• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

YA, YA ,YA. this guy for pres

nonothing

Well-known member
WASHINGTON - Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich acknowledged he was having an extramarital affair even as he led the charge against President Clinton over the Monica Lewinsky affair, he acknowledged in an interview with a conservative Christian group.

"The honest answer is yes," Gingrich, a potential 2008 Republican presidential candidate, said in an interview with Focus on the Family founder James Dobson to be aired Friday, according to a transcript provided to The Associated Press. "There are times that I have fallen short of my own standards. There's certainly times when I've fallen short of God's standards."

Gingrich argued in the interview, however, that he should not be viewed as a hypocrite for pursuing Clinton's infidelity.

"The president of the United States got in trouble for committing a felony in front of a sitting federal judge," the former Georgia congressman said of Clinton's 1998 House impeachment on perjury and obstruction of justice charges. "I drew a line in my mind that said, 'Even though I run the risk of being deeply embarrassed, and even though at a purely personal level I am not rendering judgment on another human being, as a leader of the government trying to uphold the rule of law, I have no choice except to move forward and say that you cannot accept ... perjury in your highest officials."

Widely considered a mastermind of the Republican revolution that swept Congress in the 1994 elections, Gingrich remains wildly popular among many conservatives. He has repeatedly placed near the top of Republican presidential polls recently, even though he has not formed a campaign.

Gingrich has said he is waiting to see how the Republican field shapes up before deciding in the fall whether to run.

Reports of extramarital affairs have dogged him for years as a result of two messy divorces, but he has refused to discuss them publicly.

Gingrich, who frequently campaigned on family values issues, divorced his second wife, Marianne, in 2000 after his attorneys acknowledged Gingrich's relationship with his current wife, Callista Bisek, a former congressional aide more than 20 years younger than he is.

His first marriage, to his former high school geometry teacher, Jackie Battley, ended in divorce in 1981. Although Gingrich has said he doesn't remember it, Battley has said Gingrich discussed divorce terms with her while she was recuperating in the hospital from cancer surgery.

Gingrich married Marianne months after the divorce.

"There were times when I was praying and when I felt I was doing things that were wrong. But I was still doing them," he said in the interview. "I look back on those as periods of weakness and periods that I'm ... not proud of."

Gingrich's congressional career ended in 1998 when he abruptly resigned from Congress after poor showings from Republicans in elections and after being reprimanded by the House ethics panel over charges that he used tax-exempt funding to advance his political goals.
 

P Joe

Well-known member
Who freaking cares??? I mean really do you think NO ONE ELSE reads the paper??? Any more crap you can just cut and paste. Here, I'll give it a try, let me go over to CNN.com and just cut and paste. I bet your right mouse button is almost wore out!
 

nonothing

Well-known member
P Joe said:
Who freaking cares??? I mean really do you think NO ONE ELSE reads the paper??? Any more crap you can just cut and paste. Here, I'll give it a try, let me go over to CNN.com and just cut and paste. I bet your right mouse button is almost wore out!

ok your sound like you are everybodys mom here,go back to the judgemental hole you crawled out of.....You come across as you feel you better then the rest here......So go away and do not come back....I bet no one will miss you ......
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
Oh, aptly named one......I'ts nice to see that you are into the equal opportunity thing. Doesn't matter WHO you bash, as long as you can bash someone. At least it wasn't me in the previous reply.

You must be going through KOLA withdrawl.

Talk about crawling out of a judgmental hole....... :roll:
 

passin thru

Well-known member
In order for this to matter you have to prove:

Both these instances of cheating are the same

Both these men committed Perjury under oath

And then if you can prove that these errors in judgement these men used
are the SAME then you have to prove an inconsistency in a posters stance.

