"To take an ex-wife and make it two days before the primary a significant question in a presidential campaign is as close to despicable as anything I can imagine."

Really??? Serving your wife divorce papers while she is in the cancer ward all the time schtooping the next strumpet seems alot more despicable to me.

@Old Navy Man: it's not Dem election season, that is why it's not important right now. If Jessie Jackson was running for office, it would be a good topic to get into, however, we are dealing with the Repubs, and what they offer their party. Remember, this is a man who cheated on his first wife, cheated on his second wife(and asked for an open marriage after being busted), and is now married a third time. I am willing to bet his latest wife is scared to death when she gets a cold or the flu, because it takes her out of action for a few days, which could lead to wife #4.

Is it bad that it happens 2 days before the SC vote? Yeah, probably, but in primary season, there is a vote very week, or so it seems. It is hard to have something like this in a down cycle, when there are no down cycles. Maybe next time he will take a few extra minutes to think about cheating on his latest wife.

I don't like all this negative comments on my man Newt. He is a family man, that is why he has 3 who we know about and a few more in hiding.

Have all of you done your good deed for the day,...and Googled SANTORUM?

We must keep his description HIGH on the page.

Please Google at least once a day.

Newt, I feel thou doth protest too much.

Fed up in NYS,

You just made the point -- how come it is you DID have a problem when Clinton was cheating, but you don't when it's Newt. It's worse for Newt, in many ways, because he was lambasting Clinton for cheating while doing the same thing himself.

Even if you agree with Newt's positions, he's a terrible, terrible person. Do we really want that kind of person leading our country?

@FedUpInNYS

Why do you assume "liberals" have no problem with Clinton cheating on his wife? Have you ever met anyone who thought that was OK?

Your entire argument (and schmear attempt) is moot because you made an incorrect assumption based on your own personal bias. Time to stop the name-calling and bias based on incorrectly assumed positions and start using your brain.

@FedUpInNYS

Nobody Likes what Clinton did back then (Maybe somebody divorced for more than once)... but compare to Newt... Clinton is a saint!!!

Lets look at the real issues here. Unemployment, If Newt can turn the economy around I do not care what he does in his private life. That is why it is private.

John King knew ahead of time that Newt Gingrich would react to this incendiary question. So he got it out of the way. He wasn't accused of using campaign funds for his hidden mistress (Edwards) or lying in court about sex (Clinton). Every president and candidate has personal, private issues. These issues haven't kept any administration from creating jobs, balancing budgets, evaluating foreign policy, starting or ending wars.

A lot of righties on here seem to jump right in and mention Clinton and Edwards while defending Gingrich. The main difference here is that Clinton and Edwards haven't come out against gay marriage in "defense of the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman".

The republicans are the party of marriage hypocrites and people that are so rabidly homophobic (Santorum and Bachman's husband) that the only real explanation is that they are homosexuals so ashamed of their orientation that they have to act our radically against it to cover their secret.

Hmm. Let me see. One Republican candidate who is a member of a religion in which it is okay to have three wives at the same time and one Republican candidate who has had three wives, one after another.

Decisions, decisions.

Pre-empt, pre-empt (and hope it goes away!)

And why in the world is this not a valid topic??????????????? I think character matters..........

Newt exclaims," You are a dirty rotten, despicable lowlife for questioning me about evidence which proves that I am a dirty rotten, despicable lowlife". It's a good thing he didn't represent himself in divorce court.

"If I'm it, then so are you" is a phrase that most of us grow out of before we enter grade school. Typical Newt. Tantrums, outbursts, belligerence and juvenile behavior most commonly found in immature 13 year olds. No wonder his wife never lets him out of her sight.

Everyone who thinks bonking a slut while married to an MS patient is cool, then divorcing in favor of the slut who by the way wears a blonde helmet, vote for Newt.

Newt claims he has found Jesus so no big deal.

• Well, Newt, we happen to think character matters in a Presidential race...

Newt is turning Mormon, so the choices are in this corner Romney and in that corner Newt, wow what a choice but at least Romney does not have marital affairs that We know of, but it still bothers me about how he enjoys firing people, that is heartless and I could never vote for someone like that ...

It's just a wee little thing called "character," in which case Newt has none. And I don't know of anyone who thought Clinton was a saint and what he did was okay. Each case should be taken on it's own merit.

Newt is a pompus loser who has no chance of being elected. But there are three others in this race for the GOP nomination who also don't have a chance, so that leaves...well, nobody!

olddude50, we can only assume you are referring to Mitt Romney as "one Republican candidate who is a member of a religion (Mormon) in which it is okay to have three wives at the same time". Kindly avoid public displays of ignorance like this in the future. The Mormon Church does not allow polygamy and has not for well over 100 years.

All I see is a candidate who won't answer the question.

The most IMPORTANT thing, is that for newt's ENTIRE self-serving rant and screed, NOT ONCE did he DENY that in fact he had asked his second wife if he could screw his mistress while being married to her.

He NEVER said that his second wife LIED, that he didn't do EXACTLY what she said he did.

And, THAT'S what is important,and if I had been moderating, a FACT I would have pointed out, LOUD and CLEAR, just like newt.

Ummmm John, That is why Mitt's Grandfather moved the family to Mexico and started a new Mormon order and to keep multiple marriages alive, the Mormon Church in Utah disallowed polygamy, also why some left the Mormon Church to start their own Mormon/commune (insert Jeffs). The Church of Later Day Saints, which is by any other term, is part and parcel the Mormon Church, went against the manifesto which was passed to stop polygamy, and in the Mormon bible, believe that polygamy will be started again once they go to heaven. BTW, John, did you know that the Mormon doctrine/bible also says that Jesus was a Polygamist?

Thank God that Obama is going to get re-elected. Can you imagine what the White House or the Country would be like if one of those Republicans got in there?

Thank Goodness that nearly all the present members of Congress won't be re-elected. Obama's lost the plot.

I'm glad to finally see a change from the "dysfunctional" democrats in the primary to the more highly dysfunctional, not to mention entertaining, GOPers - this is effing hilarious.

Leading the pack is an out of touch Ritchie Rich, who made his money off a Wall Street brokerage firm and likes to pretend that he's an Average Joe and cracking jokes about feeling the economic pinch that come out catastrophically wrong. At one of those moments in history when the American public really feels like a class war rumble and sticking it to the rich in general, with a particular hard on for the Wall Street crowd in particular. Add to it that the religious wing of the party doesn't even think he's christian, what with Mormons being a heathen cult in their eyes and all.

Only competitor with a viable chance of wresting the nomination from him is a "mua, ha, ha, ha" villain straight out of a cartoon. The other side couldn't have scripted a better story than: "family values guy here got married 3 times, and divorced his first wife while she was in a hospital bed suffering from cancer because she didn't want to get down with an open marriage"

Shyte's just unbelievable :D

By all measures, Democrats should be toast in 2012. But God must love them "Godless" liberals, and has to really favor Obama to bless them with such jokes for competition and hand them and him the election on a platter like this.

See you GOP losers in 2016 - because you're not even close in 2012.

Character is not just important; it is most important. Experience comes in second, at best.

No candidate lacking character, no matter what his other qualifications, will get my vote.

Religion, meanwhile, is less important to me. Only religions which assert authority over things secular are a problem. If a candidate clearly separates his church from our state, he can believe whatever he wants. Well, almost anything; I would really question the suitability of someone whose beliefs include alien abduction or similar fringe notions.

I do not find any of the Republican candidates attractive, and except for Ron Paul, not even interesting, but their choice of religion is not part of my evaluation.

FreedomRingsLoud- You do understand, don't you, that when we discuss "character" we're talking about the character of the person under discussion and NOT the character of people who endorse, support, campaign for, raise money for, or simply HAVE MET ONCE....right?

In your list of 30, please point to the ones that pertain to OUR president's actual beliefs or actions and not what other people did.

I can see a couple at most that might have some minor validity but your list is a pathetic imitation of a suggestion of a list of character flaws. Words without substance, like talking points without validity, are just empty drivel.

Don't like what Clinton did, but if they could call him out for it while he was trying to run the country, they can call Newt out for it while he's only running for the job.

