use a new wafer called..., yep... "I Can't Believe It's Not the Body of Christ." That way the church has a modicum of deniability. Hard to picture Newt having interest in a ritual which, in it's name, has the root word of communism and the word union!

January 22, 2012 at 10:20 a.m.

harp3339, well, I think my pastor would make a decent President, if not for his health. Others I have encountered, not so much.

Still, the thing is, personal character is something Newt himself argued mattered. While violating the same standards he put forward at the time. He is not a person who is quiet about it, he is quite public, and uses that as a reason to vote for him.

Calling him on that is hardly inappropriate then. If you wish Newt to not be judged on such things, then please, get him to stop asking us to vote for him (or against somebody else) based on them.

GreenKepi, But when the Saint Bernard bites the mailman, the pizzaman, and the little boy who is retrieving his lost boy, then you may have issues.

whats_wrong_with_the_world, it's not a concern that a sin is being confessed, but that the confession is not genuine. Public grandstanding does have its risks of being more about pride than virtue.

January 22, 2012 at 10:26 a.m.
hambone said...

Confession is good for the soul.

Somehow I can't put the words, confession, sincere and NEWT together!

January 22, 2012 at 10:33 a.m.
alprova said...

wwwtw wrote: "Politicos who want a soap opera are on cloud nine this morning. The thing I most dread about the specter of Gingrich winning the GOP nomination: the self-righteous carping to be elicited by Clay, the popular media, and other disciples of the messiah-in-chief."

Excuse me, and I only speak for myself, but I have never held myself up to be a shining example of someone who professes to be a Christian in front of an entire nation, while at the same time, dodge questions in regard to a sordid past of totally disregarding marital vows not once, but twice, at a time when both women were coincidentally facing serious health issues.

People who voted for Gingrich chose to overlook the charges laid out by Marianne Gingrich, and that's fine. He successfully fended off any fallout this past week as a result of that interview. But it's not going to hold long term.

"Gingrich’s self-righteousness is odious, as is that of those who cheer it. If this past week is any indication, though, it is likely to be exceeded only by that of his critics. Only the self-righteous are appalled when sins are confessed."

He may well have made his confessions for his sins with God. I really don't have any way of determining one way or the other the validity of that claim.

But, apparently, he has yet to seek forgiveness from those who were directly affected and victimized by the commission of his past sins. Does asking God's forgiveness exonerate him completely for his decisions to abandon his marital vows so callously?

Or is it okay in some people's minds that he doesn't do so because Marianne Gingrich was at one time the other woman, who deserves no consideration whatsoever, because she committed sins of her own with a then, married man?

Quite frankly, I'm surprised that Newt has not thought to blame her for the breakup of his first marriage by claiming that she lured him into her bed.

I further find his blaming the media for the story's release to be quite telling to his lack of credibility and claim that he is a Christian. That's been his tact from day one as a Presidential candidate.

He speaks of asking God's forgiveness for his past sins, and then claims that any damning details that have been illuminated by the media and that would make him look like a cad are totally false.

Even worse, is the trotting out of his two adult daughters to defend his past. They are being used as pawns in his quest to become President.

(To be continued)

January 22, 2012 at 10:52 a.m.
alprova said...

(Continued)

There are issues yet to be raised about the man too. In 1994, Rupert Murdoch owned HarperCollins, which offered Newt a $4.5 million dollar advance for two books he was in the process of writing.

After being called to congress to testify in regard to a conversation the two had regarding federal rules on foreign media ownership, Newt was basically forced to refuse the advance.

Does anyone remember the check writing scandal that plagued the House Bank during the early 1990's? The Republicans, who were seeking to take control of the House released a report that implicated many Democrats who had written bad checks without paying any fees or penalties. Newt was also found to have written several bad checks as well, including one for $9,000.00 to the IRS.

He's done a 180 degree flip on climate change, in response to polls that suggest that most Republicans think that climate change is a hoax.

He was in favor of a health care insurance mandate before he came out against it. This is the man who once attacked Republican Rep. Paul Ryan’s Medicare reform plan as "right-wing social engineering."

Following his acceptance of $1.5 million in fees from Freddie Mac, he has ludicrously and publicly called for the imprisonment of those who formerly managed the company.

Quite frankly, I'm appalled that anyone, regardless of their party affiliation, would think for one second that this man, who seems to be made of Teflon at the moment, is capable of ethically representing this nation as President.

He represents everything contrary to what I used to think that Republicans stood for. This is a man that some people feel is the best that the Republicans have to offer as this nation's leader?

This is the man that Christian Conservatives embraced in a bear hug and a smooch on the lips in South Carolina yesterday?

Wow!!

January 22, 2012 at 10:52 a.m.
tipper said...

It is very telling about the Christian right evangelicals who voted strongly in South Carolina for Gingrich. I was always under the impression that the Christian conservatives were all about character, morality, and family values. I would certainly say that Gingrich's history represents none of that. Nor would Gingrich be considered less of an elite than any other politician or Wall Streeter in Washington or New York.

Gingrich's recent attacks on those using the food stamp program, those out of work, and youth who need to clean toilets to learn a "work ethic" apparently seem to be supported by the evangelicals. It really makes one wonder what their real motives are, or are they plain as day?

January 22, 2012 at 10:53 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Actually, Gingrich's success makes sense when you consider a party platform of one plank.

January 22, 2012 at 10:56 a.m.
miraweb said...

Newt started out a Lutheran, became what a friend of his called a "sloppy Baptist" in graduate school, and then became a Catholic two years ago.

Three seems to be Newt's "magic number."

January 22, 2012 at 10:59 a.m.
AndrewLohr said...

What would Jesus do about Newt? MIGHT vote for him as the candidate likely to do the most good along with some bad. I remind y'all that Speaker Newt got the budget into balance, cooperated with the other old party, and let the economy grow, all of which is more than President Obama can say for his own results.