Have at it...........................remember to check back with your answers. I hope we will even remember who you are when you are done with this exercise.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
reader (the Second) said:
Family values and all that are just hypocrisy with the Republican leadership for the most part. :D

Yep- You look at Gingrich, Guilliani, Foley, etal-- doesn't look like the Democrats have any monopoly on not being able to keep their zippers shut and their pants up..... :(
 

memanpa

Well-known member
and our friends to the north are worried about OUR politics???? :roll: :roll:


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Liberal Party of Canada Policy Resolution: Allow "Anal Intercourse" with 14-Year-Olds

By John-Henry Westen

OTTAWA, November 22, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) - In what is likely a Canadian first for a major political party, the Liberal Party of Canada is proposing lowering the age of consent for "anal intercourse" in their publicly-released book of policy resolutions.

On Monday, the Liberal Party of Canada made available the text of the policy resolutions put forth by the Party's Provincial and Territorial Associations, commissions, and National Caucus. The policy resolutions are to be debated and voted upon at the Liberal Leadership and Biennial Convention to be held from November 28 to December 2, 2006, in Montréal.

While still resolutions, the policies which have made it into the book have already been carefully considered by party faithful. "The policy resolutions represent the culmination of a nine-month grassroots policy process that began at the riding level and has worked its way up to the national Convention," says a release on the resolutions.

Sexual health experts have warned that anal intercourse is a recklessly dangerous activity which is the "riskiest form of sexual activity when it comes to the transmission of HIV/AIDS" (see coverage: http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/feb/06021403.html )

Nevertheless, a Liberal Party policy resolution, attributed to the British Columbia branch of the Party, calls for lowering the age of consent for such activity to 14-years of age. Policy no. 45 reads: "WHEREAS the current law discriminates against unmarried same-sex couples by not permitting unmarried persons under 18 to legally engage in consensual anal intercourse; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Liberal Party of Canada urge the Federal Government of Canada to bring the age of consent for anal intercourse in equal pairing with other forms of sexual activity." The age of sexual consent for heterosexual intercourse in Canada is 14.

Resolution no. 46 calls for a review of the criminal code on prostitution with a view to legalizing the exploitive practice.

Another resolution seeks to make permanent 'safe houses' in major citiies where heroin addicts can without fear of arrest inject themselves with the deadly drugs. Resolution no. 43 states: "BE IT RESOLVED that the Liberal Party of Canada take all steps necessary to establish a National Safe Injection Site program for large cities."

A proposal by the Young Liberals of Canada seeks not only to legalize marijuana, but also to have the criminal records of those convicted of illegal possession since 1923 expunged. Resolution no. 44 reads: BE IT RESOLVED that the Liberal Party of Canada urges the government of Canada to legalise and regulate Canada's marijuana industry and trade; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Liberal Party of Canada urges the government of Canada to examine the social consequences of granting amnesty to Canadians convicted of simple marijuana possession since 1923, and destruction of all criminal records related thereto."

See the Liberal Party of Canada Policy Resolutions online here:
http://www.liberal.ca/pdf/docs/PolicyWorkbook-EN-web.pdf

See related LifeSiteNews reports:
Gay Activists Ask Canada to Lower Age of Consent for Anal Sex, National Post Agrees
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/feb/06021403.html

Conservative Government Will Raise Age of Sexual Consent
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/feb/06020803.html

Bill to Raise Age of Consent for Sex from 14 to 16 Introduced, Gay Activists Opposed
http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2006/jun/06062201.html



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


(c) Copyright: LifeSiteNews.com is a production of Interim Publishing. Permission to republish is granted (with limitation*) but acknowledgement of source is *REQUIRED* (use LifeSiteNews.com).

NEWS TIPS to [email protected] or call 1-866-787-9947 or (416) 204-1687 ext. 444

Donate to LifeSiteNews.com at http://www.lifesite.net/contribute/
 

passin thru

Well-known member
R2, first I am not defending Gingrich one bit. I was merely trying to point out the differences.
I f you remeber, the Lewinsky came about from investigations other than infidelity.
You actually hit on my point(pot calling the kettle black). Remember all the Dems defending Clinton and are now jumping on Gingrich. The biggest thing about Clinton and I alluded to it was his perjury. I really have no interest in being in their bedroom. Even though infidelity is a major character flaw of anyone.
 

nonothing

Well-known member
loomixguy said:
Oh, aptly named one......I'ts nice to see that you are into the equal opportunity thing. Doesn't matter WHO you bash, as long as you can bash someone. At least it wasn't me in the previous reply.