Most of the stuff and I didn't bother to read it all I am sure is made up garbage and hateful spewing. Look up rules for radicals and isn't that what NEWT GINGRICH engages in? Isn't it the republicans who seem to know so much about Saul Alinsky and keep mentioning him. To spew their hatred and bile. And why is that both Hillary and Barack Obama studied under him. Surely they both didn't as accused. The right wing radicals have spewed crap for 4 years at least and you guys have bought it hook line and sinker. Everyone in this country needs to pray that our country isn't hijacked by some lowlife like Newt Gingrich. Isn't it something that Barack Obama and the Democrats have morals and values cornered in politics these days. I don't care if Newt wanted an open marriage. That is no worse than having an affair with Callista who happened to be a congressional staffer while Newt was accusing Clinton and working to have him impeached. And then he divorced his wife and married for the 3rd time. That is as bad as an open marriage.So the accusation is moot., And his personality and his sinking to wormlike activiity shows he is not presidential and furthermore if SC votes for him or anyone else in this country they are just as bad as he is.

Isn't it interesting that ABC's been working on this story, and just "happened" to schedule the interview just before the South Carolina primary, as Newt is surging in the polls.

This is the same "main stream media" that spikes many stories involving Democrats (e.g. Lewinksy coverage spiked by Newsweek, broken by Drudge and Edwards affair during the 2008 primary, spiked by ABC so the reporter could "write a book later")

Too bad the liberal media isnt' quite "fair and balanced".

.

All of this is just a rehash of what we heard in the 90's. This was all brought up during Gingrich's "trial", when he speaker of the house, and brought up on moral and ethic charges in the house of representatives.

I am a little disappointed in ABC for doing this. It seems to me, that they have lowered themselves to the level of the National Enquirer. As far as Marianne Gingrich goes, she got exactly what she wanted. She wanted a man, who cheated on his wife, and that is exactly what she got. It takes two to tango. I don't believe that you can criticize Newt, without also criticizing Marianne. After all she knew he was a married man.

Tweet: the American people have a very short memory. It's the right time to refresh the national memory on Newt's horrifyingly social non-ultraconservative behavior. If he doesn't think he has to answer the question now, how bad is president Obama going to flay him? Obama has already proven that he knows how to maneuver an angry bull in a debate.

Lizziefrom Boston - Big difference between these 2 circumstances. President Bill Clinton LIED!!!! Newt Gingrich has been answering questions about his marriage back then. Newt Gingrich paid his heavy price already 15 years ago - Bill Clinton still LIED and then costed the American Tax Payer over 40 Million dollars trying to defend his LIE! Newt Gingrich apologized many times - Hillary Clinton accused everyone of setting up her husband. I guess I am still waiting for Bill and Hillary Clinton to apologize and pay back the taxpayers money.

When it comes to "despicable" behavior Newt wrote the book. But he will never get the nomination even with the endorsements of the GOP's intellectual wing, Sarah Palin and Rick Perry.

The Mormon Church does not allow polygamy and has not for well over 100 years.

And that was because Utah wanted to become a State.

Sort of like Newt, an unapologetic lecher until he wanted to become President.

Religion - a series of beliefs that one can pick and choose from depending on their convenience and how well it can manipulate others.

As much as I can't stand GingRICH, what happens in his personal life should not be on the public stage. Its between him, his exwife and their daughters. Its no different than what happen with the Clintons. Its nobody else's business. We are the american people should reject this type of behavior by the media and tell them to keep their noses out of it.

However, what I also say personally to Mr GingRich is, stop preaching that gay/lesbians would destroy the american family values. When someone like you that has been married 3 times and twice divorced, and apparently leads a double life, you have no no clue about family values.

"I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate with a topic like that," Gingrich said, earning wild applause from the audience. "To take an ex-wife and make it two days before the primary a significant question in a presidential campaign is as close to despicable as anything I can imagine."

I'm not a big fan of Newt. I don't think he's stable enough to govern. I don't like how he endorsed the individual mandate and I don't like how he jumped on the global warming hoax bandwagon and made a TV commercial with Nancy Pelosi about it. Those things aside I wonder if a question like this would have ever been asked at a Democrat primary? From the track record of the media I believe the answer would be a resounding NO! Even you Leftist/Liberal/Progressives have to agree with that.

From the track record of the media I believe the answer would be a resounding NO!

There is always Fox News and virtually all talk radio for that. Speaking of hypocrits - I find it funny how they trumpet their high ratings while pretending to be some sort of under-dog non mainstream media. Doesn't really jive, does it?

Don't worry we real Americans won't allow it to happen.

Anyone who refers to himself as a "real American" instantly marks himself as someone to whom partisanship is far more important than citizenship.

@Mac Forest

If hypocrisy could sweat, SC would be under water right now. Such a classy and patriotic pack of candidates vying for the "republican" nomination, for a run at the American Presidency. When Newt said He was apalled by the question about his ex wife, the crowd went wild with applause. Psssst, pssst, It's a crowd of evangelical christians, chaste and very high bred morals, and any one of them would steal sh^t from a "crippled tumbleturd", then kick it's ass for not having a bigger ball. Did God really shed his grace on us, or did He sh^t in our face?

Obviously you have never been to South Carolina, or your bias is high. Not everyone in *MY* state are evangelical christians. I sure as hell don't classify myself on any religious level. So your assumptions, are just that, assumptions.

On to the real topic of discussion, Newt had every right in the world to bash John King for that non-sense. I'm sorry, I'm an American too, and I want to know the real issues of the world, not a facade that we're being fed by our CURRENT president and ones before him. As an adult, I think I can handle the truth when it comes down to sensitive or devastating topics of discussion. I would rather someone step up and be forward. Tired of having someone in office who sugarcoats and dangles the "foreign policy" crap in my face - I say "Well that's just great Obama, you managed to befriend another country and left the American's back home wondering when you're going to fix THE AMERICAN ISSUES".

Quite frankly, the media bias, and the media callousness, is outstanding. I have to make a note that whoever wrote this article, needs to go back and review the entirety of his retaliatory remark. You can't blame the guy! He made a solid point, and if he would've come out and flipped John King the bird, I'm sure the crowd would've gone even more crazier than it did. Fact is, and Newt hit it head on, there are more pressing issues to discuss.

A couple cliches that work here:

Newt made his bed and now he has to lie in it.

...and people who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

Go home, Newt.

I'm on your side, Khalid, but this is factually incorrect:

The other side couldn't have scripted a better story than: "family values guy here got married 3 times, and divorced his first wife while she was in a hospital bed suffering from cancer because she didn't want to get down with an open marriage"

It was Newt's first wife who was served divorce papers in the hospital. His second wife was the one who has recently revealed that Newt asked for an open marriage while he was having an affair with his third and current wife.

I know it's hard to keep it all straight. Why does a man like him bother getting married, you have to wonder...

If that were the worst thing about the lizard, it might be understandable (in another universe) that he gets any support at all from the religious right. It's his ethics violations that ought to give everyone pause.

Eighty-four ethics charges were filed against Gingrich during his term as speaker. After extensive investigation and negotiation by the House Ethics Commitee, Gingrich was sanctioned $300,000 by a 395–28 House vote. It was the first time in history a speaker was disciplined for ethical wrongdoing.

Most of the charges were dropped in exchange for his resignation.

Why is this man still relevant?

You know what? I hope he wins the nomination. Please Please Please nominate Newt.

Obama-Biden 2012

Xaziol - I would rather someone step up and be forward. Tired of having someone in office who sugarcoats and dangles the "foreign policy" crap in my face - I say "Well that's just great Obama, you managed to befriend another country and left the American's back home wondering when you're going to fix THE AMERICAN ISSUES".

I don't know what planet you are one, but Obama has also been addressing and attempting to FIX many American issues. However, it takes a lot more than the President to fix the issues in this country.

The libs know obama could never win a debate against Gingrich! Their solution: get Newt's bitter ex-wife to give an interview on libbie TV! Nice gig, nice payday for the little lady! This is how the liberals work....

Whoever the candidate is I would bet money obama won't debate him more than once! He's too busy messing up the country!