Loving your neighbor includes preferring the best ruler for them, not just for yourself. 'Southerners vote against their own self-interest?' and that's bad, but the hogs at the tax-filled swill bucket vote for the swillmaster-in-chief and that's good? Catering to the rich, and corporate welfare happen (Solyndra anyone? President Bush outlawing the buying of cheap foreign drugs?), but maybe Southerners are generous and the tax eaters are selfishly selling votes which the power-hungry tax distributors selfishly buy with money taken from other people, subsidizing self-destructive and evil behavior. If Speaker Gingrich (and Senators McCain and Dole, not to mention names from the other old party or from Chattanooga) really want to show that they have truly repented of their adulteries, they could give all their worldly goods to their first wives. OK, keep what's encumbered by debt (unless the first ex wants to pay the debts) and enough for until your next paycheck. Then we'll see what their current set of promises are worth. Obviously Newt did wrong. Maybe he's settled down. If he has really repented and asked King Jesus for forgiveness by His blood, he can be forgiven, except by liberals. If your list of sins is as long and heavy as that of the medieval bishop on whose deathbed confession no priest would offer absolution, would you rather be dealt with by Mr Bennett & co or by Jesus Christ?

January 22, 2012 at 11 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

It's not our place to forgive or not forgive Newt, Andrew. That's between him and his maker. However, it is our responsibility to assess the capacity for truth and ethics when electing someone to the most powerful office on earth. I would not want Newt as Constable, much less POTUS.

January 22, 2012 at 11:09 a.m.
miraweb said...

Newt is lucky, Andrew, that a third of voters are too young to remember how well he and Bill Clinton got along. Some of the rest of us still remember the idiocy of the impeachment trial and how Newt was responsible for the government shutdown.

Newt can share credit with Clinton for the economic boom of the 1990s.

They did it by bringing Reagan's massive deficits back into balance by - can we really say this - raising taxes on the rich. This was early (1993) before Newt decided he should drive his party off a cliff (1999).

January 22, 2012 at 11:23 a.m.
potcat said...

Gingrich outpolled Romney with "born again and evangelical Christians",the exit polls showed. Underscoring the role religion played, about 6 in 10 voters said it was important that their candidate share their religious beliefs, and Gingrich bettered Romney among those voters by about a 2-1 margin..

That just shows how Christian these IDIOTS are. In a State with 9.9 percent unemployment, about 80 percent of all voters said they were worried about unemployment and the economy, meanwhile they are so many on Foodstamps,that the poor pathtic people vote for the most immoral man ever. He wants to cut foodstamps and every thing else for the poor, go figure that one out.

January 22, 2012 at 11:26 a.m.
WHS1970 said...

No matter how the right wing nuts spin it, Newt is a HYPOCRITE.

January 22, 2012 at 11:28 a.m.
dude_abides said...

Andrew... the church called. They said quit typing and start tithing, it's 11:30.

January 22, 2012 at 11:30 a.m.
John_Proctor said...

Andrew, Newt can sleep with sheep for all I care as long as I don't own the sheep.

My contempt for him is due to his hypocrisy. He lambasted Slick Willie for his Monicagate sexual escapades while banging his mistress in his second wife's bed. He pilloried the opposition for a lack of ethics and then was fined $300,000 for his own moral transgressions. And, now he has seen the light and all must be forgiven in time for the election? Sorry, but I am not buying it.

He doesn't need my forgiveness nor does he especially want it. He wants my vote and will ask for my forgiveness if that will win it for him. He can have my forgiveness, if it makes him sleep better (with or without his mistress/3rd wife) but he cannot have my vote.

January 22, 2012 at 11:42 a.m.
davisss13 said...

self-righteous carping

A GOP specialty. Gingrich condemned Clinton while having an affair himself. (shakes head)

davisss13, your literalism is getting the best of you. To whom much is given, much is required. Christians can only claim to be debtors to grace. It isn’t surprising that you’ve mistaken the popular, cheap variety of easy forgiveness as true grace. The costly, biblical sort actually does produce martyrs, of whom we, whether religious or irreligious, are not worthy.

lol. Sure buddy... Tell that to serial adulterer (prostitutes) David Vitter, who used the get out of jail free Christian card very, very effectively. THEY JUST DON'T CARE WHEN IT'S A REPUBLICAN. Now the Newtster will give it a go.

I lernt muh lesson, honest

As a matter of fact Vitter was also condemning Clinton... all while frequenting prostitutes, a felony.

Seems to be a pattern here.

Act all self-righteous and stand on a soapbox and yell a lot.

  1. Say 'morals' two hundred million times.

  2. Sleep with whoever is available and if there are none hire one.

  3. Get caught.

  4. Cry a lot, say 'Jesus' and 'forgiveness about two hundred million times.

  5. Carry on as if nothing happened.

  6. Cha ching!

January 22, 2012 at 11:43 a.m.
miraweb said...

I may have given Newt too much credit for the 1990s economic boom. Tom Foley was speaker when the boom started. Newt was on two committees (Joint Printing and Admin) and was the Minority Whip until he became speaker in 1995.

He was fined $300,000 and reprimanded for ethics violations in 1997 for financing two projects and giving false information to the ethics committee.

Newt was pressured to resign as speaker after the November 1998 election. Dick Armey (R-Tx) said then the question is "whether we retain the crew of the Titanic or we look for some new leadership."

January 22, 2012 at 11:46 a.m.
alprova said...

dude_abides wrote: "Andrew... the church called. They said quit typing and start tithing, it's 11:30."

Ouch!!

January 22, 2012 at 11:51 a.m.
davisss13 said...

Newt was pressured to resign as speaker after the November 1998 election. Dick Armey (R-Tx) said then the question is "whether we retain the crew of the Titanic or we look for some new leadership.

He actually said that? Wow. That must have been when 'the Hammer', Tom DeLay, was put in charge. Talk about a two-faced, white collar criminal who used Christianity as a shield.

