Was she talking about marriage between a man and another man or a woman and another woman, which, of course, Newt Gingrich excludes from the definition of marriage? No, she was talking about a marriage between a man (Newt) and a woman (her) in which the woman does not have the man all to herself but will share him with another woman (Callista, who accepted the concept of sharing):
ADDED: If the embedded video doesn't work for you, go here.
UPDATE: Just watched the "Frontline" interview. I thought it was nothing (aside from the strange allegations against Marianne having to do with meeting with an arms dealer and asking for $10 million). Basically, it's the same story we always knew. He had an affair, and then they got divorced. I don't really understand her motivation to go on camera to say that. She seems like a very grim and sad woman.
१९ जानेवारी, २०१२
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
७५ टिप्पण्या:
So, no sister-wives for Marianne. Got it.
Where the hell is Gloria Allred? Can we assume from her lack of being involved with this that it's actually got some truth to it?
The latest Rasmussen poll in SC:
Gingrich……33%
Romney……31%
Paul…………15%
Santorum….11%
Perry…………2%
Other…………1%
Not Sure…….6%
They're wondering if there's going to be a bigger than usual turnout of women in SC.
If so, that nice, faithful Mr Romney may pull this one out, after all.
Hell hath no fury isn't always limited to the woman scorned.
This woman is his second wife. It's pretty rich for her to be moralizing about Newt when she was the mistress that caused his first marriage to unravel.
Also, NRO has a story that she and Newt had been seperated for six years before. Being estranged for 6 years isn't much of a marriage either...and might cause a man to seek relations elsewhere.
Do you agree with what I wrote in the earlier post today: "To see the ex-wife's face as she lets this stuff out... it's titillating. We'll pay attention. We'll make clips of the juiciest seconds. The experience of receiving the tidbits will be entirely different. They don't have to be new tidbits to feel vividly new. Picture it."
A man who marries his mistress necessarily leaves the position open. I believe that was Mark Twain, but I'm not sure.
"This woman is his second wife. It's pretty rich for her to be moralizing about Newt when she was the mistress that caused his first marriage to unravel."
It doesn't matter whether we like her or not. She's not running for office. All that matters is whether she makes us not like him. You know if you dislike a man's wife, even his ex-wife, it reflects on him. He chose her, and she wanted him. If she's unpleasant, it gets on him.
I believe that was Mark Twain, but I'm not sure.
Oscar Wilde, off the top of my head.
Newt and Marianne Gingrich divorced.
Bill and Hillary Clinton have been in an open marriage for decades, at least from Bill's end of the arrangement.
The media treats the Clintion escapades as a "private, personal matter between adults". And they seek to damage or ruin the Gingrich candidacy.
The MSM is blatently in the tank for liberal politicians.
Is there ANY corroboration for Marianne Gingrich's story? Any? Or are the usual journalistic practices waived when conservatives are involved?
"It doesn't matter whether we like her or not. She's not running for office. All that matters is whether she makes us not like him."
I think there is truth to that. I think some of the animus that existed toward Clinton was because of Hillary.
Hey, open marriage worked for them, right?
I think there is truth to that. I think some of the animus that existed toward Clinton was because of Hillary.
Hey, open marriage worked for them, right?
That's a subjective call, isn't it? Sure, things were going great, but then Hillary got Huma Weiner pregnant...
Marianne is the LEAST of NEwt's problems!
His biggest hurdle? He's the turkey that led the GOP into the wilderness; following Ken Starr's "search for the penis entry in the Oval Office."
Didn't clip Bill Clinton's wings, either.
Is Marianne a bitch? Yes. But she's not a senator! (Which also shows you that Bill Clinton understood how to keep his "woman" loyal.)
You need to be reminded that Newt Gingrich is a chump? What? His being Catholic didn't erase his previous behaviors?
The better question is: WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE GOP? Is there talent missing from their pool?
Oh. If you need a clue, Sherlock, the MEDIA is touting Newt. And, yes. They know all about his short comings.
It's supposed to keep Obama on top.
And, maybe, it's working?
... Ah, yes. The "Anthony Weiner" example. Used best on the current status of the piracy legislation. Where both sides got caught dipping in.
And, then?