@Donna367223 -- did I say Clinton didn't lie? Nope, I didn't. But that's beside the point. I wasn't referring to his lying. The fact remains that they went after Clinton for extra-marital affairs while he was President. Richard Scaife donated nearly $2m of his own to the "American Spectator," specifically earmarked for stories aimed at investigating and trashing the Clintons, starting in 1993. David Brock worked overtime digging up dirt. You can look all this up, if you want.

So if they can go after Clinton, then I figure they can go after Newt. And about the lying. . . yes, Clinton lied. And Newt's been brought up on ethics charges and was sanctioned by a 395-28 House vote. First time ever a Speaker has been sanctioned for ethical wrongs. And in the course of the ethics investigation, Special Counsel James Cole concluded that Gingrich had lied to the Ethics panel, trying to force them to drop the charges against him. Since you're concerned about Clinton's lying, I trust you'll find Newt's lying and ethics sanctions equally reprehensible.

Truth hurts, doesn't it Newt? What an appropriate name for him!

@FreedomRings: Yawn... (sound of crickets)

Freedom: I will fight to the death for your freedom to be as ridiculously off point and silly as you are...you can shout "squirrel!!" all you like, but this is about the utter absurdity of your hypocrites "moral authority". Guess that American Taliban stuff isn't going so well, eh?

Seldom Seen: You clearly have never seen your great "debator" the Newt is real action...he wouldn't know a fact if he tripped across one...but he is good at throwing you right wing extremists all the red meat you can eat.

IndependentSinceBirth..."but compare to Newt... Clinton is a saint!!!"

Clinton had a 15 year affair with Jennifer Flowers and was diddling a girl young enough to be his daughter in the White House. How can you call anyone like that a saint?

Worse than having affairs, if you're old enough to remember, Bill Clinton got on national television, pointed his finger in the face of every American watching, took us all for saps and told us a bold-faced lie.

You're perfectly OK with that, if you don't have a spine.

@Itsabouttime

I don't know what planet you are one, but Obama has also been addressing and attempting to FIX many American issues. However, it takes a lot more than the President to fix the issues in this country.

All things considered, you have a point to an extent. Obama has tried, and has also failed in many aspects. I also don't see any hard-line absolute truth he spews forth in an attempt to appease the majority. Whatever happened to the immigration issues that have been sprawling through the country state by state? Why isn't this issue resolved? And why are cartel members still creeping into our country? And you're right, it does take more than the president to resolve the issues the country faces. The Senate and Congress act as though they're children fighting over the last Twizzler. It's embarrassing! Both the Democratic and Republicans in the two branches act this way, and it's a known fact.

Where were these debate moderators with their insightful questions when the 'Anointed One' was campaigning in 2008? I don't recall that this level of vetting was achieved with BO and am disappointed that we have been so let down by our main (lame) stream media with the atrocious degree of sycophantic behavior that was and has been displayed.

Have people forgotten how to do research?? All that I could find when BO announced for the presidency was that he was at best a mediocre community organizer, mediocre state legislator, and while occupying the part-time seat of junior Senator from IL voted 'present' an inordinate number of times.

While many bemoan that we have been hoodwinked to electing him into succeeding positions as a result of racist guilt, I believe that it's due to the GOP failing to offer a viable candidate in opposition.

Considering the circus that is currently traveling the country with it's 'deja vu all over again' motif; and the previous offering of 'Grampa Munster' and 'Eskimo Barbie', I'm voting for Alfred E. Newman.

I'm not really a Newt fan, but I'm going to have to agree with him on this. These debates are getting more about personal life and not about the office they are campaigning for. The debates should be nothing but jobs, economy, immigration, debt, etc.

The liberal media is keeping the focus on personal life instead of focusing on the country. Cain is a good example of that. There was talk about is 999 plan, but the talk about the supposed sexual harrassment far outshadowed anything political about him.

Sex is nothing new with politicians. If you go back in history, we've had bi-sexual presidents, cross-dressers, etc. I could give a crap about what they do in the closet. I'm more concerned about how they would run the country.

The other point is the liberal media has in no way vetted Obama. If you really want to read about Solyndria, Fast and Furious, Lightsquared, etc, you have to go to non-MSM sites.

Fair is fair, if you're going to vet one, then vet all. Not just along party lines.

What a bunch of bufoons!

This is the best reality show on TV.

"Desperate Candidates"

Tune in next Caucus

I agree with Newt on this one. We need to be focused on solutions for the country, not the personal lives of the politicians. (btw, I'm not a Newt supporter - but I am sick and tired of the news media focusing on fluff instead of the core issues facing our country)

Character does matter and the voters will make their choices. I don't like it and i don't condone what he did. However, Newt has addressed this many times and owned responsibility for it.

Of course, the liberals want to keep talking about his marriages and completely ignoring what he said to John King regarding the media and their bias to the left and Obama. The bias of the media is despicable and is NOT journalism.

I know for a fact that George Washington slept everywhere in Virginia and elsewhere. With whom, I wonder. I am just glad somebody wants to run for President. I see the day when nobody will. Newt for all his shortcomings is still absolutely correct in his opinions of the National Press. Most of it is beginning to look like the National Inquirer or some other pulp which is being stuffed into our landfills.

Well, Alex, here's what bothers me. I agree that politics should be about the issues facing our country, as you say when you list some of them above -- jobs, the debt, the economy, etc. I note that you did not list contraception, marriage issues, reproductive decisions, evolution and other scientific theories, and so forth.

Now, here is my point: Newt and his brethren are owned by fundamentalist Christians who put forth a doctrine, based on their religious beliefs, that includes "the sanctity of marriage." They go around preaching that doctrine in a political context.

I frankly don't care what they say in their own churches. However, I am incensed when they have the temerity to foist their religious views on me. That is what Newt does. He proclaims, self-righteously, IMO, the "sanctity of marriage." He has the nerve to try to dictate how others behave, and try to use the legal system of this country to make us do what the fundamentalists want us to do. It is theocratic, plain and simple. I guess it's OK for them but not for the Muslims whose theocracies they love to vilify. What's the dif? Oh, of course, our fundamentalists are right. God IS on their side. Puh-leeze.

When Newt is caught with his pants down, so to speak, afer injecting the very issue he is called on into the political debate, we have every right to hear his answer to King's question. He is shown up for what he really is. Somebody who thinks he has the right to preach but doesnt' have to follow his own preaching.

Newt's behavior in contrast with his sanctimonious preaching is the ultimate in arrogance, and I for one believe he deserves whatever he gets.

I'm with you, NHLucky.

Newt is transparently pandering to the religious right by pretending to espouse their values. I "PRAY" they will see through his hypocrisy.

All you Leftist/Liberals/Progressives do know that this only helps Romney? The problem with that is Romney will win in a landslide against President Obama. He'll definitely sweep the floor with him in a debate. I can just picture you all at your computers insanely grinning and drooling at the idea of someone else's mistakes in their personal lives. You're taking your eye off the ball. But you go on with your bad juvenile Schadenfreude selves.

TO: FedUpInNYS who wrote:

"If you had no problem with Clinton cheating and lying about it while in office then you should have no opinion or concerns about Newt and his ex wife. Typical liberal playbook. You can't do this or that, but we can...because we're different. Rules and ethics aren't a concern of liberals and democrats until a republican does the same thing they find insignificant and are proud of."

Why are Republicans constantly complaining and telling others to "shut up", which impinges on our Constitutional right to freedom of speech?

Republicans put themselves on a pedestal, claimed they are better than EVERYBODY else, and that Republicans being so perfect are the ONLY folks who have the "right" to judge EVERYBODY and then play out this "false outrage" routine.

We told you then, and now you are forced to accept the fact that Republicans are NOT perfect, they're as flawed as anybody else, they have NO right to pretend to be the judge over all others, and need to stop their freaking whining and complaining.

By the way, Newt is NOT the only scumbag in the Republican Party.

Obama / Biden 2012

TO: Svenolafson who wrote:

"All you Leftist/Liberals/Progressives do know that this only helps Romney?..."

Who? Romney the jobs cremator? Why would anyone want to hire a guy who made his millions liquidating businesses and shipping American Jobs Overseas?

Republicans are crazy as hell. 1st you put Bush and Cheney in there, 2 oil men from Texas, and you still can't figure out why they attacked Iraq, overthrew their entire government, and took over the 2nd largest oil fields in the world.