I think he's even got Newt beat in the ethics department.

January 22, 2012 at 11:53 a.m.
miraweb said...

Delay is still walking free (pending appeal) after his sentencing for money laundering in Jan 2011. He got around to filing his appeal in Aug 2011. His defense is that he was using checks, not cash - so it couldn't have been money laundering.

LINK: Texas 3rd Court Appeal Case Progress

January 22, 2012 at 12:30 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Ikeithlu said: "I would not want Newt as Constable, much less POTUS."

Without a doubt the guy does appear to be rather unstable. Have you heard about the time when Newt wanted to put individuals who brought more than two ounces of marijuana into the U.S. to death. Ezra Klein mentions this one:

“On Saturday’s edition of “Up With Chris Hayes,” Gary Johnson brought up an old Newt Gingrich idea I hadn’t heard before: Putting individuals who brought more than two ounces of marijuana into the United States to death. That sounded extreme, even for Gingrich. So I looked it up. And sure enough, there it is: “The Drug Importer Death Penalty Act of 1996.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/what-are-newt-gingrichs-big-ideas/2011/08/25/gIQApk8pIQ_blog.html#excerpt

January 22, 2012 at 1:47 p.m.

MTJohn said...

I agree with you to that point. However, I'd suggest that the "cost of grace" was not borne by the martyrs, but only by our Lord. It's also important to remember that the promise of Grace is extended to all and is not reserved for or appropriated by people who have done something special to deserve it.


Indeed, martyrs do not bear the cost of saving grace, however they are defined as martyrs by sharing in Christ’s sufferings. They are not saved by their suffering. Martyrdom is a costly response to Christ’s costly grace. He voluntarily disadvantaged himself so that his elect become the undeserving beneficiaries of the price he paid to free them.

I was making the point that following Christ is inescapably costly. The promise that is “extended to all” in western culture (especially in the American south) often omits Christ’s (and Paul’s) promise that self-denial, mercy, justice, and suffering are entailed. America is selling what 20th century martyr Dietrich Bonhoeffer called “cheap grace.” Too many altar calls, too little discipleship. That’s what drives the visceral reactions to American religion that we see on this thread. It bears little resemblance either to historic Christianity or to current Christianity outside the west.

Until Newt sees himself as being in a far worse condition than that of food stamp recipients, … well … This is why I count myself among those still waiting to see the fruits of his professed repentance. To the chagrin of the soap opera addicts, public apologies aren’t necessarily required, but the lack of contrition displayed by his grandstanding, diversionary tactic at the last debate resurrect (unsurprisingly) the character questions that have long bedeviled him.

January 22, 2012 at 2:55 p.m.

davisss13 said ... “Seems to be a pattern here. Act all self-righteous and stand on a soapbox and yell a lot …”

True enough. When religion is espoused, hypocrisy is especially contemptible. But give credit where credit is due. The lurid hypocrisy you describe is an example of the cheap forgiveness so highly prized in American religion (and politics). My point was that it bears little resemblance to real Christianity. I find it interesting that when their respective scandals went down in the 90s, both Newt and Clinton were members of the same branch of Christianity. (And so the whole religion is indicted?)

As we (rightly) scrutinize Newt’s hypocrisy and grandstanding, we would be negligent if we fail to note that President Clinton was not without his own choir-singing, family man pretensions. Nor did he avoid denouncing his opponents on moral grounds. Nor does any politician in our moralistic age. While there is no excuse for either man’s behavior, could it be that they reflect the rank immorality and hypocrisy of the country as a whole? By making it a partisan issue, are we not guilty of our own shuffling and grandstanding?

January 22, 2012 at 4:01 p.m.
AndrewLohr said...

dude, alprova, where were you between 11am and noon? We went to a church service that starts at noon, upstairs in the Keys Carpet office strip between Bojangles and Teriyaki on Ringgold Road. (OK sermon on taking action, but best line in the meeting was "meat for the Adventists for Lent"--we're catholic enough to help an SDA food charity that uses meat for non-SDA clients :) Sometimes we go to a 10:30am meeting off 158, and we've darkened New City's doors more than once.) Jesus forgives sins without reference to the Temple, which is like you or me issuing drivers' licenses without references to the Department of Safety--from N. T. Wright.

Hypocrisy is the tribute that vice pays to virtue--old saying.

Fans of Presidents Clinton, Johnson, Kennedy, FDR, and Wilson say these presided well despite their adulteries in office. Will they please admit, at least in principle, that a president Gingrich MIGHT do the same? And a President Gingrich MAY avoid adultery in office--this week's news is, what, 13 years old?--and his record, and recent political statements, give reason for me to hope that he'd preside much better than President Obama has, though not perfectly.

January 22, 2012 at 4:26 p.m.
MTJohn said...

whats_wrong_with_the_world said...America is selling what 20th century martyr Dietrich Bonhoeffer called “cheap grace.”

W4 - I'd rate a sense of "family values", based on selected proof-texts that completely ignore Amos, somewhere well below "cheap grace".

January 22, 2012 at 4:53 p.m.

AndrewLohr: The problem with Gingrich is not his adultery, but his hypocrisy and arrogance about it. I know you have to be crazy to want the job, but that kind of madness rubs me wrong.

However, if you'd like to discuss some of his policy ideas, we can.

Let's see, there is his idea of putting schoolchildren to work as janitors, there's his belief that if the court makes a decision he disagrees with, the proper course is to ignore their decision and impeach the judge, that a drug dealer of any kind should get the death penalty, and he's upset at the idea that some people want to impose their ideologies on him, so he's intent on imposing his on them first.

No thanks. Gingrich may play well to people who believe his demagoguery, but he's probably not even genuine about it, he's just using it to accomplish his own anti-democratic authoritarian views.

January 22, 2012 at 5 p.m.
MTJohn said...

