Log Out
Visit The Goldenrule Name's column >>

THE GOLDENRULE NAME

Home Page
Articles Posted: 14  Links Seeded: 1
Member Since: 11/2010  Last Seen: 1/26/2012

Telling Right from Wrong: Gingrich versus CNN's John King

Fri Jan 20, 2012 4:59 AM EST
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
By The Goldenrule Name
Advertise | AdChoices

Newt Gingrich's successful spin (by audience applause) against CNN debate moderator John King amazed me Thursday evening when King didn't defend his castigation by reminding Gingrich how Gingrich was one of the people leading the impeachment proceedings against Clinton for his minor Monica Lewinski fling.  If I was King, I would have quickly defended myself with the one statement of fact that would have actually reversed the degradation.

Plus, Gingrich's affair was much worse / evil / victimizing / "despicable" than Clinton's.  First of all, since Hillary stated she was okay with it, there was absolutely no victim in Clinton's passing fling with Lewinski.  But, not only did Gingrich's second wife state she wasn't okay with an "open marriage" or the affair, making her a true victim (to today's marriage expectations / dependencies), but Gingrich's affair was a full on-going affair, not just a one night stand; therefore, MUCH WORSE and much more threatening and victimizing to Marianne, Gingrich's second wife.  Moreover, that affair was so bad that it was the cause for the divorce, thereby making Marianne even more victimized.  Therefore, not only is Fair Afterlife Suffering waiting for Gingrich, but the true wrong in the essence of adultery is what our [extremely intelligent] public should be more concerned with, when it comes to a candidate's integrity and consideration for others.

When people mess with the golden rule, they're going to get an "explanation" why they were wrong.  Since NO ONE really has the slightest idea of right and wrong, I HAVE TO BE the one to tell it.  Why is that?

As a result, what Gingrich stated Thursday evening just justified Clinton's lying about his affair, as such was just personal victimless media and partisan fluff just TO CAUSE victimization where there was none.

The Goldenrule Name

  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

Trickledown Frown

This is the person who is the most responsible for the nastiness in politics today, I hope he reaps what he has sown. In triplicate.

  • 6 votes
Reply#1 - Fri Jan 20, 2012 6:45 AM EST
Borncorn

He spent $50 million of our taxpayer money investigating sex by two consenting adults that did not want it publicized. Now he is pissed because he is asked a question about his affair which his second wife did want publicized. What a moron.

  • 6 votes
Reply#2 - Fri Jan 20, 2012 8:52 AM EST
sjayne2355

No, he didn't...Borncorn you know better than that.

    #2.1 - Fri Jan 20, 2012 11:13 AM EST
    Reply
    Roscoe B

    Oh, how I agree: I posted this on another seed, what is wrong with an evangelical audience to give Newt a standing ovation for cheating? But this is Newt's campaign; his hypocritical campaign. He keeps pointing the finger at Mitt about making money the wrong way when there has been discussion about Newt and Fannie and Freddie, Newt has judged Clinton and his 'affair' when Newt does worse; he asked Perry to get out of the race and tried the same with Rick S, just so Newty could have all the attention, he pointed his finger at the narrator and got angry over the question' but this is how he runs his campaign and gets away with it. When he is talking about everyone else, at least they aren't talking about him and his lieing, cheating life. South Carolina screw your heads on straight!! Newt is a master at putting the BS on everyones doorstep except his. He can call everyone else on the carpet about their mistakes, but, by God, don't you talk about mine?????????? Please!!!

    • 4 votes
    Reply#3 - Fri Jan 20, 2012 8:53 AM EST
    Better Careful

    I heard Gingrich cop that attitude. I had to recall him lecturing or scolding Romney about stopping the pious crap.

    Newt claims some kind of special dispensation or privilege to do as he pleases, based upon his demands that others do as he says. Somehow, in his twisted little mind and empty little soul, the combination of "do as I say, so that I might do as I please" achieves a kind of moral balance. Sorry Newt, and all you other self-righteous authoritarians; no such balance is achieved. In fact, doing this is even worse than being a mere simple and direct scumbag. One cannot justify ones scumbaggery by making hypocritical demands on others. Newt insists he can, however. The man is hopeless.

    • 3 votes
    Reply#4 - Fri Jan 20, 2012 8:54 AM EST
    sambonner

    First of all, since Hillary stated she was okay with it, there was absolutely no victim in Clinton's passing fling with Lewinski.

    This is absolutely ridiculous. I like Bill Clinton, I think he was a good President and I voted for him, but he should have resigned when he was proven to have disgraced the Presidency.

    You claim that Hillary didn't care that her husband was a serial cheater and it hurt no one. First I doubt that she didn't care, and it hurt their daughter and it hurt the people of the United States of America who EXPECT the President to not have sex with one of the youngest employees of the White House in the Oval Office.

    Bill Clinton was accused of infidelity DURING his campaign for his first Presidency by Gennifer Flowers. She went into great detail about the affair. Did Clinton drop out at that time, even though he knew Flowers was telling the truth? No, he LIED about it.

    So who's better , a hypocrite or a liar? Let God sort it out.

    • 3 votes
    Reply#5 - Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:21 AM EST
    madvargr

    I think he was a good President and I voted for him, but he should have resigned when he was proven to have disgraced the Presidency.

    Disgraced? LOL

    Disgracing the presidency is sitting on your ass and not doing anything until America is attacked on 9-11, then drumming up a fake war over WMDs against those not responsible for the attack, and after 4000 US soldiers have gotten killed for your lie, joke about it all while pretending to hunt for WMDs under the Oval Office desk.

    Clinton got a BJ from an intern. I didn't know any women who wouldn't have given anything to sleep with him while he was president. Who cares what he did in his personal life - I would care less about Newt's if he wasn't so damn in your face about his holy family values that he really lacks...