Then Republicans totally trashed our economy by spending every penny they could find in the treasury, maxing out ALL of our credit cards, burrying the United States deeply in debt, and are constantly trying to find someone else to blame for all the crap they did and all the money they spent.

Now Republicans want to hire the worse possible "jobs cremator" they've got, and claim that they believe Romney is NOT going to do any of the things he specializes in, which made him the multi-millionaire that he is today -- which was to liquidate businesses and ship American Jobs Overseas.

All I can say is, Republicans' judgment is so poor it no wonder why they constantly claim "amnesia" and try to rewrite history.

Obama / Biden 2012

American Girl - No one is telling anyone to shut up. Everyone is entitled to voice their opinion - but remember - there are always 2 sides to every story. The problem is people just always want to talk about their side!

I noticed at the end of your comment you have to call the Republican Party scumbag! I'm guessing you have no respect for our President Obama when he has asked the Country many many times to be civil and get along. Oh but wait - President Obama doesn't even practice was he preaches!

Well geeze folks, when the guy went on and on about Clinton getting a bl0w j0b - he was boinking his now current wife will still married to #2. Hypocrisy. Big time.

So Bill lied about it - compare that to the lies Newt told - over 80 ethical violations - and most of them were dropped IN EXCHANGE for his resignation and vow to NEVER run for office again. He broke that vow.

Oh no... I will never ever allow this slime to forget his hypocrisy. Keep up those questions and make him squirm. Let him reap what he has sown.

NHLucky-661693 - well said, thank you! That is my biggest problem with Newt! I am disgusted at both his personal and professional code of ethics (or more accurately, his complete lack of ethics), but I especially don't like that he does not want us to look at his actions and how he has lived his life, while telling us how we should live our lives.

@ Donna - examples please of Obama not being civil. LMFAO - get real. He has consistently been the adult in the room compared to the Party of No.

BJ, if that is your definition of an adult, in Obama, then god help you, no one else can.

BJs65 - Whatever! What party of No? How about the whole crowd in Washington not working together and getting along. The Senate is just as responsible and Prince Harry Reid has done nothing. Where is the Budget that the Senate has not passed in over 3 years. Right now there are NO Adults in Washington. But of course people like you are always one sided.

Yes, Dasvet - it is, and I'm not the one who needs the help. Why don't you go back to Fox News where you can live your happy little lie of a life.

What party of no Donna? REALLY? I see dysfunction all over Washington, but you folks always want to lay the blame at Obama's feet. Who's being one sided here?

Newtie needs to Google the word 'hypocrite'.

BJ - folks always want to lay the blame at Obama's feet. Well the last time I checked Obama was and is the President of the United States. He has to take blame - he is in charge! Or he is suppose to be. Oh I guess you are ok with a CEO of a Company not doing his or her job and the Company is failing and has problems and now you can not lay blame where it needs to be? President Obama stated at the beginning of his Presidency - the Buck stops with him.

I'm sure you were all over blaming Bush when he was President.

Well, OK then, Donna! According to your line of reasoning, Mr. Obama gets the "blame" for the millions of jobs added during his term, for the rebirth and new dominance of General Motors, for getting binLaden, for ending the war in Iraq, for the country moving out of recession and into positive growth territory... I could go on and on but maybe you get my point.

NHLucky-661693 - Well your comments are really for another topic and discussion - but Sure! Still waiting on the jobs number. Rebirth and new General Motors - well ok sure - has not been long enough yet - but so far looks good. Getting Bin Laden - Yep - Kuddos! Ending the war in Iraq - yep for the sake of our Military - but the jury is still out if Iraq will be whole again. Country moving out of a recession - still a work in progress - as the President said himself - it takes time! I could go on and on - but I think you get my point, too. Always 2 sides to every opinion! Discussion does not need to get nasty. Everyone can voice their opinion and agree to disagree in a civil manner.

@BJ...Where were you when BO went ready-fire-aim with his gaping pie-hole over the Lewis Gates incident in Cambridge???

Was that an example of adult behavior?

Gingrich angrily rebuffs questions about ex-wife

She publicly castrated him and I would be screaming too if I were this load of lard Newt.

I'm luvin it seeing his lying azz be taken down.

RON PAUL 2012

For those who feel compelled to defend Gingrich and believe "as long as he can fix (name your problem) I don't care about his serial infidelities", consider this. His infidelities ... and the circumstances surrounding them ... go directly to the point of his character and his integrity. As a member of Congress he has done little to move the country forward and, as part of the party bloc, has stonewalled many measures to help the middle class while holding America hostage to ensure tax breaks for the wealthy - which were supposed to have expired two years ago - are maintained before any considerations are given for the struggling middle class. To me, this is part and parcel of the character of the man. Even his campaign logic is incredibly flaccid and vacuous when he tells reporters that the party is pushing Romney over Gingrich because Gingrich is the best candidate to beat Obama. After many months, I have yet to figure out how he reasoned that one out! The last thing this country needs is to have this congressional lizard taking up residence in the White House. Well, I don't see that happening, of course, because he will not get the party nod. But, even in congress the lizard is a handicap to the nation. Although, I will say, compared to Ron Paul, Gingrich actually looks like a viable candidate!

thewordsmith,

I'm not sure what you mean by "has stonewalled....supposed to have expired two years ago...middle class" - Newt hasn't been in office since 1999, and from what I remember, the 90's were pretty good times.

From what I remember, congress pushed Clinton to give on tax rates and welfare reform in exchange for giving on military spending. Personally, I was in favor of all of these changes.

Where I think both parties failed was on regulatory reform.

I would love to go back to the "failure of the 90's"...and I give Newt and Clinton a lot of credit for that decade (not all of the credit, but a lot).

Newt is the one that made this an issue. He persecuted Clinton about an affair while Newt was cheating on his wife. When it was the other guy, Newt said personal life matters. So he made it an issue; people in glass houses should not be throwing rocks.

The bigger problem, though, is how he handled this, and other tough questions. Instead of answering the question calmly, he always starts by attacking the messenger. He is very divisive and loves to play to bigots and racists. He always gets indignant and angry. Is this a man you would want to have with his finger on the nuclear trigger? Is this a man you want meeting with heads of state? Do you think the Chinese will sit quietly for his personal, mean spirited attacks? He will have us at war with every country in the world if elected.

And everyone knows he lied. He is very good at pretending, but we all know he was cheating, and with his ego, his ex-wife's story is more credible than his.

It is despicable that Newt is still running with all his family values in the septic tank ????????

Melanie Flax

Lets look at the real issues here. Unemployment, If Newt can turn the economy around I do not care what he does in his private life. That is why it is private.

Apparently the republicans don't feel this way, Melanie. The economy created millions of jobs and we were paying off the US debt under Clinton's presidency and none of the pub's seemed to care. They went after him with all of the knives at their disposal. Newt was there with the rest of the lynch mob, ironically enough. Maybe you should talk to them...?

Scott

all 84 were dropped for lack of evidence. The $300,000 was to pay for half of the cost of the investigations because he had materially mislead the committee. Gingrich was slow to provide accurate information on his doings, which caused a bill to be run up investigating him. NOTE THEY FOUND NOTHING they could charge him with. They did turn him over to the IRS for possible income tax evaision (misreporting Procedes from the college course. The results after three years of investigation and studying Newt's course - the course was a-political, instructional, meaning the 501c3 had not violated the non-profit laws in distributing the tapes of the course or distributing him any proceeds which he then had reported correctly!

The other thing the committee was hacked off about was about him receiving an advance on a book. Hillary did the same thing for her book too, and not a peep was uttered about it.

Collapsers: "Love it or leave it" we have a Constitution which guarantees free speech. If you don't like it get the Hell out of here or shut your mouths.

