Gingrich Pwned

Gingrich Pwned January 9, 2012

Ouch:

"To be fair -- an enduring romance and a World War probably give a good ..."

Trailer for a new biopic about ..."
"So you inherently object to Shakespeare's ANTONY AND CLEOPATRA or JULIUS CAESAR or RICHARD III ..."

Trailer for a new biopic about ..."
"I've not heard the radio drama, but the BBC, in general, seems to have a ..."

Trailer for a new biopic about ..."
""It will be boon to humanity when the boomers dies off."In case you haven't noticed ..."

Dear Prolife Suckers

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


TRENDING AT PATHEOS Catholic
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • I loved this video of Gingrich defending the Church from bigotry.

  • Sean O

    Spot on Ron. Almost to a man, the republican contenders and all of the W Bush adm were chicken hawks. Perry did the same dodge as W, hiding in the reserves defending Texas while boys were dying in Vietnam.

    Unlike in the Vietnam era, the reserves today are essentially paper of the regular army. Different deal.

    • “Perry did the same dodge as W, hiding in the reserves defending Texas while boys were dying in Vietnam.”

      I do not believe this to be an accurate statement of Perry’s service record. If you can provide proof for the assertion, I will withdraw my objection.

      • Richard M

        Perry actually served as an officer in the Air Force, not the reserves, from 1972-1977. Vietnam was already essentially over by the point.

        Dubya, of course, is another story.

    • Tom Connelly

      All this talk about chicken hawks comes uncomfortably close to suggesting that a person cannot support military action unless he has voluntarily served in the miltary.

      Lots of people attempted to avoid military service in Vietnam by whatever legal means were at their disposal. One could argue that since the draft ended, lots of people haved avoided military service by choosing not to volunteer (including me and probably most of thee).

      So do we chicken hawks get to speak up only when we oppose military action?

      • Isaac

        If you aren’t a hawk, you can’t be a chicken hawk.

      • Maiki

        If only those willing to go to war themselves ever spoke in favor of it, I gather we might have a whole lot less of it.

        That said, first amendment rights go both ways.

      • Andy, Bad Person

        All this talk about chicken hawks comes uncomfortably close to suggesting that a person cannot support military action unless he has voluntarily served in the miltary.

        I think it’s more than that. I don’t think that you can’t “support” military action if you haven’t served in the military. However, to hold office, to have your finger on the button, and to be the person with the power to actually send young men and women off to die in war, while simultaneously being unwilling to fight yourself? That’s chickenhawk-y. Or chickenhawkishness. Chickenhawkality? We need a word for it.

        • Tom Connelly

          So, for example, those of us who never served in the military but voted for the chickenhawk over the war hero in 2004, implicitly condoning the former’s policy of sending men and women to die in our war of choice in Iraq, even though he dodged service in Vietnam, are not ourselves chickenhawks?

          Phew; that’s a relief.

  • William

    I found it just too much that Gingrich kept talking about the “sacrament of marriage”. He’s do well not to bring up marriage at all.

  • Confederate Papist

    I am not defending Newt here but I am sick and tired of this constant raising of his past marriages. He has explained the situation ad nauseum. Does that put him in the clear? I guess so. If he confessed his past sins, made peace and apologised to his former wives, his kids are defending him, who the hell are we to question what has transpired in the confessional? It’s now between God and him. If he lies to God then he has to deal with the consequences.

    You don’t have to like him at all. Just because he’s Catholic doesn’t mean you have to vote for him. Fine, but bloviating constantly about his past infidelities is almost like saying Mark Shea is not really a Catholic because he was not born one.

    • William

      I accept that Newt has dealt with it all sacramentally. I just think he should be in ashes and sackcloth rather than running for president.

      • If that’s the case, then I think that we would all be better off in being in ashes and sackcloth. I’d prefer not to be the pharisee in the parable of the pharisee and the tax collector. I don’t know about the other guy, but I sure need to beg for God’s mercy.

