Who's Lying Now?

The grumbling isn't over at all when it involves Newt Gingrich's behaviour toward his now-ex, Marianne Gingrich, whom he unceremoniously dumped at the onset of her serious illness for his mistress of 6 years (now wife), Callista.

The guns are out on the hypocrisy he so blithely ignored when he was doing his best to impeach President Clinton for his mindless dalliances with the now infamous intern with whom he "did not have sexual relations..." while Newt was doing his own "having sexual relations" on-the-side thingy.

What's the difference, you may ask? Newt wasn't president. He was simply the Speaker of the House! The gavel-banger of all things immoral and corrupt in the Democratic administration! The "idea" man; the face of all that was so very chaste in the Republican party at that time.

With an unflattering ABC interview making the rounds from the former Mrs. Gingrich stating that she doesn't believe Newt has the moral character to be president, wanted an "open marriage" (ahem), the Comments sections on several websites flashing the story, reek of the usual war between Democrats and Republicans:

(R) "Oh no you don't, you Liberal a-hole! What about JFK? John Edwards, huh?"
(D) "That's not what we're talking about here. It's Gingrich's hypocrisy."
(R) "You are saying that cheater Bill Clinton was moral enough to stay in the White House but not Newt because he cheated? That's lame, man."
(D) "At least Clinton kept the economy strong. Repubs are such jerks. More affairs on your side of the aisle than ours, genius!"
(R) "Go f-k yourself!"
(D) "Better than doing it with a Republican hypocrite!"

And so it goes, back and forth. There is no point to this comparison, really. Whether a married Republican cheats, or a Democrat breaks his vows, the bottom line seems clear: It's The Menz of Power syndrome. Period. That's all there is. In addition, these guys are, well, GUYS. Guys on a power trip. Add to it that they are politicians, and what you have are professional liars and back-door squires (in more ways than one).

The truth went out of politics a very long time ago, particularly with regard to personal issues. Politicians, as with any American citizen, have a "right to privacy." The only situation in which I believe it is important for a president to be honest with the world and their country regarding personal issues is when - a) they have a life-threatening illness that makes it impossible to do the job; b) they pound on their bully pulpit over moral issues and plan to take away the private rights of their citizens while behaving in the precise manner they tout as "inappropriate" for a "Leader"; c) hide financial gains made through dubious dealings.

Those kinds of things. So, be it a Republican or a Democrat, people are people = flaws. Those with sincere ethical and moral standards are also of different parties. So, JFK messed around with many women while he was president? Methinks he did the same before he was the Leader of the Free World. Newt messed-around on his wife for years but isn't considered presidential material for that reason? The tune from Democrats is that if he lied to his wife for 6 years, he would have no difficulty lying to the country were he to become president.

Excuse me while I choke. Chances are Newt's already lying about his true beliefs on race relations. Obama doesn't tell the full truth, either.  Most presidents have to parse words when serious sheet is flying behind-the-scenes on both the national and international level. Military stuff. Bomb threats. Aliens. (Hah!)

Therefore, although I don't back infidelity, it's extremely naive to think that somewhere along the way to the White House, the Menz of Power have been tempted by "other women" and yet somehow managed to race away unscathed from the talons of so-called "easy sex" because they belonged to one particular political party and one perfect wife.

I think that Mr. Gingrich is an ass primarily because he is one in my "book." Were he a Democrat I would feel the same. The argument between Dem's and GOPer's is really a moot one. Yes, I understand that most of the negative reactions to GOPer's who have been caught in affairs stems primarily from the pious, "I'm a loving husband and go to church every Sunday" speeches and pristine images which does wave the Hypocrisy Flag quite high. I don't care for Bible-thumping by those who are going home (or to a hotel) to do exactly what they preach is so abhorrent to the "moral fiber of America."

But, although I certainly don't want Gingrich as the next President of the United States for reasons well beyond his personal failings, the argument I'd love to see on more Message Boards and Comments sections involves what a candidate wants to do for (or TO) our country. You know, the "What have you done (will do) for me lately?" measurement. Not how slippery all the zippers have been over the years.

Link to Marianne Gingrich's Part 1 Interview: Bitter Chills

Image via: http://www.signs-of-a-cheater.com