…partying in secret to hide the fact that they are more equal than you are.
Obama talking about economic justice is like Gingrich talking about marital fidelity.
“… like Gingrich talking about marital fidelity …”
Or like some guy named Saul changing his name to Paul and talking about being a good Christian and how that can lead to persecution.
Look, far be it from me to defend Newt Gingrich, of all people. But according to Holy Mother Church, Newt Gingrich has been married exactly ONCE. According to Holy Mother Church, Newt Gingrich’s sins of the flesh have been confessed and forgiven (otherwise, he wouldn’t have been received into Her communion).
The objection appears to be that, because Gingrich’s sins are in the public’s knowledge, he is thereby disqualified from ever speaking publicly about avoiding those types of sins.
But far be it from me to get in your way if you wish to be more Catholic than Gingrich’s bishop.
Yeah. St. Paul and Gingrich. Impossible to tell them apart.
As I just said: Going and sinning no more involves, among other things, not continuing to tell lies about the way in which you went into your wife’s hospital room and demanded to talk about terms of divorce. Gingrich still does this and even manipulates his daughter into doing it for him. He’s welcome to call himself Catholic if his bishop says he can. But I don’t have to vote for this creep.
“Yeah. St. Paul and Gingrich. Impossible to tell them apart.”
What a juvenile retort. No one is comparing Gingrich to St. Paul. But I was under the impression that we were to look at these great sinners who became saints as examples to us all of how no one is beyond the grace of our Lord. Apparently, I was mistaken. At least I was mistaken when it gets in the way of the increasingly juvenile blog host’s political ax to grind.
Look, I’m not going to defend Gingrich. He is not now and never was my favorite politician and I don’t intend to vote for him. But the standard that you seek to hold him to is an impossible one and could be applicable to any sinner. You. Me. Anyone. I reject your literally graceless viewpoint not because it applies to Gingrich, but because it applies to and condemns anyone who has fallen short of the glory of God.
Come on. It’s *impossible* for Gingrich to acknowledge that he treated his wife like crap and to attempt a little humility?
I thought the former wife – along with the daughter – also said that the story you are referring to is not true.
Excellent point, Jay: the Church tells us he’s been married once, so he’s been married once.
I also don’t have a problem with the White House throwing a super-cool party for kids, something that will stay with them forever. Good on ’em: as far as I am concerned, that’s tax money better spent than half the waste we typically dump out the window.
Parties like this are no surprise for this couple. Remember their date night in New York? http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2009/05/obamas-date-night-in-new-york/
You begin your 1st comment comparing Newt to Paul.
You begin your second comment with the claim that no one has done so.
You certainly seem ready to campaign for him!
But not 100% accurate, since what he was trying to do was evoke Paul’s conversion, rather than any Paul/Newt comparison itself. It was a decent allusion, and is precisely why I tend to give Newt the benefit of the doubt.
Although I don’t believe the comment was a “nice zinger”, but an intentional misrepresentation of what I said.
In other words, a lie.
You are a liar.
And I’m not about to campaign for any of the stiffs running for President, and certainly not Newt Gingrich.