A little blackout. And, you saw congress critters FLEEING. "They shed support like Anthony Weiner's "twitter."
The GOP hasn't figured out, yet, how to be more like GEEKS. And, less like dweebs and jerks.
As the late Patrice O'Neal said, "I'm sorry. I thought you were a ho."
Ah so, the last day ex-wife bomb about past sexual lust in a candidates heart. It is a true classic maneuver.
That same maneuver got Barry Obama an Illinois Senate seat(and the rest of King Obama's reign is history.)
Apparently Newt has a strong mental discipline that few men have if he could do two women at the same time and keep his sanity...but that becomes the next question: has Newt kept his sanity?
Why are people so fond of digging into the personal life of these candidates? Gingrich isn't my bet, but I think that the personal lives of these candidates shouldn't be the bases of their capability as a political official.
She's a bitter clinger. People don't like that.
Newt will win in SC and FL.
Bill Clinton's not running for anything.
Hillary, meanwhile, is the top of State. (Which brings in Saudi money. And, prestige. Since the media have to find her to get her to give them sound bytes.)
Trying to compare Newt Gingrich to Bill Clinton, misses the point. In 1998, Newt brought the battle to Bill Clinton. While Bill Clinton was still president.
Guess who won?
Meanwhile, you could ask, who is giving money to Newt? (Are the people who abandoned Obama, because he wouldn't steal the Internet; funding others?)
Why ask?
Because, in politics, everything is done for the money.
What we need to do is put up a big red beacon on top of the congressional dome.
Given how much attention yesterday's blackout got from ordinary Americans ... It seems the GOP lacks the ability to tap into this mainstream. Why is that? Is there something wrong with your bait? Is your fishing pole too short?
I'm still betting on Donald Trump. Who is watching the GOP committing suicide, along with the democraps.
The date to watch? Oh, at the end of May, as soon as Donald Trump wouldn't have to offer up "equal time" for his run.
Can Donald Trump get the "blackout" kids to follow him?
I MEAN BUSINESS! (And, I think that will be Donald Trump's slogan, too.)
Hillary stood by her man. That says something about her and him. It's up to you to make of that what you will, but what you don't have is Hillary's face badmouthing him on camera.
Hillary stood by her man. That says something about her and him. It's up to you to make of that what you will, but what you don't have is Hillary's face badmouthing him on camera.
...yet...
ScottM said: "Or are the usual journalistic practices waived when conservatives are involved?"
You have to ask?
Ann:
Many people think that Hillary standing by Bill looked worse as time went on because it made her look power hungry especially in how later affairs were covered up or how the women were treated. Is it exactly like the Gingrich scenario? No, but the principle you elucidate still is at work.
Newt is a chicken hawk phony Christian right wing nut job. I am super pleased that GOP insiders are in the bag for super moderate Romney and are going to make sure that but jobs like Newt, Cain, Backmann and the like are destroyed before they get to close to the ring. Liberal Republican Romney vrs. Moderate Demorat Obama is a good reflection of where the country is at. The Tea Party is obviously dead. No one even talks about it any more.
A few thoughts from a 30 year experience of Gingrich:
Newt is always searching for a strong person to keep him centered, and he uses women for that role because he does not trust men.
His worst ideas are the wild ones that are supposed to change the future. He uses them to avoid real dealings with other men. If you are a man, and you do not accept his latest wild idea, then he has no use for you. He thereby escapes from you.
And he is seriously angry at the Man Romney who has pinned him down time after time, even if he cheated.
If Newt is elected, then we had better hope that Calista keeps him centered on doable ideas.
She is a Wisconsin woman and has the Catholic Church's teachings to help her. So there is hope.
And I would never underestimate Newt's intelligence and political skills.
This woman is his second wife. It's pretty rich for her to be moralizing about Newt when she was the mistress that caused his first marriage to unravel.
THIS in spades.
How can this woman complain about her husband being unfaithful when SHE was a participant in destroying his first marriage?
Did she think she had some sort of magic wand that would "change" him into the person she wanted him to be?
What a hypocrite and moron this woman is.
The cheater got cheated on. Ha ha ha.
All that matters is whether she makes us not like him.
I like him better for at least being true to his character, as weasley as it may be.
Women always think that they can
change a man
Take me in tender woman"
They never learn.