      • Ed L

        This is ridiculous: Christ says to the woman “Go and sin no more,” where would the Church be if St. Augustine had declined leadership because of his past? Or St. Ignatius of Loyola? Or Francis of Assisi? The Catholic Church’s history is full of men who became Catholics after having lived profligate lives, who are we to say it is impossible for Newt to be unqualified for the job? I understand that we must judge his sincerity, since we are voting for him; but, we cannot blind ourselves to his virtues because of past sins.

        • Mark Shea

          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.

          • Peggy R

            FactCheck.org is not conservative’s friend. I can’t find the WaPo article debunking this widely-held myth. But FactCheck I present:

            http://www.factcheck.org/2011/12/the-gingrich-divorce-myth/

            I was surprised to read in the MSM that the story’s not quite what has been told. I am not planning to vote for him. I do appreciate his comments on anti-Catholic bigotry, nonnetheless.

            • Mark Shea
              • Peggy R

                FC covers that too. There’ not much combox room here, but it’s not clear at all whether NG insisted on bringing up something testy w/her, if she objected, etc. Or it just came up and tempers got out of hand? They’re bound to have something to say about the pending divorce if they were in a room together. Why is that shocking? A child of divorce speaking.

        • ds

          Augustine, Loyola, Francis >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Gingrich

          • ds

            oops

            Augustine, Francis, Loyola >>>>>>>Gingrich

      • Ed L

        “Let him who is without sin cast the first stone”

        • Andy, Bad Person

          Exactly. Stop executing Gingrich, Mark!

          Wait. You’re not?

        • Jeff

          I’m out of stones, so I’ll just cast a ballot…for Ron Paul.

  • “Perry did the same dodge as W, hiding in the reserves defending Texas while boys were dying in Vietnam.”

    I do not believe this to be an accurate statement of Perry’s service record. If you can provide proof for the assertion, I will withdraw my objection.

  • Sean O

    Mr Connlley,

    Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But individuals who studiously avoided military service in their youth (& this includes the Reserves dodge in vietnam era) have no business banging war drums and displaying eagerness to display ‘their’ toughness by sending other young men & women to fight in wars of choice now. It is the very height of hypocrisy.

    Most men who have served and have seen combat are not so gung ho to jump into battles as the Chickenhawks are. I’m sick & tired of faux tough guys like the ones who got us in and promoted the “cake walk” engagements like the Iraq war. Let them put their ass on the line first. That curb a lot of the adventurism.

    War is serious business and should be treated so.
    Always the last result when all other viable options have failed.

    • Tom Connelly

      Most men who have served and have seen combat are not so gung ho to jump into battles as the Chickenhawks are.

      I’m genuinely curious: What is your source for this statement?

      • Sean O

        Mr Connelly,

        The statement is mine. It is based on observation. In the run up to the Iraq war almost any war drum bangers in the administration or media had never served in the regular military nor had they ever seen or experienced combat.

        Almost to a man in W. Bush’s adm none had served and they were in lock step for the war. The only one with any reluctance about the war was Colin Powell. And sure enough he was the only one who served and saw combat on the ground during Vietnam. [Rumsfeld was in the Air Force, I believe, & may have been in Korea. Even in this instance, things are different down in the trenches compared to up in the sky.]

        The list goes on & on for the tough guy chickenhawks who bravely avoided serving in the Vietnam war but want to send you son to wars now

        GW Bush ——Reserves dodge defending Texas
        Cheney –“I had other priorities..” 5 deferments
        Tom Delay — did not serve
        Saxby Chabliss — did not serve[& questions the balls of veterans]
        Newt G — did not serve –bad ankles
        Rush Limbaugh —did not serve–fat ankles, & allergic to bullets & motars
        Bill O’Reilly –did not serve, hanging in Spin Zone
        Bill Kristol –did not serve
        Dan Quale –Reserves defending Indiana
        Paul Wolfowitz –did not serve
        Douglas Feith — did not serve
        Mitt Romney — did not serve
        Richard Pearl — did not serve
        ……..time & space don’t permit me to name all the “tough” guys wish who leap to war now but studiously & strenuously avoided serving in their youth. They love sounding tough & beating their chests. Plus they have the yellow magnetic “Support the Troops” ribbon on their SUVs. Really, what more can they do?