AndrewLohr said...Fans of Presidents Clinton, Johnson, Kennedy, FDR, and Wilson say these presided well despite their adulteries in office. Will they please admit, at least in principle, that a president Gingrich MIGHT do the same?

Andrew - I don't really care about Newt's philandering and associated hypocrisy. That said, given Newt's record of public dis-service, what is your basis for concluding that he might preside well?

January 22, 2012 at 5:11 p.m.

MTJohn said...I'd rate a sense of "family values", based on selected proof-texts that completely ignore Amos, somewhere well below "cheap grace".

If proof-texting is the crime, both parties are guilty, from the POTUS on down. The religious left can be plenty selective in using scripture to justify its political manipulation of social issues like poverty relief.


NPR just reported that Jeb Bush may enter the race. A Hail Mary may be in the works.

January 22, 2012 at 5:59 p.m.
dude_abides said...

More like a Hail No.

January 22, 2012 at 6:44 p.m.

What about Neil Bush?

January 22, 2012 at 6:51 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

More like a Hail No. POTW

January 22, 2012 at 6:52 p.m.

Nobody is more arrogant than Oteleprompter. Nobody is more smug and spoiled.

January 22, 2012 at 6:53 p.m.

yeah, how dare he not kiss your boots by instead run for President of the United States, and then he has the temerity to win!

January 22, 2012 at 6:55 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

MTJohn said: "We, the people, vote for the candidate who most effectively panders to our selfish interests - not the candidate best qualified to serve all of the people."

I believe it may be more accurate to say that we, the people, vote for the candidate whose Super Pac most effectively panders to our selfish interest, MTJohn. It was certainly the case with Newt in S.C.:

“Gingrich supporters quietly lobbied for help from one of the richest men in America: Sheldon Adelson, a billionaire casino owner and Mr. Gingrich’s longtime friend and patron. Mr. Romney’s supporters were also calling, imploring Mr. Adelson to stay out of the race. . .

"By the time Mr. Gingrich limped into New Hampshire, some of his top backers had given up on Mr. Adelson and begun prospecting elsewhere, including among erstwhile supporters of Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, to finance a counterattack."

But on Friday, the cavalry arrived: a $5 million check from Mr. Adelson to Winning Our Future, a “super PAC” that supports Mr. Gingrich. By Monday morning, the group had reserved more than $3.4 million in advertising time in South Carolina, a huge sum in a state where the airwaves come cheap and the primary is 11 days away. . .

The last-minute injection underscores how the 2010 landmark Supreme Court ruling on campaign finance has made it possible for a wealthy individual to influence an election. Mr. Adelson’s contribution to the super PAC is 1,000 times the $5,000 he could legally give directly to Mr. Gingrich’s campaign this year.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/10/us/politics/sheldon-adelson-a-billionaire-gives-gingrich-a-big-lift.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

January 22, 2012 at 7:14 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

About 78 more cartoons this year criticizing anyone republican running for president this year.

Someone needs to put a picture of Clay Bennett in Wikipedia under One-Trick-Pony.

January 22, 2012 at 10:09 p.m.
hambone said...

FAMILY VALUES!!

Using daughters from your first wife to convince everyone that your second wife is lying about your third wife!!!

January 22, 2012 at 10:30 p.m.

The family that engages in a media campaign together is the family that...I'm at a loss of how to finish it.

January 22, 2012 at 10:36 p.m.
dude_abides said...

BRP... your posts are like typographical halitosis. "77 more cartoons until... 45 cartoons until..." yawn. Find another kick to get on, this was boring at 79.

January 22, 2012 at 10:48 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

dude_abides said... "BRP... your posts are like typographical halitosis. "77 more cartoons until... 45 cartoons until..." yawn. Find another kick to get on, this was boring at 79."

It is not hard to imagine getting down to 1 before election day gets here. Only The Wart has the power to save this page from terminal banality.

January 22, 2012 at 10:51 p.m.
alprova said...

hambone wrote: "FAMILY VALUES!! Using daughters from your first wife to convince everyone that your second wife is lying about your third wife!!!"

Hilarious!!

January 22, 2012 at 11:02 p.m.

BRP, don't underestimate your own empowerment! You can create interesting and insightful posts that are full of perspicacious wisdom!

Fight the boring banality which saps the souls of men like a suckling parasite on the straining muscles of the laboring genius, with the purple prose of expansive effulgence!

January 22, 2012 at 11:19 p.m.
alprova said...

BRP, you are hopelessly and totally pathetic.

"Waaaaahh!! Clay's picking on Republicans again!!"

"Someone needs to put a picture of Clay Bennett in Wikipedia under One-Trick-Pony."

Someone needs to enter you in Wikipedia under the heading;

"Cartoonist's Obsessive Stalkers."

January 22, 2012 at 11:41 p.m.
alprova said...

Uh Oh...Are there Republicans who were guilty of voter fraud?

South Carolina's Attorney General, Alan Wilson has notified the U.S. Justice Department of potential voter fraud.

Wilson says an analysis found 953 ballots cast by voters were people who are listed as dead.

He has asked the State Law Enforcement Division to investigate.

http://www.wtoc.com/story/16571904/south-carolinas-attorney-general-detects-voter-fraud-for-primaries

January 23, 2012 at 5:56 a.m.
hambone said...

NO, NO, NO. It can't be! Voter fraud is only a democrat thing!

And didn't the GOP require a photo ID!!

January 23, 2012 at 6:16 a.m.
whatsnottaken said...

I knew as soon as Newt won in S.C. that he'd be Clay target du jour. Always hittin' on the so-called GOP front-runner. Cmon Clay, you're an award winner. Don't be so predictable!

January 23, 2012 at 9:43 a.m.
chet123 said...