I was going to accuse Hillary of flip flopping but she's still not Tammy Wynette and you must parse a Clinton's words carefully.
Althouse wrote: All that matters is whether she makes us not like him.
She doesn't make me dislike him. Quite the opposite.
What does this have to do with SSM other than to remind people of a rather savage definition of marriage?
@ JayRetread....Actually Newt is as far from a Right Wing Nut as a person can get.
He is an old traditionalist at heart, but if it were not for Georgia politics in a District that included the Lagrange/Warm Springs area country folks up to south side of Atlanta, he would not be seen as a Right Wing at all.
If he had been running in Pennsylvania instead of in Georgia, he would come across as an NPR Liberal and love every minute of it.
This is his last hurrah. But he is very motivated by Romney's blitzkreig slander tactics.
I still see Romney as a Tom Dewey figure selected by the Party for positions in a cannot lose election, but without a personality that connects to the voters.
It could be very close.
Did she think she had some sort of magic wand
It's my observation that many woman DO believe they can change their man.
There is one thing I would break up over, and that is if she caught me with another woman. I won't stand for that. ~ Steve Martin
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
Oscar Wilde, off the top of my head
How did Oscar Wilde get on top of your head?
“Oscar was just saying how your Majesty reminds him of bat urine…”
Why are people so fond of digging into the personal life of these candidates?
Because it shows the content of their character. This is why the general mass media did, and is still doing, a great disservice to the country with Obama.
mesriani said...
Why are people so fond of digging into the personal life of these candidates? Gingrich isn't my bet, but I think that the personal lives of these candidates shouldn't be the bases of their capability as a political official.
================
It matters when the people closest to a person or who have worked with them the longest are the ones that have the highest negative perception of the person.
With former wives, with people he worked with in Congress, with think tankers, and recently with a campaign staff that quit enmass when Newt decided he'd summer in Europe for 3 weeks with Callista and line up some book and speech private money-making events rather than help campaign - Newt attracts those negatives as a direct reflection on his personal and ego-driven behaviors.
Who has appointed Marianne Gingrich arbiter of what constitute marriage?
Two people want to get married.. who the hell is she to tell people they cant get married?
Shame! Shame! Shame!
How did Oscar Wilde get on top of your head?
Ace Rimmer: Cat! You're looking sharper than a collection of Oscar Wilde witticisms that have rolled into a point, dipped in lemon juice, and jammed into someone eye.
The TV interview will have an impact because there are still a lot of people who get their news via TV. Also, a lot of current voters were not paying close attention to politics back when Newt was in power way back when.
Callista better stay healthy or Newt is gone.
Excellent analysis TradMan. Seems like Newt is a lot like Clinton except that Clinton had Hillary to keep him on political track.
Who is Newt's current mistress?
DBQ said: "I like him (Newt) better for at least being true to his character, as weasley as it may be.". I don't get that. Why is it good to be true to your character, if your character is weasely? Wouldn't it be much better if he tried to be a better man, if he tried to transcend his weaknesses?
I don't like Newt but I will vote for him if he is the GOP nominee.
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
Ace Rimmer: Cat! You're looking sharper than a collection of Oscar Wilde witticisms that have rolled into a point, dipped in lemon juice, and jammed into someone eye
*LMAO*
What's interesting is that ABC is playing up this old news about Newt just after they reported with due shock and horror that Mitt has secret accounts in the Cayman Islands. Now we have Rick Perry dropping out. His main sin seems to have been forgetting which of the cabinet departments he was going to terminate. High fives at the White House.
"...what you don't have is Hillary's face badmouthing him on camera."
They are simbiotic careeists.
"Oscar Wilde"
The Google tells me you are correct.
The Google tells me you are correct.
It deigned speak with you?
"I like him (Newt) better for at least being true to his character, as weasley as it may be.". I don't get that. Why is it good to be true to your character, if your character is weasely? Wouldn't it be much better if he tried to be a better man, if he tried to transcend his weaknesses?
Maybe he IS trying to transcend his weaknesses by converting his religion. Who knows? The media won't give him the benefit of a doubt on that one.
People do make mistakes and learn from them. If you never make a mistake and/or never learn you just aren't human.