@freedomringsloud ---- Congratulations on a recird setting series of collapsed conversations!!! You really are a Rush Limbaugh level republibot!! And like him you are probably a fat nicotine addicted drug addict draft dodger three times divorced with a college drop put education from a rural missouro community college. CLEARLY you are not a pragmatic thinker with mathematically correct thought processes!!! LOL

I agree with you, but to me the larger issues are: "open marriage" is an oxymoron, whereas Newt is a central casting Republican moron, who thinks he can win a general election when no married woman in America will vote for him. The real big issue in this whole sad story is trust, or the lack of it. I want a President who I believe is a man of his word. Remember, "fool me once, shame on you", fool me twice, "shame on me". Mr. G is not an honest man in the world I grew up in, and if he should make it through the party gauntlet to represent the GOP in the general election, he will deservedly get tanked worse than Barry Goldwater did in 1964 (BTW, for whom I voted).

Like FDR, JFK, Bill Clinton, and John Edwards did, among others.

Of course republicans don't do this sort of thing, eh Wally? You know damn well if this kind of information was revealed before any of these men became president it would harpoon their chances...exhibit, John Edwards. Get real!

Hey Wally, at least they weren't hypocrits.

As despicable as cheating on your wife while publicly condemning the the President for doing the same thing?

Newt is just plain despicable, there isn't one decent cell in that mans body. Newt is the perfect name for a reptile like Gingrich. Calista, his reptilian sex toy deserves him. EWWWWW could you imagine showing up to a swingers party and seeing those two naked? I think I just threw up in my mouth a little.

Oh and Newt, just wait till you are sick and dying (which wont be long from the looks of that bloated body) and Calista leaves you for a younger, more plastic looking Replicant. Karma's a bitch.

@Wallyworld, FDR and JFK are 67 and 50 years in their graves respectively. Newty boy was cheating on his second wife AS he was trying to impeach Clinton and Edwards was never a president or even a presidential candidate. If any of these guys had known extra marital affairs at the time they were seeking the presidency, there is no doubt the repubs would have raised it as an issue. Lets concentrate on the here and now shall we.

Pretty good homework Rub. Now give us the other side...or you're not credible!

GREEN: Impressive list buddy.

Tell me, how many of these Democrats preached moral self righteousness, chastity, purity and acted sanctimonious constantly???

I don't give a good god damn about anyone's sex life, single or married. I do care about pompous, bloviating hypocrits who invoke the name of god at every turn and yet their personal lives tell another story completely. Spare me the list pal, we're not talking about sex, we're talking about HYPOCRISY. Got that?

I suggest you go and watch one of Burt Lancaster's ( a proud Liberal) greatest performances, for which he won an Academy Award, Elmer Gantry. Cause that's who Newt Gingrich is.

Rub of the green

Big difference here is, the Democrats never claimed to be the "Family Values", holier then thou party. The Republicans have trumpeted this time and time again, all while being anything but. So whatever you have here means nothing. Which just figures.

The party of 'family values', eh!

Wally, the Repubs run on family values and yet regularly get caught performing particularly non-family values. Seems it's: "Do as I say, not as I do." Eh!

average joe, you are more than welcome to create a rebuttal list, if you want to be viewed as being credible.

Intrepid - pretty sure that none of them expounded on the benifits of sexual prowess, infidelity or anything else that promotes violating anothers rights.

Hey Intrepid1; If hypocrisy bothers you to such a degree, how can you stand supporting the dems and the president of the U.S.?

Obama defiantly criticized the GOP for using superpacs when he ran in 2008. NOW he to is using them. He cried foul that to many republicans used back room dealings and that his administration would be one of transparency. There are so many cases of back-room dealings by Obama and the dems during this administration that it would take to long to list them all.

People on both sides of the political aisle cheat on their spouses, make secret deals, lie and speak in partial truths everyday. This is why so many people are disgusted with politicians and political partys in general.

American, I don't have to spend hours making a list of repubs to be "credible". I would, however, bet my house that there is an equally long list from your side. That being said, almost all on the list were discovered doing something bad once in office. Gingrich is trying to be Pres. Totally valid to question his ethics now. As mentioned, this is a man trying to impeach Clinton while he was doing the same thing while his wife had cancer in the hospital. The man will say or do anything to become pres. Course so does Romney (not saying dems don't do this either believe me). The mere thought of having to listen to him every day would drive me to live in another country. I do find it odd that those whom God "called to run" are slowly dropping off the map. Now we are left with Newtie and Rick. One a basic whore and the other with a family of communist (not to mention how he made his money after leaving office)... that just leaves Robot Romney... and we all know God ain't going to endorse a Mormon...

American, not going to waste my time tallying repub ratbastards. Call me in...credible. If you think only dems are slimy here...well you're in the non-cred club, too.

"To take an ex-wife and make it two days before the primary a significant question in a presidential campaign is as close to despicable as anything I can imagine."

WilliamOfRites

Really??? Serving your wife divorce papers while she is in the cancer ward all the time schtooping the next strumpet seems alot more despicable to me.

Agreed.

Touting "family values" while dropping divorce papers on a spouse who is in a hospital fighting for her life is below the nadir of nauseating. If this candidate could not show any civility toward a spouse battling the deadly disease of cancer, how can he truly care about the American people?

He cannot.

Oh snap! I think rub just got served!

Ugh, you really took the bait? Disappointed.

They like to indoctrinate them young in the Republican party, sick bastards!!

Republican advertising consultant Carey Lee Cramer was sentenced to six years in prison for molesting two 8-year old girls, one of whom appeared in an anti-Gore television commercial.

DougCoe22201,

Yes, the Right can be reminded of its sins.

The "family values" crowd harbors many hypocrites.

You made your bed, Newt, and apparently slept in quite a few other's. Maybe it's time to put that campaign to bed too.

These people in South Carolina have no family values. Remember, these are the folks who reelected a RAPIST, Strum Thurman for 48 years because he stood firm on segregation, even though he, himself, had fathered a mixed race child through his RAPES.

That is your true South Carolina Republican. Of course they like Newt.

Doug Coe, lol, what's your point! Where are the sources.... very few of the names you've listed are politicians and most are are minor state politicans, Rub's list is primarily PROMINENT DEMOCRATS!

A volunteer worker for the DNC here in Vegas got arrested for possession of marijuana.... big deal. Harry Reid's son owes his ex-wife back alimony, big deal! If you want a bigger and better list of dirty politican's you need go no further than Chicago! :) Your list is irrelevant!

Get real Doug!

Thats sad.. all those Republicans on Dougs list and not one of them got to use a cigar in the oval office.

Like I said bill I just picked the worst crime I could think of and googled it, in fact here is the disclaimer **NOTICE**:All information on this website is public information gleaned from reputable news sources and public court records. No part of this information can be considered defamatory, libelous or slanderous. Anyone who is willing to search a little bit can find this information. If the content of this site offends you, or if you really just don't like it, please feel free to contact me (admin at republicansexoffenders dot com) about purchasing the site and you can shut it down yourself, or do whatever you want with it.

And there link http://www.republicansexoffenders.com/

Plus there were quite a few higher level repubs, like crane, lukins, doyle, foley, rummy, and others. But this was a very narrow search JUST for prominent republican sex criminals, if I would have googled just republicans congressmen who have been convicted of a crime the list would never fit on a web site like this, the list of KNOWN repbulican crimes is a book in and of itself. But if you like I will "take the bait" as Holly so disappointedly put it.

Republican prosecutor Larry Corrigan was arrested for soliciting sex from 13-year old girls.

What does this have to do with the subject of politicians? lol, the libbies are really reaching again.

"Static instead of substance" Democratic Mission Statement of 2012!

"So what" to both of you.

I'm sure someone could list 100's of vile criminals and horrific cheaters on both side of the political aisle.

"So what" because listing 1,000 other guilty parties doesn't make Newt Gingrich any less guilty. He's a loser extraordinaire.

Especially since the Righties are always preaching family values, and chastity, and "just say no" crap.

Old Klingon proverb: "Revenge is a dish best served cold", or maybe just before an election?

Who cars what any republican says on this issue. The SAD state of affairs (no pun intended) in the republican party is a fascist dirtbag like dick cheney is one of the FEW republicans who can get a pass on this issue - of the many things dick has done, ONE thing he never did was EVER campaign on "family values".

As for newt and the rest of the republican scum who preach family values and then flagrantly disregard your pious preaching at home, they deserve to be held up and ridiculed as the flaming amoral sociopathic hypocrites they are.

And, ANYONE who can say they support republican "family values" and then defend these creeps, is even lower than they are - it shows they'd sell out ANY principle for the sake of power.

