Friday, March 09, 2007

Newt Gingrich's Trouser Snake Trouble

You really couldn't make this up. At the same time as Newt Gingrich was pursuing Bill Clinton over his affair with Monica Lewinsky, he was having an extra marital affair himself. Fox News has the story HERE.

Well, that should reduce the Republican candidates for 2008 by one.

35 comments:

Hide the sausage said...

What is it with politicians on either side of the Atlantic?

It must be true that power is the ultimate aphrodisiac, because so many of them seem to be having affairs.

My old dad always told me that you can never trust a man who cheats on his wife. Is it any wonder that voters are so apathetic these days?

chatterbox said...

What a hypocrite!

Anonymous said...

The guy's named after a reptile, what do you expect?

Anonymous said...

sorry, i meant amphibian!

Scott said...

Old news. Old, old news.

If Hilary can run, Newt can.

Norfolk Blogger said...

It shows the absolute hypocrisy of the Republicans.

hide the sausage said...

Norfolk Blogger:

What about the absolute hypocrisy of Paddy Pantsdown?

Cheap shot, I know...

I just can't help feeling that we all deserve better.

Scott said...

The *absolute* hypocrisy of the *Republicans*?

Are you sure?

At most it shows that Newt Gingrich was having an affair at the same time that Bill Clinton was having one of many affairs, this one involving a White House intern, and one which he perjured himself and lied repeatedly to hide.

There is hardly an absolute parity between the two men, their offices or their offences.

So there cannot be any absolute hypocrisy.

And only Gingrich would be the hypocrite.

So don't be such an idiot.

Benedict White said...

All I can say is thank goodness. He is not my favorite republican.

Tom Tyler said...

Good, publicise it, kick him out of the race. Sausage 11:53 is right. If he cheats on his wife, he would cheat on the nation. I don't want him in the Whitehouse any more than I want lardass Prescott in Whitehall.

garypowell said...

Who are we to call politicians hypocrites on this matter.

Clintons problem was not his willingness to stick his willy in other women. It was that he did it on government time with an employee while in the white house.

The only rich powerfull men not fucking women other then their wives are fucking other men. When was it not so?

Also clinton was impeached not for having sex with a junior employee, he was impeached for lieing about the fact.

There are many republicans that play the religious card. There are also many republicans that come from the libertarian wing that dont give a flying F..K about moral sexual behavior at all. And they dont pretend otherwise.

Envy is one of the seven deadly sins that it seems many on this site are more guilty of then any politician.

As for you females out there. Do you really trust yourselves not to cheat with a rich man whoes better looking and more generous then your husband?

Women are not only generally hypocrites they are far better liers then men.

It does after all take two to tango.

Anonymous said...

"Reports of extramarital affairs have dogged him for years..." A somewhat unfortunate turn of phrase...cast iron hypocrite if you ask me - in which case he passes the first test for inclusion on the 2008 ballot...

I wonder if he read that bit of the book about 'casting the first stone' or the story of the mote and beam..

Hmmmm.....

Anonymous said...

garypowell - great work ! have you thought of a career in politics yourself ? priceless...

Anonymous said...

Isn't the most interesting part actually in the final line of the report:
...reprimanded for using tax-exempt funding to advance his political goals.

Sounds familiar?

PJ said...

Most Republicans throughout the impeachment proceedings were very careful to say that Clinton was not being impeached for his affair, but for lying about it under oath - read the counts of the impeachment: perjury and obstruction of justice were passed by the House, so the idea that they were hypocritical is rubbish. Federal judges are routinely impeached for offences as serious or less so, and ordinary members of the public spend years in jail.

Also, if we're talking about hypocrisy, don't forget that Clinton himself was nailed by HIS OWN LAW - the Sexual Harassment law of 1994 IIRC. I can't think of many politicians who have had that happen to them, though hopefully it'll happen to Bliar soon with cash for honours. Finally, don't forget the rather sickening spectacle of Clinton telling direct lies over and over again, in a particularly pious way: "I did not have sexual relations with THAT WOMAN" etc. It was only that she didn't clean her dress ...

Anthoninus said...

It is possible that Gingrich is airing the dirty laundry now in preparation for a run for the Republican nomination - though such blatant hypocrisy could well come back to bite him in the ass!

Chris Paul said...

Another IDD scoop!

This story was throughly aired back in 1999. Newt is a serial love cheat. And he had his first wife - too ugly to be the first lady - sign for divorce on a hospital bed immediately after her third cancer op. And being a dope smoking, good 'ole southern rascal he also did the oral is not sex line.

He is not really a contender. But Rudi has a bunch of detractors also.

Dirt, dirty, dirty.

Apoplectic From Aldershot said...

With the introduction of stain proof clothing,from which liquids form droplets and roll off.Do you think we will start to see shoes displayed as items of evidence?Chewing gum may be the least of our worries with prescott and his small member.

Border Reiver said...

I am not taking the moral highground - I had an affair years ago so there's no way that I cam. However, it's the absolute bollocks that's spoken that makes me laugh. When he was asked if he'd had the affair this was his answer

"The honest answer is yes.....there are times that I have fallen short of my own standards. There's certainly times when I've fallen short of God's standards."

He maybe Newt for now, but he'll be nowt come the elections

James said...

"What about the absolute hypocrisy of Paddy Pantsdown?"

I suggest you look up the word "hypocrisy". Having an affair whilst being a leading cheerleader for Clinton's impeachment was hypocrisy. Having an affair in itself is wrong but not hypocritical - Ashdown never preached or persecuted people on the basis that they had done the same as him.

The Hitch said...

I have seen Hillary and therefore completely sympathise with Bill Clinton , until I have seen a photograph of Gingritchs wife I reserve comment.