You can change your behviour, but you are what you are and to pretend otherwise is deceptive. Like Obama.
Without knowing the ins or outs of his marriages, I presume that his wives, especially #2 and #3 know who and what he is on a marriage level. He didn't pretend otherwise, I would guess and they went with him anyway. They "knew darned well he was a snake before they took him in".
So as a candidate if we already know that Newt is a pompous, hard to get along with dick and he isn't pretending otherwise, how can we blame him for his character or faults.
At least we get to KNOW what those faults are before the election instead of getting a fantasy candidate constructed out of unicorn farts and fairy dust by the media.
Maybe what we NEED right now to get this country back on track and to beat the moronic congress critters into doing their job is a giant prick who doesn't care that he is a prick.
"It deigned speak with you?"
Yeah. We had a little spat yesterday, so I think it feels bad.
(This joke would have worked better had I looked up the quote on Wikipedia. Apologies)
He has more San Francisco values than I do.
No open relationships for me.
I can't and won't share.
Candy seemed to open to swinging though. Go Candy.
tits.
She comes across as a typical angry white woman.
Apparently Marianne Gingrich supports the individual man-date.
DBQ,
Let's ignore Newt for a second and just focus on the philosophical question:
Which is better if you have a weasely character,
a) be true to your weasely character, b) try to transcend that weasely character?
traditionalguy said...
"If Newt is elected, then we had better hope that Calista keeps him centered on doable ideas.
She is a Wisconsin woman and has the Catholic Church's teachings to help her. So there is hope."
You mean like adultery?
Which is better if you have a weasely character,
a) be true to your weasely character, b) try to transcend that weasely character?
Perhaps, the term "be true to" was not appropriate. I think accept your character and try to transcend.
You have to do both. Just like an alcoholic. You have to admit that you are one and THEN try to transcend it.
If you don't accept the truth about yourself, or as I inaccurately put it....be true to your character, how can you possibly overcome or change your faults?
I know what my personality type is (from various profile type testings) and some of the faults and strengths.
However, what some people may find as faults in a woman (overly analytical mind, a low empathy quotient aka...I don't care what other people think.... and an intolerance for incompetence) others may find to be strengths. Those things served me well in financial analysis and as an impartial advisor. I recognize that these can be faults when taken too far and try to overcome.
So while some people may find fault in Newt being a philanderer (as I do, very much so find it a fault) and his arrogance....who is to say that some of his faults may not be the strengths that we need at this time.
"The latest Rasmussen poll in SC:
Gingrich……33%
Romney……31%
~~~~~
Seriously, can Obama be this damn lucky! :D
On topic, as mentioned in the previous Newt thread, he's a train wreck. At least Herman Cain had the good sense to get out lol. ok, ok, HC just wanted to up his profile and sell some books and obviously his wife knew about his indiscretions long ago, much like Hillary.
The irony is Newt's mission was the same ie sell books, until he realized how frickin' sad his competition was and thought he had a good chance to win the nomination by default.
Back to Clinton. One of the many things that drives conservatives bat shit crazy is after the '60 minutes' interview when Jennifer Flowers was brought to full bloom ;) so to speak, every Rep political operative thought Clinton was DOA. But miraculously he rose from the dead and was the comeback kid in NH.
And the rest as they say is history, including the right's continual hatred of him.
And speaking of the Bible :-P interesting that Clinton's infidelity wasn't a big deal w/Dems in the final analysis, whereas it's always a big deal w/conservative evangelicals.
Forgiveness indeed!
Obviously Newt is no Reagan, eh.
Forgiveness is on a case by case basis and whether one is running for C-in-C of the free world also enters into the equation.
Again conservatives, deal w/Gingrich as you may.
btw, you know Althouse is smitten w/mittens, so if Newt wins SC, be gentle ...
Forgiveness is on a case by case basis and whether one is running for C-in-C of the free world also enters into the equation.
It's been a while since the American president has been the leader of the free world.
How can this woman complain about her husband being unfaithful when SHE was a participant in destroying his first marriage?
Yes, but how can he carry the flip-flop message against Mitt Romney, which is really the only card the ABMs have to play? Romney might have flip flopped on the roster of social conservative issues like gay marriage, but Newt has lived a grossly hypocritical life if you assume that social conservatives are part of the coalition he's aiming for.