Nice list DougCoe, but you failed to mention that many of those people on your list may have been arrested, but they WEREN'T convicted! Just a little point your 'list' failed to mention, but I think, an important point anyway! In the future perhaps your research should avoid such fallacious websites, eh?

AverageJoe

You know damn well if this kind of information was revealed before any of these men became president it would harpoon their chances...exhibit, John Edwards

That's a nice retort, however it's incorrect!

The liberal media IGNORED Edwards affair during the 2008 primary. The allegations surfaced only after he was defeated. The LA Times reporter covering the Edwards campaign he knew of the affair, but kept the information to himself, so he's have a nice plot line for a book he was planning to write after the campaign.

Yes, it's sad that Newt's had such turmoil in his private life, but I suspect it's more common than not. I sort of recall Michelle Obama deciding to fly to Spain with 40 friends, blowing off her husband's birthday party in August 2010. But I don't recall ANYONE in the press commenting on that...

.

The liberal media IGNORED Edwards affair during the 2008 primary.

Funny, I remember reading about it right here on this bastion of the liberal media, MSNBC.

mark from tahoe-Static instead of substance" Democratic Mission Statement of 2012!

republican mission statement- anybody but obama, no matter how bad they are.

differnet..."at least they weren't hypocrits."

LOL!!! How can you be an adulterer and not be a hypocrite?

There are plenty of hypocrits in this Country. One that always points out someone's mistakes has just as many mistakes that they do not address. To bad that people have to get nasty when having a discussion.

The man has balls to ask for it. Then he's a coward and a liar for denying it and blaming someone else (liberal media). Man up! Take responsibility for what you've done in the past!

This is a very interesting situation. Here we have a man running for the highest, most important office on the planet with the moral of a rutting sea otter. What's interesting is that normally American women would be more likely to be harshly judgmental of Newt and his Wandering Richard. Instead, Newt' own male species is doing him in and not just for political reasons.

The issue of what exactly validates a candidate's qualifications for President is now in every American's face. We understand that from a religious point of view, Newt's skirt chasing proclivities will be slammed. What we didn't expect was that this poor excuse of an adult male would thrust the entire country into having to take a more acute look at their own set of values, ethics and principles.

From a woman's point of view...Newt's second and third wives KNEW he was a married man and deliberately and without respect for the commitment got into bed with him. That makes them "power magnets"...women who are only attracted to men they believe possess autonomous power over others. These kinds of women are far worse than your average golddigger because they stupidly believe HIS power gives HER power.

As for Newt? He leaves his first wife while she was undergoing chemo and his second wife when she was diagnossed with multiple sclerosis. So, may be infer from his attitude that he strenuously objects to the part of the marriage vow that states, "in sickness....." ?

Newt isn't the first male to be a married playboy and he won't be the last. Newt's problem is his inability to understand what being a "public" servant means.

Republicans are now in a massive pickle.They've got a Mormon they know can't win in Southern Baptist country which is 90% of the south. And now frontrunner Newt who cannot possibly do more than show the low standards he sets for morality and more importantly, responsibility.

Gingrich's just needs to change his party affiliation to democrat, and he would be get a pass on this sort of stuff. He would be a giant leap forward for the dems if he replaced Obama. Anything is better than Obama the imposter.

Dasvet - he isn't welcome in the Democratic Party.

I feel sorry for you - it just kills you that the Obamas' are a normal, happy AMERICAN family, who happen to be **whisper** black.

LMAO.

Again, if that is normal, then God help you. These two America hating people are your definition of "normal"? psst...who care if they are .....sssshhhh..... black, they are incompetent, even if they were as white as Frosty the snowman.

Michele,

Re Clinton comment

You spelled "comings" wrong...

At least if Gingrich "did" cheat on his wife, he didn't do it in the "Ora..." oops, "Oval" office, for crying out loud!!

Sawyer, no.. he just did it on Capitol Hill. Oh, and Callista was a lobbyist.... Talk about being in bed with those who purchase influence.

How does that make it different saw? We should wait for newty to cheat once he's in? What's the right thing to do here? Tell us.

He also wants to force his "christian values" on the rest of us whether we want it or not. No thanks. If I wanted to live in a theocracy, I would move to Iran. Mitt is by far the least scariest.

Yes,... Santorum wants to disallow women from having contraception in any way. This idea of having sex with out having to birth another child every time is just beyond reason.

There should be a price for having sex. The price is another kid to feed cloth and educate for 18 to 21 years.

Any person that would vote for Santorum is completely out of their mind.

LOOK......we don't need a new president, just a new congress.

John from Jacksonville Fl. Here Here John! Correct as can be!

Really??? Santorum??? Morals??? Values???

Santorum has come out against birth control. Not birth control for teens, but birth control for EVERYBODY! He has stated on numerous occasions that sex should only be performed by married people, and only when they are trying to procreate. No other time, ever.

He is so radically homophobic that he HAS to be a closet homosexual himself.

Santorum is a complete nut-case who happens to have some really good handlers that have done a fairly good job of keeping the really batsh*t stuff out of sight.

But make no mistake, if he gets elected, they'll have to pad the walls in the Oval Office.

finally, someone makes sense, keep going michele, and mike, mike from az. a nut case usually uses alot of alot of these ? . understand now

I'm a nutcase because I used question marks?

But you're okay with Santorum.

Okay, I get it.

Just one question- who gives you your opinions? Is it Hannity, Limbaugh, or Beck?

I often wonder;

When will "alot" actually become a word?

Probably about the time that "alittle" does, I suppose.

It's only a word if you repeat it in the same sentence. That gives it gravity.

You have got to be kidding about voting for Santorum! Have you read any of his positions?

That gives it gravity

Just a theory.

You have got to be kidding about voting for Santorum! Have you read any of his positions?

I had the same reaction when my younger bro told me he 'liked' Perry and Santorum. We don't differ much at all on our secularism and 'lack of' religious beliefs. He tends to be a tad more conservative on certain things, but definitely not on social issues.

Upon further investigation into just where in the hell he got the idea that Perry and Santorum were in any way sane individuals, I discovered that his only exposure to the two candidates was through Fox News and Drudge. He was obviously not privvy to many of the completely insane things that the two have said, and their virtually theocratic "Pastor in Chief" nonsense never made it to him.

I wonder how many other relatively intelligent individuals are in the same blissfully ignorant boat as my brother was.

Michele...Check out Santorum's wife's past. Not so very moral as all that after all. He may have converted her. But before they were married, she lived with a doctor who performed abortions. Santorum has to have known this when he married her. His hypocritical spouting of the sins of others shows he's as much a hypocrite for not coming public with the fact that he married a woman who saw no problem with the doctor she lived with performing abortions. Now, Santorum is going all morality on everyone else. He needs to clean up his own house first.

ewent, I've heard that story about Mrs. Santorum -- can you tell me where you got it? I'd just like to know where it came from if you have the info. Thanks.

NHL, there is no proof needed when dems disparage people. You must take their word for it, unquestioningly.

ewent, why don't you clean up you hate?

dirt, how about you clean up YOUR hate?

Actually, dasvet, I'm a Democrat. We DO like to know where info comes from, that's why I'm asking.

NH, apparently only if it is a republican, do the dems want the info. Dems, and mainstream media are tone-deaf when it comes to the likes of Kerry and John Edwards.

Nice pivot, dasvet, but you don't really know that, do you? Just like you didn't think I was a Democrat when you posted your first response to my query. Didn't that even make you stop and think for one second that maybe you are assuming way too much about Democrats?

The reason I asked about the source of Mrs. Santorum's story was that I didn't want to go off half-cocked and repeat a false story. Can you accept that a Democrat could be honest or fair? If not, we are in more trouble as a country that I thought.

I am just as interested in the foibles of Kerry and Edwards as I am in anyone else's foibles. However, it serves no purpose, in my opinion, to answer a charge by saying somebody else did the same thing. So what? If they did the same thing, they should be able to answer for it in the same way.

What Kerry, Edwards, FDR, Caesar, Abraham or anyone else did has no real bearing on the way Newt has handled his situation. That is the real issue.

