Follow The Apparent Parent by Email

Thursday, January 26, 2012

Newt Gingrich attacks Mitt Romney for..."seeming perfect"? Hmmm...

From nymag.com:

"So far, voters in the party of "traditional family values" don't seem to really mind that Newt Gingrich is a thrice-married, two-time adulterer. In an interview with CBN's David Brody today, Gingrich suggested that it's because most people have had "very sad" moments in their own lives, which they "wish wouldn’t have occurred." Then, he took a very unsubtle and seemingly gratuitous shot at squeaky-clean Mitt Romney:
"So, I think in that sense, it may make me more normal than somebody who wanders around seeming perfect and maybe not understanding the human condition and the challenges of life for normal people."
- End quote

What was that Newt? Did you really just try to underhandedly attack Mitt Romney for not cheating on his sick wife? Twice? Geez, that paints Mitt Romney in a completely different light now. Time to jump on the Newt Gingrich bandwagon. Nothing better than bringing in a president who has already admitted his infidelity. After all, people had issues with Clinton's scandals only because he perjured himself. Not because people thought the most powerful man in the world should have the scruples and faithfulness not to abuse his power by jumping in bed with interns that were decidedly not his wife. No, we do not expect the U.S. president to have morals. That would be a terrible situation. After all, how can a politician lead the country astray if...*GASP*...that politician strives to do the right thing all the time! Only someone who has tasted forbidden fruit knows just how good it tastes, right? And Americans do like stuff that tastes good. Am I right?

I hope you could tell I was laying the sarcasm on thick there. As disgusting as I thought Gingrich was before, this blows me away. This is "calling evil good and good evil." I don't know where that is in the scriptures off the top of my head, but boy is it in there. And it's definitely not one of the ten commandments, (i.e. "Thou shalt call evil good and good evil." That surely didn't come down on a stone tablet from Mt. Sinai.)

And about those "sad moments" because of personal indiscretion: maybe it would be better to elect someone whose "sad moments" come not because of their transgressions but in spite of their faithfulness. If there is anyone out there who has not experienced "very sad moments," that person is surely incapable of reading this blog. Those people are all of 8 hours old, after all.

If normalcy means cheating on two sick wives, call me an outlying lunatic. I want no passage on that boat. And this is the guy that has a [really really distant] shot at becoming the most powerful man in the world. Considering his track record with only moderate power, imagine what he would do with more. We need to run away from Newt Gingrich. I mean, look at the guy:


As a family man, I find it despicable that a politician has done his best to cast people who are committed to family as "not understanding the human condition." Besides, anyone who has been a stake president has seen enough of the human condition to know they don't need to touch the forbidden fruit. On that note, I don't think Romney's perfect. I disagree with him on some points. I'm at issue with him over what I see as his political maneuvering to become governor in Massachusetts, an incredibly liberal state. But I think he is a man of integrity for the most part. And that is something seldom seen in politics. And considering the current state of D.C., that can only be a good thing.

2 comments:

  1. "As a family man, I find it despicable that a politician has done his best to cast people who are committed to family as "not understanding the human condition." Besides, anyone who has been a stake president has seen enough of the human condition to know they don't need to touch the forbidden fruit."

    SO well-said here. Newt sounds like he's desperate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Michaela. The guy is grasping at straws, isn't he? I have no idea what anyone sees in him. I see a guy with obvious moral and ethical problems seeking a place of prominent power on name recognition alone. He's banking on the fact that people won't remember his name recognition comes from ethics violations as Speaker of the House.

      Delete