Newt gingrich is not the real issue. The real issue is the southern church who claim to be about family value,morality,and character..but i see just the opposite in their action and ministry....when a republican have tregress they move the goal post....where was redemption with Bill Clinton...Hmmmmmm....this really is an indictment on the phony evangelical southern churchs....they are hypocrites and the whole world see them for what they are.....they talk hate and division...then put a halo over their head........they never talk about greed....they suport it.......they never talk about "usury" about they dont give a rat butt about being christ-like.........the book of AMOS...condemn their kind of phony worship....WHAT A JOKE!!!!!

January 23, 2012 at 9:59 a.m.
jesse said...

just read on huff.post the rasmussen poll now shows newt w/ a 10 point lead over mitt. in fla.

how about them apples!!

January 23, 2012 at 11:29 a.m.
mymy said...

SC Voter Fraud-does not say in the recent primary election, but recent elections-so wait and see. Another reason for voter ID:

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) - South Carolina's attorney general has notified the U.S. Justice Department of potential voter fraud.

Attorney General Alan Wilson sent details of an analysis by the Department of Motor Vehicles to U.S. Attorney Bill Nettles.

In a letter dated Thursday, Wilson says the analysis found 953 ballots cast by voters listed as dead. In 71 percent of those cases, ballots were cast between two months and 76 months after the people died. That means they "voted" up to 6 1/3 years after their death.

The letter doesn't say in which elections the ballots were cast.

The analysis came out of research for the state's new voter identification law. The U.S. Justice Department denied clearance of that law.

Wilson told Nettles he asked the State Law Enforcement Division to investigate.

January 23, 2012 at 11:43 a.m.
mymy said...

One more thing: Has everybody got their snacks lined up for the yearly "Comedy Hour" from Obama on Tues. evening.

January 23, 2012 at 12:17 p.m.
acerigger said...

SC Voter Fraud,yes,let's do wait and see if they can produce evidence,not just allegations.

January 23, 2012 at 12:29 p.m.
John_Proctor said...

Actually, I'll have my popcorn ready for the rebuttal to Tuesday's SOTU speech. The "Obama is the Devil" crowd will be in fine voice I'm sure. That's the speech that belongs on Comedy Central.

January 23, 2012 at 1:16 p.m.
chet123 said...

NO MYMY! But i have my popcorn and soda ready for the republican debate tonite

January 23, 2012 at 1:22 p.m.
chet123 said...

The woman is gingrich's(family value man)3rd wife!

January 23, 2012 at 1:24 p.m.

Alprova claims to be a businessman yet he bends over for a Marxist. Why don't you apply to be a double for Michael Moore?

January 23, 2012 at 1:27 p.m.
hambone said...

Francis by any other name is still---

FRACISTROLLMONKEY

January 23, 2012 at 1:35 p.m.
alprova said...

chattanoogatennesseeusa wrote: "Alprova claims to be a businessman yet he bends over for a Marxist."

Calling the President a Marxist only exposes your ignorance of true Marxism, what feeds our economy, of President Obama and what makes him tick.

"Why don't you apply to be a double for Michael Moore?"

Why don't I? I wasn't aware that there was an opening or need for a Michael Moore double. It would be a waste of time for me to apply for the position, probably because I look nothing like Michael Moore.

I do like his work very much. I don't agree with every point he makes, but he does a fine job of exposing wrongs in our society.

January 23, 2012 at 1:55 p.m.
whatsthefuss said...

Did anyone watch Newt's lovely ex and listen to what she said? Maybe I'm the one that missed it but what I heard was that Newt told the worn out ugly bag that looks like she lives inside a vodka bottle that he would no longer be requiring the services of her Hidey Hole. Not that he was requesting an open marriage. Once again a far stretch from the loons on the left. He is moving on and has a shiny new model to ride around in. She just wishes he still had a use for such a run down hag. Well, sorry honey but he doesn't and the man must still have skills. All you jealous old farts that can't even get it up with Viagra are simply sorry and lame. Not Big Newt. He is aware if you don't use it you lose it. Newt is the man!

January 23, 2012 at 2:05 p.m.
mountainlaurel said...

Good grief! Here are those words again – banana republic. This time it’s former President George W Bush’s attoney general, Michael Mukasy, using them to express his disdain of Newt Gingrich’s prespective that a U.S. President is above the court:

“Newt Gingrich has pledged that on his first day as president he will set up a constitutional showdown by ordering the military to defy a supreme court ruling extending some legal rights to foreign terrorism suspects and captured enemy combatants in US custody.

The Republican contender told a forum of anti-abortion activists ahead of South Carolina's primary election that as president he would ignore supreme court rulings he regards as legally flawed. . . "If the court makes a fundamentally wrong decision, the president can in fact ignore it," said Gingrich to cheers.

“Gingrich has said before that he regards the president as above the court when the two branches have fundamentally differing views but he went further in committing himself to setting up a constitutional crisis on his first day in office.

The Republican candidate cited what he said were precedents, including Abraham Lincoln's refusal to accept the Dred Scott decision denying that former slaves were citizens.

Gingrich's interpretations have previously been met with disdain. President George W Bush's attorney general, Michael Mukasey, has said that a president selectively ignoring supreme court decisions would turn the US in to a banana republic.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jan/19/newt-gingrich-ignore-supreme-court-president

January 23, 2012 at 2:13 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

I thought that you Libtards firmly believed that it is exactly our place to forgive. Weren’t you the people that said if a person’s private sins did not affect his/her public function that it is none of our business.

Not if you are representing a party who claims to be the party of "family values" and propose to legislate morality for everyone else. Newt's behavior is only of issue because he is a hypocrite and is dishonest. Otherwise what he does behind closed doors is HIS business.

January 23, 2012 at 2:48 p.m.
potcat said...

The truth is that today's conservatives are united in their opposition to the Obama agenda,and not a whole lot else.

Gingrich has been emphasizing his conservative credentials - and is audacious enough - to claim credit both for Clinton's balanced budgets and for Reagan's unbalanced ones.