    • 3 votes
    #5.1 - Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:30 AM EST
    sambonner

    To tell you the truth , it is AMAZING to see the left be so blind as to these matters. Bill Clinton paid 800,000 dollars to Paula Jones to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit. He ADMITTED , in his autobiography, that he had a sexual encounter with Gennifer Flowers ( she says it was numerous encounters, and since he was at the time a habitual liar, I will believe her). This matter was alleged by Flowers during the 1992 campaign. Clinton did not come clean at that point, he LIED about it, and sat silently next to his wife while she defended him on Sixty Minutes.

    To all liberals who don't care about what Clinton did in his personal life, but now become almost hysterical about Gingrich - get over yourselves. This is a tired game going nowhere.

      #5.2 - Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:40 AM EST
      teresa-498430

      samboner

      I don't care about the Newtsters personal life; that is probably the best part of him. He is unethical, and a criminal and has made his money screwing this country over and its people. Now that is a screw that should scare everyone.

      That aside there is no difference between the strength of family values between the left and the right. Good ones and bad ones all around. The difference is that the right pretends there is. The family values assertion by the right is nothing more than an urban legend. For every good family value guy on the right there is a stinker like the Newtster along side him.

      One more thing; he is a racist

      • 2 votes
      #5.3 - Fri Jan 20, 2012 10:13 AM EST
      The Goldenrule Name

      To sambonner at #5:

      The Clinton's are still together. You have to realize that some couples do allow open marriages, as long as it doesn't threaten the marriage (that leads to divorce, like Gingrich's affair did) or becomes a big deal. I agree that most wives would not like or allow their husband to have flings; but, I heard that Hillary might be bi, which would actually make her enjoy hearing about the kinky details from Bill (only), because she would also like to be with the women that Bill scores with. You see, being bi can change one's entire outlook about sex, and usually eliminates all feelings of (unthreatening) jealousy, which is good because jealousy is an attribute of the Devil.

      Clinton's affair didn't hurt his daughter. It was the Republicans and the media making such a big deal about it that hurt Chelsea. Also, NO ONE in the entire United States of America missed any meals because of the Clinton affair(s): Victimization was only in people's minds. Nor did it hurt any US citizen, in reality, for a young (but legal) woman to have consensual sexual relations with a middle aged man -- nor because it was done in the Oval Office, as everyone deserves some personal play time: unless it caused a stain on like the carpet which required additional maid service, which costs the taxpayers a bit more; but, that kind of stuff just goes with the territory that a visitor's cup of coffee could cause. So, at least I'm talking reality here (about possible carpet stains), but it is such a frivolous reality that even I here (not the media) am wasting everyone's time in talking about it. However, this kind of frivolity does need to addressed (and in the media), because there ARE so many people like you who aren't aware of what can really and really not hurt them. I'm not saying you are dumb, but because you have been "taught" the errors, I'm saying humans in general are dumb.

      The Jennifer Flowers thing just showed that the country elected Clinton knowing that he had flings every once in a while. I remember Saturday Night Live did a skit on it prior to the 1992 election.

      Again, Gingrich's Thursday defense only really justified Clinton's lying about his affairs, because it was really no one else's business. Everyone knows that their personal sex life is something that should be (most of the time) kept personal. It's kind of an unwritten right. Again, in victimizing cases of adultery, the current wife is the only possible victim, when things are purposely hidden from the rest of their family. And when Chelsea did find out about it, she didn't seem too angry at her dad, she seems angry at the media for talking about it. Same with Hillary. Likely her parents explained somewhere that sex is not as evil of a thing as today's Church says. I've heard that Chelsea and her new husband are even into Tantra, which is basically the teaching of sexual enhancements. Believe me, the Church has embeddedly created a very apathetic sex life for females (especially years ago). So, I'm sure we could all benefit with some Tantra.

      Again, Clinton's lies, in truth and reality, didn't hurt anyone: No American missed a meal because of the lies. The main reason Clinton lied was not so much because he likes to deceive people, but because we live in such an erroneously judgmental society concerning sex negativity. So, it's today's Church that is the true evil, not so much Clinton. I agree that people should be taught not to lie as a general rule, but an example when a lie can actually be a good deed is if like a terrorist is about to kill your loved ones and a lie could prevent it from happening, then the lie would be a good deed, right? But, again, those situations are rare, and when God gives individuals an inch they take a mile, so teaching that lying is always bad should moreover be the teaching. If humans were smarter, then God would be able to mandate better individual laws.

      Realize the true essence of the golden rule is only concerned with things that beget true innocent victims. Hillary and Chelsea weren't apparently hurt by Bill's actual affairs, just by the media; but, Gingrich did victimize an innocent person: his second wife. There's a BIG difference, and the only reason I wrote this article is because SO MANY people out there are in the dark concerning the difference. Again, today's Church is the one who needs to begin to change.

      I appreciate your further questions on this subject. You did make good points based on the status quo.

      The Goldenrule Name

        #5.4 - Fri Jan 20, 2012 4:14 PM EST
        Reply
        Borncorn

        So who's better , a hypocrite or a liar?

        Newt is both. Why the distinction?

        • 1 vote
        Reply#6 - Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:31 AM EST
        sambonner

        see 5.2

          #6.1 - Fri Jan 20, 2012 9:41 AM EST
          Borncorn

          Newt and the GOP spent $50 million of our taxpayer money dragging Lewinsky's name through the mud. That is what I find disgusting.

            #6.2 - Fri Jan 20, 2012 10:27 AM EST
            Reply
            Leave a Comment:
            You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
            Newsvine Privacy Statement
            As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.