You must be going through KOLA withdrawl.

Talk about crawling out of a judgmental hole....... :roll:

I would bash you but it is more fun to see you come after me for what i say to others......To me your just a big joke anyways...bring your old name out and then I will maybe care more.....but right now your just a big ole' laff ...... :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

nonothing

Well-known member
PT many on here over time have pointed to clintons infidelity as a big deal....Never,other than your last two posts has the perjury card been used,,,(and it is fair to use it)....But why did it get to that point in the first place?Why is it ok to go after Clinton while Gingrich was doing the same thing at the same time....Newt never admited to it till now but had been asked before and chose not to answer.....When clinton chose not to answer he was called into court...So if Clintons action with lewinsky mattered enough to be questioned at oath,why is it ok for newt to just breeze in......I think newt let this out so it would not get brought out during his race and therefore be made to answer for it......

So your saying what clinton did with the intern is ok? It is only the denial under oath that you have issue with?
 

passin thru

Well-known member
Ok, I have major problems with Clinton and Lewinsky deal. You put the office of Prez(highest office in the land) in Jeopardy with these things. I don't care who else or how many have done it. It still put the Prez in a very precarious position. I defintely have a problem with Perjury. I hate to think that at times we might have to overlook that act, as in no other choices or worse choices. Thats Politics for ya........sad.
One has to remember that the Lewinsky deal surfaced during a seperate investigation, which makes it justifibly pursued.
 

Steve

Well-known member
many on here over time have pointed to Clintons' infidelity as a big deal.

And many of those same people on here, (myself included), have pointed out that Newt doesn't have a chance at the nomination because of his infidelity and ethics cloud..

While I respect his ability to govern, and more then likely he would do a good job...I would not vote for him in the primaries..because of this.....

But given a choice between him and any of the current Dems running,...it would be Newt in 08....
 

CattleArmy

Well-known member
Gingrich argued in the interview, however, that he should not be viewed as a hypocrite for pursuing Clinton's infidelity.


I just wonder how he can argue that he's not a hypocrite? :???:
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
Only one name here, or anyplace else, aptly named one. Your fixation that I am another member here is getting old, but quite entertaining at the same time.

Fume on! :lol:
 

nonothing

Well-known member
loomixguy said:
Only one name here, or anyplace else, aptly named one. Your fixation that I am another member here is getting old, but quite entertaining at the same time.

Fume on! :lol:

ok whatever you say... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
 

memanpa

Well-known member
nonothing said:
loomixguy said:
Only one name here, or anyplace else, aptly named one. Your fixation that I am another member here is getting old, but quite entertaining at the same time.

Fume on! :lol:

ok whatever you say... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

in nono's mind the only one on here that does not have another identy is nono, i almost bet that he thinks everyone on here is the same person using different nicknames :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

talk about paranoia :D :D
 

passin thru

Well-known member
The one thing I find interesting is............ The people that only think it was about sex with Monica and that think it was not important do not address the main issue and it is conveniently left out here. I wonder why no one brings it up. I waited to see if anyone of them would mention it. Still nothing.
Oh well it is only sex..................ya right.
It was only Perjury.....................ya right.
It was only a witch hunt...............ya right.

Still waiting for a brave liberal to tell the truth.
Or if they don't know is even more pathetic.
pa_4.gif
 

Soapweed

Well-known member
memanpa said:
in nono's mind the only one on here that does not have another identy is nono, i almost bet that he thinks everyone on here is the same person using different nicknames :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

talk about paranoia :D :D

nono and Reader 2. Talk about a pair to annoy ya. :wink: :)
 

nonothing

Well-known member
reader (the Second) said:
Politicians are slime, regardless of party. Slimier still is to attack the other side for things you are doing yourself. And by the way, the Democrats do the same thing.


I agree.,the dems are in the same boat.....
 
Top