The Goverment - sponsored mortgage company Freddie Mac paid the Newtster two MILLION dollars in consulting fees, and he has been depicted as an unprincipaled opportunist by his own party ( during his Speakership, he was fined $300,000 dollars for ethics violations).

You go Republican Christian family values cult,you are truly wolves in sheeps clothing!

January 23, 2012 at 3:57 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

At least the Conservatives makes the attempt to lead a productive, moral and ethical life. Since the Libtards make no such attempt they have the advantage of no one holding them to a high standard.

Are you insinuating that I am not living a productive, moral and ethical life because I am a liberal????? You are a piece of work.

January 23, 2012 at 4:06 p.m.
timbo said...

Let's see, is Newt a hypocrite like say....Bill Clinton, John Kennedy, Edward (Chappaquiddick) Kennedy, John Edwards, etc., etc. Some of your liberal icons weren't exactly squeaky clean. Of course the rest of you liberal hypocrites have selective morality.

Now, let's ignore the libs, because right now it is none of their business, and analyze the election on Saturday. The democrats absolutely suck but the Republicans only suck just a little bit less. Newt Gingrich’s win in South Carolina has the Republican Establishment Elite throwing a hissy fit. They just don’t get it. I will try to explain. Obama won last time because independents were upset that Bush, an establishment Republican, and a Republican congress ran up the deficit $5 trillion. The point is that you self-serving elitist Republicans are just luke warm Democrats. Anything to reduce their influence or slap them around is alright with me. Newt might be a hypocrite but is verbalizing the feelings of millions of conservatives that are sick and tired of the elite.
Jumping on Newt about his past will just backfire on Romney and the elites. We conservatives have been fooled by you people too many times. On the budget, the bank bailout, warmongering, spending, the Patriot act, etc. etc. none are based on conservative, constitutional principles. The Republican Establishment, by being “pragmatic” made it possible for Obama to win in 2008. Now you want us to trust that you “get it” and you’ve changed. The fact is that you will do the same thing that Bush and the congress did before. You are just Obama-lite. Well, I am not falling for it.

January 23, 2012 at 4:30 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

Let's see, is Newt a hypocrite like say....Bill Clinton, John Kennedy, Edward (Chappaquiddick) Kennedy, John Edwards, etc., etc. Some of your liberal icons weren't exactly squeaky clean. Of course the rest of you liberal hypocrites have selective morality.

You clearly missed the point.

January 23, 2012 at 4:37 p.m.
timbo said...

Well, that's ok but I wasn't responding to you...It was a general response to what most of the liberals are saying.

January 23, 2012 at 4:43 p.m.
lkeithlu said...

And my point is that these politicians don't always get a free pass. John Edward's career is over. Bill Clinton and John Kennedy rarely took the moral "high" road, and certainly didn't judge others the way the religious right and their adopted lapdogs the GOP do. No politician is squeaky clean (except maybe Carter). But to have someone like Newt claim that he espouses "family values" and religious virtue is ridiculous. The other GOP candidates and Obama are much better role models by far in this realm.

The GOP needs to shut up about social issues, marriage, gays and abortion and focus on the economy.

January 23, 2012 at 4:53 p.m.
BigRidgePatriot said...

Even the comments are boring today. Who cares about Newt? This is about Romney being a Ken doll establishment pick that does not represent the wishes of the republican base. The republican establishment is a bunch of two faced wimps that does not have the guts to truly stand up for conservative principles. They wonder why they cannot wrap up this nomination?

You don't win elections by trying to marginalize the most politically motivated part of your base.

We live in a country now where the "ruling class" jokes that more than half of what they do is beyond the Constitution. Many of us are just sick and tired of it. Gingrich can talk the talk but he walks the same walk as Romney and Santorum. The only one that is at all different is Paul.

January 23, 2012 at 5:43 p.m.
alprova said...

Timbo wrote: "Let's see, is Newt a hypocrite like say....Bill Clinton, John Kennedy, Edward (Chappaquiddick) Kennedy, John Edwards, etc., etc. Some of your liberal icons weren't exactly squeaky clean. Of course the rest of you liberal hypocrites have selective morality."

Have any of us defended any established act of immorality committed by any Democrat? You offer this as if that is the case, and it's not.

"The democrats absolutely suck but the Republicans only suck just a little bit less."

Okay, if you say so.

"Newt Gingrich’s win in South Carolina has the Republican Establishment Elite throwing a hissy fit. They just don’t get it. I will try to explain. Obama won last time because independents were upset that Bush, an establishment Republican, and a Republican congress ran up the deficit $5 trillion."

I don't recall the debt being a high priority campaign issue at all until after Obama took office.

"The point is that you self-serving elitist Republicans are just luke warm Democrats. Anything to reduce their influence or slap them around is alright with me."

Okay.

"Newt might be a hypocrite but is verbalizing the feelings of millions of conservatives that are sick and tired of the elite."

And you don't think that he is simply verbalizing what the majority of people who support him, want to hear? You don't actually think for a second that he would actually institute that which he campaigns on, do you?

"Jumping on Newt about his past will just backfire on Romney and the elites. We conservatives have been fooled by you people too many times."

Is that a fact?

"On the budget, the bank bailout, warmongering, spending, the Patriot act, etc. etc. none are based on conservative, constitutional principles."

Woah...you have the audacity to claim that bailing out the banks, the wars, and the Patriot Act were arranged by the Democrats? You really need to get busy and do some research on that. You're full of crap.

January 23, 2012 at 7:19 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote:

I previously wrote: "both women were coincidentally facing serious health issues."

"I think we have covered this already and revealed it to be B.S."

No it is not. It has been well established that both women were having health issues just before he filed for divorce from them.

"You are continually claiming to be an old-line Republican and that the party has left you and not that you left the party. I’m fairly confident that this is a false flag tactic that is nothing but B.S."

I don't recall ever stating that I felt the party left me. I absolutely stopped supporting Republicans, but am still a registered Republican.