And you still hold dems to a lower standard than republicans, with your last sentence. No, I did not say I knew it. Sorry, but I mixed you and ewent a bit above.

Um, well, if you think Caesar and Abraham were Democrats? I couldn't possibly comment.. .:)

if anybody knew anything about that scumbag president other than he loves to take vacations and hand out my money, we could have a conversation. he could have been blowing dealers for his cocaine in college for all we know.

JIM-1326948 God what a fool you are.

This President is one of the most achieved in modern history. He just doesent brag about his accomplishments but they are clearly there.

If you would take a pliers and twist that ignorant, low information, uninformed, bigot brain out of your head, you would be better off.

Quit listening to Hannity and Limbaugh and start thinking for your self.

And he's taken fewer vacation days than any of the last 4 presidents

he could have been blowing dealers for his cocaine in college for all we know.

Jim--and so could YOU too, for all we know.

And can you please tell us how your post at #5.1 relates to this topic of Tea/republican presidential candidate debate? I, for one, do not see the connection.

Did you have a point to your post? Please, what WAS it?

well john from fl., all there is to say wow, and please take off the blinders

ohicmenu2,

Get over it. All we heard from the right from 2000 to 2008 was how Clinton was the worst president ever. All we hear from the left is how W was the worst president ever. And now all we hear from the right is how Obama is the worst president ever. There are far worse presidents in history. Andrew Johnson gave us the Jim Crow laws. Woodrow Wilson gave us the progressive tax system. Warren Harding had more scandals than any president in history. FDR implemented more socialist programs than any other president. Herbert Hoover raised taxes during the great depression. There's plenty to pick from that are far worse than anything W or Obama or Clinton have done.

Obama wins the sweepstakes for worst American President, hands down. Carter is reveling in his promotion to second worst President.

Oh Dasvet - just because you say it's so does not make it so. LOL - your opinion in the whole scheme of things doesn't really matter - certainly no more than anyone else's, including my own.

Get over it.

Not just my opinion, just look at Ob ama's record. Do you ever wonder why the dems/MSNBC are so preoccupied with fidelity now, when it didn't matter with Clinton? It is because they cannot run on Obama's record, that would be suicide.

There is NO liberal media. That's a lie started by Republicans because the truth is inconvenient to them. The real truth is that we have a media owned by corporations who are only interested in turning a profit. If it will generate ad revenue than it's news. Oh and if Republicans could behave themselves there wouldn't be so much truth out there to be bothered by. Blaming the media because you are repeat adulterer and a troll, is kind of like blaming the doctor for telling you that you have cancer.

GEORGE: Still whining about the "Liberal Media"??? You want your "news" with a ridiculously far Right slant, go listen to Fixed Noise, they're lying in wait for folks like you.

Hate to tell you this fella but the NYT is universally acknowledged as the finest newspaper in the world. The Washington Post not that far behind. Of course, you can subsribe on one of Rupert Murdochs fine publications like the NY Post. LOL

BTW, the dean of radio & TV journalists, the guy who invented the medium was a fella by the name of Edward R. Murrow. He pioneered the whole concept and yes, he was a proud liberal. A liberal instrumental in bringing down the tryanny of Joseph McCarthy and his witch hunts. Sadly, you're party has not improved much beyond those days, still the party of hate.

differnet, the liberal bias in the media is well documented.

Consenting adults are entitled to work out their situations in private. That said, thinking about any flabby, pasty politician with his clothes off makes me throw up in my mouth a little.

But sorry, George, the whole media establishment, including the so-called liberal media, bombarded us with the Clinton and Edwards misadventures, because American culture levels off at the mentality of a smutty-minded 12-year-old, and naughtiness sells.

Meanwhile, Family Values conservatives are hellbent on legislating morality for everyone else, though they can't keep their own pants up. Repulsive as the image of Newt Gingrich in rut may be, it's no one else's business -- until the fat slob goes back to preaching about who can marry whom and what women are allowed to do with their lady parts.

Screw him, though (God knows) not literally.

GeoSapper.. that's because the truth has a liberal bias. So, then why does big business, which OWNS the media hate Republicans so much. You guys are ridiculous. Again, if Republicans could not cheat on their spouses they might not be called hypocrits when they say things like gay marriage is a threat to marriage. The awful truth is that Newt is a serial adulterer AND a serial hypocrit. You just have to deal with it.

Rub of the Green at post (#2.6) provided a nice list of less than stellar liberal democrats in our recent history.... how soon will it take for that post be collapsed, lmao! 1 second...2...3....

Don't force a liberal to face facts......

Respected journalism=oxymoron

Memphis Kelly, again, it's not the infidelity.... IT'S THE HYPOCRISY. I suppose that's too inconvenient for you to understand.

differnet, you're a bit confused, the hypocrisy rests with the current administration that lies to us and the main stream media who, among other issues, turned their back on the John Edward scandal of 4 years ago.... how soon we forget those things we want to forget!

Memphis

So what? The Democrats never claimed to be the "Family Values Party". You guys always do. You can take your false indignation and place it somewhere. Nobody believes your lies anymore.

Ben, I see you aren't denying that Newt is serial adulterer and hypocrit. Blaming the media for this so sad and desperate.

See you got the same memo as the right wing talkies.

the liberal bias in the media is well documented

Geosnapper - at least according to Fox, Rush, Hannity, O'Reilly, Coulter, Beck, Ingram, Savage, etc. etc. it is, right? *wink*

Poor George: would you feel better if she had given this exclusive to FOX (who yes, brilliant one, was begging her for one)? Then what would your argument be: That Fox had forgotten its own propaganda??

Wow. To those who whine about the "liberal media" would love to see only one news source be allowed to present news.

After all, anything that doesn't go along with your own preconceived viewpoints must be wrong and must be stopped at all cost.

Yeah. The real American way.

BJ, are you keeping track of BJ's? The mainstream source is basically, one source, just a different branch of the same leftwing DNC.

So why didn't the "liberal" media cover for Edwards back then?

Whats, they did cover for Edwards for a year. The National Inquirer bared the story, only after the liberal media sat on the information. Edwards discretion came out after he lost the primary elections.

Head in the sand much, John??

From where I'm watching, they are more like a gang of angry white redneck trailer trash no accounts being used by the republicans and the Kock brothers.

The T-Party are a bunch of low rent low information people that don't know any better than to ware a 3 pointed hat like a bunch of clowns.

They are ignorant beyond words.

Their ideas in Wisconsin are being unwound at about as fast as they were made.

They lied to the public when they were campaigning and now the people have had it. Wisconsin is only the beginning of getting rid of these bottom feeders.

John,

In reference to your screen name, "Laugh while you can monkeyboy"

Gingrich/Palin in 2012 !

Boy, would that ensure an Obama victory or what?!

"When Newt Ran with Sarah?" Is that a romantic comedy or what?

"Could we liberals ever get so lucky as to have this bloviating pantload as the GOP nominee."

Stop INTREPID - "bloviating pantload"! LOL! You're killing me!

"Bloviating pantload"

A more accurate two-word description of Mr. Newt Gingrich has yet to be created.

Did you see her comments about the number of debates and why she'd vote for newt?

More debates, more vetting of candidates because we know the mistake made in our country four years ago was having a candidate that was not vetted

That woman is just a treasure trove of ridiculous comments.

Let us not forget the likes FDR, JFK, Bill Clinton, and John Edwards, among others.

WALLY: And let us also not forget that these Democrats never preached religion, self rightiousness and piety in a nauseating fashion, claiming that they commanded the favor of god.

I don't give a damn what these jokers do in their private lives I do care when they claim the mantle of moral purity and then prove what hypocrits they are.

See above, wacky wally.

Ahhh Wally. Those guys are not running for POTUS.

Newt changes religions as much as he does wives. Hey Newt, try Islam or fundemental Mormenism next and you won't have to divorce as much.

@Jack EXACTLY !!!Hello WTH are the Tea/ thugs thinking ???

Obama did NOT "hang out with terrorists". That was a lie perpetuated by Palin.

Palin is an idiot.

Obama is a fine Christian man.

Conservative Christians do not seem to realize when they support hateful, lying, hypocritical politicians that they drive more people away from their religion.