  • Sean O

    Jay

    I don’t have details on Perry’s service. I heard he served in the Texas air guard like Bush. I don’t believe he left the states during Vietnam.

    If someone knows more please share.

    • Arnold

      I bet that most people serving in the military during the Vietnam war never served in that country and/or never left our shores.

      • You think? I like how it went from those who never served, to all of a sudden now the line is being moved a little more toward ‘only those who actually served over seas’.

    • Gov. Perry was not in the reserves, but was an active duty Air Force pilot from 1974-1977:

      “After graduating in 1972 from Texas A&M, where he was a yell leader, Perry entered pilot training at Webb Air Force Base in Big Spring about three months before the Paris Peace Accords brought what was supposed to be an official end to the Vietnam War. Fighting would continue for a couple more years, but by the time Perry joined the 772nd squadron in 1974, American air forces had been pulled out of Vietnam.”

      http://www.statesman.com/news/texas-politics/perry-colleagues-remember-solid-pilot-and-airman-1863224.html?printArticle=y

  • Thomas R

    I think if you’re defending or liking Paul’s comment here you’ve completely jumped the shark for me. I know you hate Gingrich, and I think at this point hate is basically the right word here, but this is ridiculous even for you or Paul.

    Paul was called up, despite being married, because he was a doctor. Doctor’s were an exception to the rule about married men in college. (And Gingrich was likely too flat-footed to serve anyway, see the site “Factcheck”) My Dad was not called up during Vietnam because he had a child. Does this mean he can say nothing about wars? Of course not. We’re not living in Heinlein’s “Starship Troopers.” I mean you can’t get pregnant. Should you never speak of abortion again?

    I get that in politics you’re IMO eccentric and unconnected from US reality, and that after this I might become one of the Neo-Con Catholics in your mind, but I guess I thought you were still above embracing things close to lies because you dislike a guy.

    • Mark Shea

      It’s not a lie to say that one man served and the other didn’t. The man who served does not want to send people off to suffer and die on foreign adventures that benefit oligarchs. The man who did not serve does.

      • Thomas R

        I think you’re smart enough to know that I didn’t mean the lie was him not serving.

        My Dad didn’t serve because he was married with a child. They just didn’t call him up. Was Gingrich supposed to volunteer, become a medic so they would call him up, or what? Was my Dad?

        Paul didn’t make any kind of point and by indicating he “dodged” he was lying. I think any fair-minded person who lived then would know that.

  • Hezekiah Garrett

    I don’t know his source, Tom, but I’ll gladly endorse the sentiment. I base it on a bunch of anecdotal evidence gathered by exposure to fellow veterans.

  • Observer

    Mr. Gingritch makes excuses making money through a venture after shaping policies falling into the interest of Fan Mae. If he didn’t make these excuses and actually admitted those things done were wrong, I wouldn’t have so much a problem. People can make mistakes and I can understand some of their naive and selfish decisions in the past. However, he doesn’t do that.

    With regard to the past failings the man has had in marriage, I don’t think it’s sensible to make rhetoric out of something he may very well, in confession, has confessed with guilt Sure, none of us can say yea or nay to whether he really had a strong sense of guilt and did confess (as he and his confessor only know in God’s grace.) And even with that being said, the past failings he’s had, with which does not necessarily fall into the platitude of political discourse, ought to be left out for appropriate discussion to why one wouldn”t vote for him.

    Again, I agree with you Mark on his failings (particular to Fan Mae) to show the virtue of being self-governed (what Mother Theresa, Pope John Paul II, Benedict XVI, the immoderate temperance practiced by Chesterton, and even the pagan philosophers practiced.) But, what past failings with which he pursued in marriage does not necessarily come out of necessity with respect to not voting for him (unless, and I’m open to correction, he makes it so by making his past failings public with no regrets for what he did – and defending himself the same way he has defended himself upon his venture. So, the critique ought to be proportionate to how he conducts himself towards being elected.)