As to your opinion that my former status as a Republican supporter is untrue, I really don't care what you believe.

"However, to prove your point, give us the party platform that you did support, at one time, that is now closer to the Libtard positions you currently support."

The catalyst that turned my stomach sour against the Republicans began during the health care reform debates with the telling of all the unconscionable lies by just about every grandstanding Republican that weighed in on the issue.

I find the Republicans hypocrites for at one time espousing the concept of individual responsibility, and then doing a complete 180 degree turn on that issue when an individual mandate was proposed as part of the overhaul of out system of health care.

Republicans have endeared themselves to the insurance lobby of this nation and they have fought tooth and nail to protect the status quo.

Their dedication to reducing or refusing to tax the mega-rich so much as one dollar more in this nation, at the expense of a disappearing middle-class that is fighting to make ends meet, is another pet-peeve of mine.

Republican proposals to privatize, amend, or eliminate long-standing entitlement programs to put them further out of reach of those who count on them to be there when the time comes is completely unacceptable. Case in point: Raising the age requirement to 70 years in order to qualify for full Social Security benefits.

Never-ending attempts to prevent women from obtaining legitimate and legalized abortions, especially in the case of incest, rape, and when the mother's life is in danger, is not something I support at all. If Republicans did more to convince me that they are pro-life when it came to anything other than embryos, I might be more inclined to step over the line on their side a little more.

Need I write anything else? Those are just the highlights.

January 23, 2012 at 7:57 p.m.
dude_abides said...

timbo... you can still vote for Herman Cain if you like, or just keep picking republicans and pretending they're not republicans. Newt was the freaking Speaker of the House, for God's sake, and you're playing him like he's some sort of new age non-establishment outsider! He's the stalest also-ran in American politics.

January 23, 2012 at 8:17 p.m.
alprova said...

whatsthefuss wrote: "Did anyone watch Newt's lovely ex and listen to what she said? Maybe I'm the one that missed it but what I heard was that Newt told the worn out ugly bag that looks like she lives inside a vodka bottle that he would no longer be requiring the services of her Hidey Hole."

I've never read anywhere that Marianne Gingrich abused/abuses alcohol. Granted, the woman has obviously not had a face lift and would look better if she had one. Newt has probably not traded in his personal automobiles for newer models as often as he has traded in wives.

"Not that he was requesting an open marriage. Once again a far stretch from the loons on the left. He is moving on and has a shiny new model to ride around in. She just wishes he still had a use for such a run down hag."

It's been my experience in life to witness many times, people who point out faults of others, particularly when it comes to other people's appearance, that they usually wouldn't win a beauty contest themselves.

I find your comments rather nasty and you really ought to be ashamed of yourself for offering them.

"Well, sorry honey but he doesn't and the man must still have skills. All you jealous old farts that can't even get it up with Viagra are simply sorry and lame."

Well, I think I have a picture in my mind, at least, as to what you feel is important when it comes to being a man or a husband.

"Not Big Newt. He is aware if you don't use it you lose it. Newt is the man!"

You don't think that it has more to do with the money that he now has, and what he can lavish on his wife in the form of baubles to keep her around?

Do you recall the half-million dollar revolving credit account at Tiffany's and Company that was reported last May?

Calista is a trophy wife, and just one of many things that he thinks he needs, in part, to propel him into the White House.

January 23, 2012 at 8:25 p.m.
hambone said...

Was Newt the one that paid off the Tiffany account, or was this some sort of money laudering scam?

January 23, 2012 at 10:18 p.m.

If candidates and elected officials were spending as much time confessing their sins as they were ducking, weaving, and proclaiming their righteousness, we would think about politics very differently. That politics has become a dirty word is a tragedy, and it is serves to undermine ordered liberty and republican government. Reporters (and cartoonists) latch onto the sordid and salacious because they know that we revel in it. Candidates raise absurd amounts of money to buy absurdly-priced air-time because, even though we protest that their ads annoy us, they know we’re easily influenced by their demagoguery.

They don’t confess because we don’t confess. If we gave more serious attention to individual and corporate confession, our standing in other parts of the world would improve dramatically, and we would learn to trust one another again in our communities.

We call the writer of much of the New Testament a saint, but he called himself “the chief of sinners.” He also said that “confession is good for the soul.” Of course, he didn’t mean the cheap commodity that often goes by the name “confession” in America. He meant the kind that includes true repentance and true faith. But we will have none of it.

Is horse-race, personality-driven politics really the problem? Is it really the solution? Our failure to confess, repent, and believe plays a far more significant role in WWWTW.

January 23, 2012 at 11:17 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote: "Looks like I was right. Your claiming to be, or was, a Republican is a B.S. false flag scam. We can at least dispense with any future discussion of that, can't we?"

Your opinion on the subject has no bearing on me. I am not known for lying. I have no reason to lie. Believe what you wish and yes, there will be no further discussion between you and I about it.

"As for the health issues of Newt's first two wives your are at liberty to post your evidence at anytime. Until then we can give your position the consideration it deserves."

I've presented it to you already. You have chosen to disregard it. There is no way that I am about to dance with you again.

Who's this "we" crap? You're out there on that limb all by your lonesome. You speak only for yourself.

January 24, 2012 at 1:07 a.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote: "Gingrich had 84 ethics charges filed against him but all were dropped except one. The one that was not dropped claimed that Gingrich falsely claimed tax-exempt status for a college course he was teaching. The $300,000 dollars he paid was not a fine but was a “cost assessment” to cover the extra costs to the committee for what they claimed was Gingrich’s interfering and delaying their activities."

After a year-long investigation, the charges against him were combined into a single count of engaging "in conduct that did not reflect creditably on the House of Representatives." In return, Gingrich agreed to admit to the violations, and face a reprimand and the financial penalty.

He publicly stated that he had brought discredit to the House by failing to ensure that the financing of various projects would not violate federal tax law and admitted to giving the ethics committee false information.