I think this interview literally cuts Newt off at the knees, and effectively winnows the race down to Romney vs. Santorum.
That's not just my projection of what conservative Republican voters might think. It will also affect the pragmatists. Do we, who want Obama ousted in order to reverse Obamacare, want to put up against him the one candidate who can lift the burden of being the issue from Obama?
Anyone who is pushing the line that Newt survives this is just in denial and they will feel differently in about a week.
In a world where the social construct of marriage is under serious challenge (as in should it really be only a contract between a man and a woman in order to propagate our race in a civilized manner?) – you better believe that there are many of us who believe in that contract between a man and a woman and the sanctity of marriage between ONE man and ONE woman.
And those of you who say otherwise are not only not conservatives – you are fringe – extreme fringe – Democrats.
Please feel free to vote accordingly if this is the major thing we all want to focus on as our nation is crumbling into a European socialist model.
DBQ:
"Perhaps, the term "be true to (weasely character)" was not appropriate. I think accept your character and try to transcend."
That sounds reasonable.
The husband of one wife rule for church leaders in scripture means "Never divorced" in legalistic churches, but means "One Wife at a Time" in Moderate churches.
But in the Mormon Church neither restriction applies and everyone is happy.
I think open marriage might be more of a threat to the one man one wife concept than homosexual marriage--what is a good Republican to do?
I can forgive Newt for being a philanderer and don't regard it as a disqualifying weakness.
What is much worse is divorcing two different wives after they got profoundly serious illnesses. I think Newt did this because he thought those profoundly ill wives would be a huge drag on his quest for the presidency.
It seems like our system for selecting presidential nominees tends to select immoral megalomaniacs who are borderline sociopaths.
Really wish people would stop getting so religious over Romney vs. Newt. Either is fine with me, neither is perfect or the second coming of Reagan or whatever. There is no doubt in my mind that either one would/will do his best in good faith for this country. Both have meaningful experience. Newt's ideas are bolder, but like it or not, Romney is going to be more appealing (less unappealing?) to the moderates.
Cool ideas don't matter much if you don't get elected.
Whoever wins the primary, we have to rally and get behind him. If it's Newt, I'm fine with that. Romney, no problem. If you honestly see one as a devil and the other as a saint, well, go out and get some fresh air or something.
Steve Koch said...
“I can forgive Newt for being a philanderer and don't regard it as a disqualifying weakness.”
Steve,
If a man cannot be true to the vows he takes promising a person, who he loves, that he will remain faithful to them for life, how do you think he will respect his oath of office? How do you separate being faithful in one circumstance and not in another to justify philandering? Is there not the possibility he will also be unfaithful to his oath of office?
"What is much worse is divorcing two different wives after they got profoundly serious illnesses."
This is what makes me think he's a deeply flawed human. And he did it twice.
Marriages for him might be all about utility. She gets thrown away if she is disabled or sick.
Maybe he IS trying to transcend his weaknesses by converting his religion.
There are no confessionals and no Sacrament of Penance (and hence no absolution or sacramental graces) in Protestantism.
The Catholic Church is not a hotel for saints, but is a hospital for sinners. The sicker you are, as perhaps with Gingrich, the more you need her.
36fsfiend said...
"If a man cannot be true to the vows he takes promising a person, who he loves, that he will remain faithful to them for life, how do you think he will respect his oath of office? How do you separate being faithful in one circumstance and not in another to justify philandering? Is there not the possibility he will also be unfaithful to his oath of office?"
I understand your thinking and certainly don't advise you to change your opinion.
For me, sex seems like a special situation in that the sex drive is a basic drive in men (it is not unusual for men to think with their little head) and philandering (at least one time) is not unusual in our society. I doubt it will impact Newt's thinking on global warming, terrorism or other non sex related topics. Like most of us, he will be much clearer headed in topics where he is not sexually aroused.
Desertion just when his spouses were faced with a grave illness, not philandering, is the main issue for me.
Blogger Steve Koch said...
“For me, sex seems like a special situation in that the sex drive is a basic drive in men (it is not unusual for men to think with their little head) and philandering (at least one time) is not unusual in our society. I doubt it will impact Newt's thinking on global warming, terrorism or other non sex related topics. Like most of us, he will be much clearer headed in topics where he is not sexually aroused.”
