Gingrich admits to affair during Lewinsky scandal

[yesthattom]

Dear Mr. Pot,

Fuck you. Fuck you fucking fuck fuck. Fuck you and the fucking horse you fucking fuckity fuck road in on.

Sincerely,
Mr. Kettle

P.S. I'm refering to this.

My favorite part is, "confirming what had been a persistent rumour in political circles at the time". Whhhaaa? You mean the press knew about this but didn't investigate? Oh wait, "Mr Gingrich's short-lived successor as Speaker, Bob Livingston, had to resign after it turned out that he too had strayed from the marital path." Whaaaaa??

Can't these Republicans keep their dicks in their pants?

For the last 10 years I've asked, "Why can't Democrats get as mean and nasty, which appropriate, as the Republicans do?" and my liberal friends always reply with weak reasons like, "Oh, we're too good to do that" or rationalizations like, "we wouldn't be good at it if we tried because we're too honest." More and more I think the real reason is that there's just too much Republican dirt and we just don't know where to start.

Comments

[thespian.livejournal.com]

For the last 10 years I've asked, "Why can't Democrats get as mean and nasty, which appropriate, as the Republicans do?"

Because most of the people I know who are Democrats tend to think about people. We empathize. We recognize that all of us have the possibility to do both good and harm. And so, we imagine all the things that go into, say, having to make the decision to have an abortion, and realize how hard it is, and end up fighting to make it easier, safer, etc. When you talk to people who are anti-choice, they make comments akin to, "I simply don't understand why they would do that," hardening into a fight to make it not available, NOT because they won't choose that option, but because until the experience happens and they've been through it, they don't get what goes into the choice.

These are not absolutes. But it's easier to follow *current Republicanism* (not, I note, conservativism) if you believe in moral absolutes, and it's easier to be Democrat (not liberal) if you understand that context really does extenuate.

So it's hard for most Democrats to attack a man for having an affair, because we all recognize that we've likely done it, we likely could do it, and the things that go into it are not nearly as simple as they seem. It's easier for most Republicans because they don't seem to recognize that everyone is struggling just to keep their heads above water, sometimes.

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

An excellent reply. However, I'm issuing 1 LD-demerit for answering a rhetorical question. :-)

[circesbed.livejournal.com]

I think my favourite was back in my second year of law school. Dubya was campaigning for his first term. I was in the Student Bar Association meeting and the reps from the Young Republicans (or some such group) were sitting directly behind me. One of them said, "It's really bogus that they keep dragging up this cocaine business. It's so irrelevant; it happened SO many years ago. Just let it go already."

I turned around, incredulous, "WHAT did you just say?"

I'm sure a really entertaining conversation could have taken place had the meeting not started at that exact moment.

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

If you repeat a lie enough times, it becomes true. By repeating that excuse (and NO other excuse ... that dilutes the message) it became truth. The reality is that we've elected, twice, our first coke-head president.

Taking the fight to the bullies

[rationalfool.livejournal.com]

Announcing his families acquisition of the now bankrupt liberal (if Quixotic) Air America Radio local politician Mark Green reminds us of that old bit from Frost: "a liberal man is too broad-minded to take his own side in a quarrel". That's a bit generous and I would offer a small modification: a liberal is too broad-minded to ONLY take his own side in a quarrel. That's our enlightenment pedigree, if I may say so. But this does not preclude us from fighting back rough, and when dealing with bullies (which the vociferous elements of the conservative movement are) that may be the only way, for as well know bullies are (most often) cowards who need someone to stand up to them. One excellent example is Matt Taibbi.

Thespian: I agree with what you write. However, it is not for extra-marital humping that we criticise these parasites, but their hypocrisy.

[seasings.livejournal.com]

Lol. Love the letter. Didn't realize how eloquent you could be.

[cuddlebunni3.livejournal.com]

Eloquently put sir...LOL!

[awfief.livejournal.com]

"Can't *men* keep their dicks in their pants?" is really the question. And it's only men 'cause most women don't have dicks.

[arkham1010.livejournal.com]

Do we really WANT both parties down in the gutter, throwing ad hominum's and baseless attacks all the time? I don't. I hate the republican smear machine, and i really don't want to see the dems going the same direction.

Im independent, and think both parties have good and bad points. But the republicans will never get my vote while they rely on slander, slime and attacks to score political points.

Lets bring on the 3rd mainstream party!

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

I agree with ad hominum attaacks, lies, and slander are bad.

However, why didn't we press the issue about Gingrich when we knew it was the truth?

[arkham1010.livejournal.com]

That I don't know. Perhaps they didnt want to go tit for tat and look like they were being petty.

Or perhaps they were being wimpy, which a dem pol would NEVER do. :P