Jesus only condemned one class of people- religious hypocrites. That is exactly what you get when you see Santorum, Gingrich, Romney, Sanford, Perry and right-wing governors Brownback and Walker.

HYPOCRITES spewing hate all of them.

So Bill Ayres isn't a terrorist? Do some research Sara you sound like your head is in the sand. Nice Christian post.....

@ watt75

Obama was 8 years old when the Weather Underground existed and that was in 1969. So get your sh!t straight before accusing Obama of hanging around with terrorists.

Cee, exactly when did Bill Ayers stop being a terrorist? After he turned himself in in 1980? In his speech in Caracas in 2006 seems to me he has not stopped, only changed his methods.

The libs know obama could never win a debate against Gingrich! Their solution: get Newt's bitter ex-wife to give an interview on libbie TV! Nice gig, nice payday for the little lady! This is how the liberals work....

Seldom, really...you are going to blame the news media about questioning the validity of a presidential candidate who claims to be for family values and the sanctity of marriage while being accused of asking for an open marriage by his 2^nd ex wife after she was diagnosed with MS? Really??? If President Obama was facing similar charges, you and your ilk would be calling for his head. Also, the President will wipe the floor with him in a debate. If Newt is the intellectual champion for the Republican Party, then your party is in some serious trouble.

So convenient to forget certain facts. Obama started his political care in the living room of Bill Ayers. He sat on boards with Bill Ayers. his first book was ghost-written by Bill Ayers. I don't care if obama was "only 8 years old" when Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorn were running around blowing up buildings and killing people. When Bill Ayers was featured in a news magazine that just happened to be released on 9-11 and sad his only regret was that they didn't do more, Obama wasn't eight years old! and, yet our president chose to continue to associate with this despicable piece of crap. What's that say about character? You are known by the company you keep!

So what if he associated with Ayers and sat on certain boards with him. You sorry BASTARDS can't find nothing on Obama so you come up with bullsh!t scenarios like he wasn't born here, He is a Muslim, He is a Marxist, Pals around with Terrorists, He hates White people, He Hates America, You call him stupid when he was the President of Harvard Law Review, ETC, ETC. You all can't stand that a Black person running the United States of America, a position that was only supposed to be controlled by White Men. They couldn't find ANYTHING on Obama since he announced his candidacy back in 2007 and they still can't find anything to this day. So what they do is basically lie about him and the stupid ass people just believe it to be true.

Ron Paul is a racist plain and simple. He thought that his past wouldn't come back to bite him in the ass. When confronted about those issues, he refused to answer the questions.

Uh Katherine

"soul searching" Really? Newt Gingrich? Honey, you have to HAVE a soul to do that. That hypocritical S.O.B. hasn't even a HEART much less a soul. Gimme a break.

You can't polish a turd, but you CAN roll it in glitter!

Ummm, Paul? ..guess what. The Mythbusters polished turds. Fact.

Hawaii Charles. You said it all for me. Amen.

I consider myself a liberal (even though I am a working, straight, white, married woman) but I completely respect anyone who can honestly look at "their" candidates... I am not happy with everything Obama has done. Quite frankly I am disappointed that he didn't fullfill his promises for change and transparency and has turned out to be no different than any other politician.

I honestly think the republican/democrat debate may be a moot point. I think they might just all be snakes....

Newt disagrees with wife 2 re: open marriage. He just asked her if it was ok for him to screw around.

And what appears to be, being missed, is now that he is married to his mistress callista, she is still okay with him screwing other women while she's married to him. Wouldn't that make for a messy White House!?!

Difference being Clinton was the president and abusing his power with a 20 year old intern and disrespecting the Oval office. Then he lied under oath but the left still considers him their Hero...lol..hypocrisy at it's finest....The right is called the party of family values because we don't agree with killing babies...

Who said I was a dem? I have no allegiance to our current system whatsoever, they're all idiots! But Republicans are the ones claiming to represent 'the faithful', i.e. the religious. So, there's the hypocrisy there on top of everything else.

A democracy will always be corrupted by money. Now, a Technocracy or Demarchy I could support. This BS? Just look at the fools we have in office and then explain to me why I should owe them my allegiance. Hint: I don't.

I love this country, but I hate the way it works.

No watt, location doesn't make a difference. Religious conservatives should know, the sin is the sin.

Doug Coe... We all have our deplorable sins. No candidate should be expected to be perfect. But I know the list of democrat's sins are just as awful. Santorum is the one I trust to lead our exceptional country.

Ah yes, the Family Values Party. They still think that the 10 Commandments are multiple choice.

watt75: Are you under the mistaken impression that Monica Lewinski sucked Bill Clinton off while they were within the Oval office? never happened there.

Are you also unaware that she pursued him, not the other way around. 20 going on 45.

You are the same people who claimed that Bill was married to a lesbian. You insult his wife, but won't cut him some slack for letting his stalker wear out her obsession with him. Are you going to say that Newt's many wives should now admit that they are lesbians to in some way mitigate Newt's guilt for being a serial adulterer all the while promoting his supposed christian family values while bearing false witness, and casting the first stone?

hoolagooly

Santorum? As POTUS? Really?

Seriously, get back on your meds, or maybe get off the meds but get help.

Jesus said "ye without sin, cast the first stone." It is wonderful that there are so many people on this site who have never ever done anything they regret in their life. Newt has admitted to many mistakes and has asked to be forgiven, if he is the Christian he professes to be, he has been forgiven by God. Its a real pity that he can't be forgiven by the posters here. His personal life is his personal life, just as Clinton's personal life is his personal life. All of us are going to have to answer for the decisions made in our lifetimes.

Many posters on this site claim all Republicans are hypocrites. Some may be, but if they admit their mistakes we should be able to move on. All of you who say Republicans are trying to cram their values down their throats need to wake up, even if Rick Santorum who you despise so much for values were to be elected president, he is not going to be able to cram anything down your throats, as long as their are elected officials in Congress who disagree with his views, his ideas will not be passed as law. He can try all day to get his ideas passed but as long as the majority in Congress vote against it, it won't happen. Thats why thankfully, Obama hasn't been able to cram his liberal radical ideas down our throats the past 3 years, the majority has voted it down, or come up with enough votes to allow it not to happen.

Paul:

She pursued him? Let's say that happened, he is so weak that he "jus' let it happen" ? One thing about President Clinton, he is not weak. So, I think this was completely mutual, and where it happened, who cares.

Those insults to his wife, a formidable politician and Sec State, are foolish and baseless. I am no supporter of her politics but she would have been a better President than Obama, better organizer, more to the center I think.

All that said, in my view, Newt should not be President, but not because of his marriages nor all these issues being brought up these days.

Who cares? About where it happened? That has been the major issue for most commentors on the lewinski affair from the "right". Their biggest issue has always been about making the false mention that it took place in the OVAL office, when it did NOT.

I find it amazing how Republicans can swallow a camel and choke on a gnat. I don’t really care about Newt’s personnel life. However, since he is running for president and touting how he represents “family values” and wants to defend the “sanctity of marriage” from those damn homosexuals, then I find his hypocrisy mind numbing. The Republicans who are supporting Newt have just swallowed a huge camel and didn’t even seem to blink…amazing, freaking amazing.

I agree ModDem99. Newt can lambast the media all he likes, but he brought this on himself by going after Clinton for his lack of values (which was not a Clinton campaign theme in the first place) and then running his own campaign based on "moral" values, which he himself is so sorely lacking. The problem with Newt and many of the Republican candidates is not so much how sleazy they all are, but their HYPOCRISY on that issue.

hmmm....So, if Newt hadn't "gone after" Clinton, then you wouldn't care?

NavyKoz and Paul - both raise the subject and it's a good one. Although Monica was at an age of legal consent, NEWT and the Republicans consistently raised the issue that she was only 21 at the time, and this made it somehow non-consensual. Calista was a 25 year old lobbyist when they "met", but of course, in NewtLand, that was perfectly consensual and ethical.

The exact point that Newt raises is that his personal life shouldn't be a public issue. And he's 100% right, neither was Clintons' sordid tryst with Monica. But Gingrich led the charge to appoint a special prosecutor to the tune of over $100M so all the details would be out there.

To be angrily saying it's despicable to ask these questions publicly, boy, that takes some mental gyrations.