Steve,
To me, it’s the mindset. If his marriage vows are not important to him, then I believe he will take the same approach towards the oath of office – to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. It would have been different if he first divorced his wife before becoming involved with another woman.
I agree with you that Newt’s tendency to leave his spouses just when each was facing a grave illness is a matter of concern. It's that mindset again.
Some years back, when our marriage became stale and likeless, I suggested to my ex wife that we invite her sister in for a little threesome action. Her sister is four years younger and somewhat prettier so it seemed like a good idea to me. I presented this proposal with tact and delicacy. I'm sorry to say that my wife hit the roof. I can't help but thinking that my proposal in some way served to undermine my marriage. Sibling rivalry is a fearsome, all consuming thing. I offered her a chance to overcome it, but she refused. It's sad really how this one weak spot has wrecked her life. She's an angry, vindictive woman. You should see how she carries on if I'm just a month or two late with the child support payments. I really sympathize with Newt. Sometimes you don't know who you're married to until the chips are down.
Sounds like a perfectly conservative, traditional, Biblical, marriage to me. Solomon had 700 wives and 300 concubines, after all.
Just because you prefer the pagan Roman custom of monogamy doesn't make those who prefer traditional Biblical values wrong. After all, the same pagan Romans who insisted on monogamous marriage were perfectly fine with male-male sex.
Not to defend Newt in his marriages.....but....
We don't know the real story and speculating on his mind or his wives' minds at the time is silly.
In addition many of the 'stories' manufactured by the media are either out and out lies or are distortions of the truth. Incredible I know. The media NEVER lies.
Here is an excerpt from Newt's daughter from the first marriage.
"It is this visit that has turned into the infamous hospital visit about which many untruths have been told. I won’t repeat them. You can look them up online if you are interested in untruths. But here’s what happened:
My mother and father were already in the process of getting a divorce, which she requested.
Dad took my sister and me to the hospital to see our mother.
She had undergone surgery the day before to remove a tumor.
The tumor was benign.
As with many divorces, it was hard and painful for all involved, but life continued."
Her mother is STILL ALIVE and WELL.
It takes two people to make a marriage. It is hard work and we have no idea what is really going on in other people's relationships.
To believe the media is foolish.
To make a decision about the future of the country on false or distorted information meant to sway you on an emotional level is ....stupid.
VW: intel
indeed. we need good intel before we can make a decision.
So Gingrich wants plural wives. Remind me again who's the Mormon in this race . . .
I heard the Gingrich daughters on Laura Ingraham today. He's lucky to have them as they were strong in his defense.
However, Gingrich defended his pushing of the Bain movie as performing an important public service by airing what the Democrats would certainly use against Romney. If Gingrich's explanation was not, you know, a complete freaking lie, he would welcome the airing of this information for exactly the same reasons.
Payback is just like your ex-wife.
The point being that there are so many stories out on the internet that contradict each other and stories told by the various participants that also vary from time to time, depending on when they are told and depending on who is tellin and for what reason....
Who knows.
Personally I don't care. I'm like Tarzan (the poster) and would vote for a stuffed penguin over Obama.
This is the Herman Cain syndrome. Trot out the victims to tear down the candidate and when the candidate falls, the victims evaporate into the ether never to be seen again. What is even more shameful is that ABC is trotting this out like it's BRAND NEW NEWS!!! ZOMG!!! A lot of people know that Gingrich is a marital scoundrel, but ABC wants to make extra sure that you are hearing this for the first time, like it never happened before.
Dust Bunny Queen said...
“To make a decision about the future of the country on false or distorted information meant to sway you on an emotional level is ....stupid.”
So, has or has not Gingrich committed adultery? Do you think that type of behavior should be considered in making a decision on who to vote for as President of the United States?
"and would vote for a stuffed penguin over Obama."
Which is why I voted for Kerry in 2004.
And please, let the conservative rationalizations/pretzel logic continue as Reps try their best to defend Newton Leroy.
Apologies to stuffed penguins ...
"...literally cuts Newt off at the knees"
Literally? Wow, the poor guy was short enough already...
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा