Someone else here mentioned the fact that Gingrich was considering running for the Presidency, so I was prompted to post this question. I know that a lot of conservatives find Bill Clinton's private behavior objectionable, but is Newt Gingrich really any better? After all, he dumped his CANCER-STRICKEN wife in her hospital room to be with his mistress!Cheating is bad enough, but it's even worse when you're heartless enough to drop a bomb like that on someone who's dealing with a serious illness!
2007-07-25 05:38:11 · 16 answers · asked by tangerine 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
danielle: What makes you think that Newt wouldn't do that if he were Pres?
2007-07-25 05:50:27 · update #1
I have issues with how each of them conducted their personal lives.
Bill Clinton had the added problem of committing the exact same crimes Scooter Libby was convicted of - perjury and obstruction of justice. Clinton essentially accepted a plea deal.
Maybe one could argue that these actions were part of his "private life" because they arose out of a civil suit against him - sexual harassment. But again, crime is crime. I'd rather not have a president who committed a felony.
PS To give you a straight answer: based on the evidence, and to the extent I am asked to judge, YES. Our society generally deems criminal activity to be more serious a "sin" than marital infidelity, even what could be categorized as "emotional cruelty." And again, we have only the latter with Gingrich, and both with Clinton.
Although I did vote for Clinton, each time.
I was different then.
PPS I assume both were hypocrites too - Gingrich about infidelity and Clinton about women's rights.
PPPS I would never pass the "morals" test for president myself! :)
2007-07-25 05:43:42 · answer #1 · answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
As far as I am concerned, Mr. Gingrich, is just as his first name implies, a slimy Newt. No, he is not more morally upstanding than Clinton. Clinton eventually admitted to his wrongdoing, Gingrich never did. Newt has been divorced several times, Clinton has made up with his wife, and did not get divorced.
I agree that the bomb he dropped on his wife while she was in the hospital with cancer is totally heartless, to some it shows some sort of 'inner strength,' perverted as it may seem.
But you have to convince people like Bill O'Reilly, Rush Limbaugh, and Sean Hannity of this, because they have the biggest mouths, and speak the most, when it comes to conservative propaganda.
2007-07-25 05:45:12 · answer #2 · answered by Rocco R 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I agree. I know I know Clinton couldn't keep Mr. Johnson in his pants but with him we were not in the red! I admire what Clinton did in the "working body" of his presidency. He did get us on track and he didn't push Big Brother into our pants pocket! Boehner is a weak individual. He also could work better with the President but won't. I mean let's face it......he needs to work with Obama for US the people!! Right? So why not TRY. It's like helping people on M&D section understand that yes your divorced....but you have to work together for the sake of the child you created.
2016-05-18 01:18:35 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think one is morally more upstanding than the other. I wouldn't vote for Gingrich simply because I believe he is vain and self absorbed. I didn't vote for Clinton because I don't believe I could trust a word that came out of his mouth. That has nothing to do with his trysts. T4
2007-07-25 16:33:17 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
No he isn't.I believe he's worse but like with Clinton I consider his personal life to be irrelevant.His idea's and policy proposals are enough to stop me from ever considering supporting him.
Conservatives who cared what Clinton did aren't very consistent if they don't care what Newt did..
2007-07-25 05:49:38 · answer #5 · answered by justgoodfolk 7 · 4⤊ 1⤋
Gingrich is a hypocrite pure and simple. The man actually attacked Clinton for having an affair while he himself was having one!
2007-07-25 05:42:26 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
Wait a minute! I thought democrats believed that personal conduct has nothing to do with the ability to lead. That's certainly what America heard while Clinton was commiting serial adultery and sexual molestation while in office.
2007-07-25 05:43:07 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
as a card carrying neocon, (and proud of it dangit), gingrich represents all that is wrong with american politics. as for as morality goes, very few pro politicos are morality models. that's just the way it is, always has been always will be.
2007-07-25 05:46:11 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
I don't condone what Newt did,but the President should not treat the White house like a whorehouse and harass women.
2007-07-25 05:44:03 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
no, he is not morally Superior to Clinton in that regard but has a lot more common sense than bill regarding political issues.
the problem as i see it is that liberal excuse bill, con don't excuse it but it is pretty much a fact of life that sex scandals on both side make ppl con sick but liberals don't seem to mind it too much.
2007-07-25 05:45:01 · answer #10 · answered by ? 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