In October 1994 he said GOPAC was involved in setting up a college course that was financed with tax-deductible money. In December 1994, he said GOPAC was not involved.

"The committee later admitted that one of Gingrich’s lawyers was the culprit responsible for incorrect information but still claimed that he should have known what his legal team was doing."

If you ask me, that claim was an easy out for Gingrich. Nobody was out to crucify the man, after all.

"So what are you left with? A political hit job."

Oh please. If the man had been totally innocent, he would have stood his ground to the very end. As it was, he took a plea deal to salvage at least part of his reputation.

"The hefty sanction imposed on Gingrich was described as a "cost assessment" and not a fine, and designed to reimburse the committee for prolonging the investigation."

A "fine" is defined as a sum of money required to be paid as a penalty for an offense. No one disputes the fact that the money was assessed due to his guilty plea. Had he been exonerated completely, which in no manner was the final outcome, he would not have been assessed a dime. It was indeed a fine.

January 24, 2012 at 1:45 a.m.
lkeithlu said...

Sounds like David Barton has been messing with that history.

January 24, 2012 at 7:09 a.m.
whatsthefuss said...

Poor little Alpo, I wrote that gem with you & Clay and a few other select bloggers I had in mind. If you wish to speak to being mean & hateful look no further than your own words. As for my choice of women and my quality of being a husband, I believe marriage is between two people and if one is to be public with everything, and I mean everything that has been shared during a marriage, which in my opinion should never happen, {no class, low class} it should only be aired with all present so both sides of the story are presented and the other party is able to defend themselves. The ex Mrs. Newt I saw displayed all the traits of someone held up in a closet with a bottle. Believe me, that is not a woman any man would wish to be married to after witnessing that display of hatred. Sour grapes is all you saw there. Marriage takes a great deal of compassion, forgiveness, understanding and effort. I didn't hear her speak about any effort on her part to save their union. Also I read the jealous saps on here going on about his credit line at the jewelry store. Funny his ex didn't mention such a thing and most likely because she was also showered with plenty of those things that mean so much to women during her tenure as Mrs. Newt Gingrich. Welcome to America. The one you hate when someone has more than you do. Now back to the truth. You know, your side, my side and the truth. Oh, sorry, I forgot you don't. You are the only honest truthful person on the planet. Mr. Alpo Right! Now get off the computer, go get a 2x4 and try to wack that thing off. If it doesn't come to life well, it leaves you little choice but to shrivel up and die! I'm sure you will continue to spread your nonsense on here until then. I don't visit often but I felt it necessary to tell everyone how I felt about the circus presented to us by the very left media we are subjected to every day in this country and their attempt to convince us their lies are facts. The timing was perfect even though it was old news and not at all even close to the truth. "Hell hath no fury as a woman scorned" Perhaps if the ex Mrs. G worked a little harder at her marriage she would still hold the title sans the ex? Alpo, I have an idea. Why don't you go shower the ex Gingrich with expensive gifts and dinners and ask for her hand in marriage. You seem to find her attractive and possess qualities you find enduring. Then get back to us in a few years and let us all know how it's going. She may just be the perfect woman for you. And to that I agree! It will be a match made in heaven! Enjoy! And never forget. Newts the man, NOT YOU!!! I hope you enjoy your new president.

January 24, 2012 at 8:33 a.m.
alprova said...

whatsthefuss wrote: "Poor little Alpo, I wrote that gem with you & Clay and a few other select bloggers I had in mind."

I wish I could say that I am honored.

"If you wish to speak to being mean & hateful look no further than your own words."

Really? What words would those be?

"The ex Mrs. Newt I saw displayed all the traits of someone held up in a closet with a bottle. Believe me, that is not a woman any man would wish to be married to after witnessing that display of hatred."

I saw no hatred at all from her. She even defended the man at times.

"Marriage takes a great deal of compassion, forgiveness, understanding and effort. I didn't hear her speak about any effort on her part to save their union."

I'm sorry, but if my spouse came to me and asked me for an open marriage after 18 years, declaring at the same time that it was a-okay with my spouse's sexual partners, I would pretty much write off my marriage as being over.

"Also I read the jealous saps on here going on about his credit line at the jewelry store. Funny his ex didn't mention such a thing and most likely because she was also showered with plenty of those things that mean so much to women during her tenure as Mrs. Newt Gingrich."

Not likely. Newt made his fortune AFTER he left Congress. He left Marianne shortly after leaving Congress as well.

"Hell hath no fury as a woman scorned. Perhaps if the ex Mrs. G worked a little harder at her marriage she would still hold the title sans the ex?"

But of course. It's her fault that the man goes out and cheats.

"Alpo, I have an idea. Why don't you go shower the ex Gingrich with expensive gifts and dinners and ask for her hand in marriage."

I'm quite married already and happily I might add.

"You seem to find her attractive and possess qualities you find enduring."

I just don't believe in kicking people due to their looks.

"I hope you enjoy your new president."

Newt Gingrich will never be the President of the United States...period.

January 24, 2012 at 9:14 p.m.
alprova said...

tu_quoque wrote: "It does look like I provide links to support my points and you provide empty rhetoric.:

Is that a fact? Every point I raised came from your quoted article. Go back and read it.

It sure is funny that you have a habit of citing every article that I use to research points that I make on other subjects, but this time you didn't know that I used your research material to refute your point? Hilarious.

"Do you deny the truth of the AP article that I posted earlier?"

Not at all. I used it in fact to rebut your post. Look it up.

"Why did you skip the link to the IRS investigation?"

Because that ruling wasn't relevant to what he plead guilty to two years prior to that February 1999 ruling by the IRS.

January 18, 2007..."the committee had not reached a conclusion about whether Gingrich had violated tax laws, that matter will be left to the Internal Revenue Service. The committee plans to make available its files to the IRS."

January 24, 2012 at 9:33 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.