C4' said...

Old news!

Ken said...

Quite funny that you think marital infidelity should rule someone out of the race, Iain.

Neil Craig said...

He doesn't seem to have lied about it & he didn't use the Oval Office. This latter may seem a bit silly to us but America, bing officially without a state religion, imbues such places with a special status

hide the sausage said...

james 11.05 am

You're right of course, hypocrisy isn't the most accurate way of describing Paddy Ashdown's behaviour.

So, with your deep understanding of the English language, perhaps you can come up with the best word to describe a man who cheats on his wife with his secretary, whilst holding a position of public trust?

Ewan Watt said...

"Battley has said Gingrich discussed divorce terms with her while she was recuperating in the hospital from cancer surgery."

The new 'revelation' is pretty bad, but I would have been surprised if the information above was never raised during his campaign. I don't think Gingrich was ever seriously looking to run for President. I think he was looking for the VP slot.

Low life scum bag.

no longer anonymous said...

Hypocritical clown.

US Constitution Party or Libertarian Party anyone?

garypowell said...

Iain
Be carefull before you, of all people, start moralising at all on hetrosexual married men. I assume you are not sad enough to not have had a regular # lover. Can you say hand on heart that you have not had fun with another while you were.

If it was OK simply because your partner said it was. Why does the same, not apply to hetro men when in any type of hetro relationship married or otherwise. Has anyone asked MRs Gingrich what she thinks on the matter.

Also does any one have the right to expect her to answer the inpertenant question truthfully?

Like a lot of homosexual men with not enough or any experience of having a "relationship" with a real hot blooded or ambitous hetrosexual women, you put women on a moral pedistal that they have never deserved to be put on.

Maybe Mrs Gingrich Mrs Clinton Mrs Brown and Mrs Blair are frigid or rampant lesbians or shagging anything in trousers.

Does any one know? Is anyone trying to find out? Does anyone care if they are?

Why should only men in 2007 western culture, still have to take the moral responsibility for private sexual infidelity?

However I repeat Clinton got done for barefaced repeated in your face lieing, not for having sex with a young employee.

The sort of behavior as an employer that would have me locked up or my wife and family very substantialy poorer, even if my wife gave me her permission.

garypowell said...

Iain
You have always been honest about your sexuality which does deserve and gets you respect from people.

Could you please get some MP to ask members of the shadow and government cabinet to answer the ARE YOU OR HAVE YOU EVER BEEN in a homosexual relationship.

They had the front to ask David Cameron about his past or present drugs habits, so why not the whole of parliaments sexual ones. Get it all out in the open, you know it makes sense.

What do they all have to hide? I think the public have a right to know. It has not stopped many known homosexuals getting elected and re-elected. You yourself were on the A list.

I would say that at least 50% of all the people involved in my local Conservative association are either lesbians or homosexuals, a fact that none of them make a serious effort to even try to hide.

There are serious and repeated alligations on the blogaphere that Gordon Brown is a long time unreformed now married with kidd homosexual.

I dont know if this is true, but It would be very nice to know if GB is prepared to lie about this matter or not, or sue people that say he is.

Arden Forester said...

It's not exactly news. That's been known in Atlanta since he got divorced. Newt will probably wrap it up as a "let the heartaches begin" story. But that's not what will keep him out of the White House. He's just a bit too flaky on some of the issues!

Action-without-theory said...

You Tories are sex mad.
People are turned off by negative campaigning that concentrates on personalities.
People like proper discussion abour proper policies.
Try it.
Whoops!
You haven't got any policies.

Jasper said...

It's pretty impossible for Newt to dodge the hypocrisy charge, for obvious reasons. Still, I heard a bit of his interview, and I must say his position is not completely without merit. He basically makes the case that as a central figure in the US government in the 1990s, he had no choice but to support the investigation (and eventual impeachment on grounds of perjury) of the president.

In short, Newt's actions may have been despicable toward his wife, but they weren't illegal. Perjury, after all, is a felony (many would argue that President Clinton's lies didn't actually meet the US legal definition of perjury, but, at the very least, his falsehoods under oath surely warranted looking into). Indeed, when you think about it, Newt would have been derelict in his duties as a public official had he allowed his own worries about charges of hypocrisy to influence his official conduct.

Observer said...

Come Iain, politicians are sleazebags and the ones that aren't get fired by the ones that are

James said...

"So, with your deep understanding of the English language, perhaps you can come up with the best word to describe a man who cheats on his wife with his secretary, whilst holding a position of public trust?"

I would describe cheating on your wife as a private moral transgression, and if I were without sin I would be more than happy to reach for the rocks. I would describe the position of public trust as irrelevant.

Anonymous said...

To cut through the bumf a bit, think Iain's basic point is pretty simple:

NEWT GINGRICH IS A BIG FAT LIAR WHO COULDN'T GET ELECTED DOG CATCHER, LET ALONE PRESIDENT.

Why?

BECAUSE AMERICANS DON'T (KNOWINGLY) ELECT THE KIND OF PERSON WHO WOULD RAPE HIS OWN GRANNY FOR $5.

Rememeber it was the REPUBLICANS who put an end to Gingrich's power & glory. Nowadays the GOP only lets him hang around 'cause he impresses the soft-headed (the dumbest preachers & prettiest journalists) by pretending to be a policy wonk (similar to the way his soulmate & fellow liar LORD ARCHER can pretend to be an author.)

Every four years regular as clockwork Newt starts launching his presidential bubble . . . and every four years regular as clockwork the bubble gets burst . . . when some Republican reptile pulls something nice & incriminating from the files . . . and shoves it up Newt's lying you-know-what!