Mother Talkers

Hypocrisy at it's very best! ARRRRGGGHHHH!!!

Mon Mar 12, 2007 at 07:46:32 AM PDT

I have been thinking - all weekend - about the news that came out about Newt Gingrich and his affair during the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal. I'm close to obsessing on it.

Note - I haven't read a lot on it, haven't reviewed the transcript of his interview with James Dobson or anything, save the key quotes - I'm simply speaking to the basic story. Which, if you didn't catch it, is that Newt Gingrich was having an extramarital affair at the time he was rallying for the impeachment of Bill Clinton because of his dalliance with Monica Lewinsky. http://www.cnn.com/...

This has me so mad I could spit!

So this is how my brain has been wrapping around it:

Newt Gingrich knowingly rallied the Christian Right against Clinton for his indiscretions with Monica Lewinsky while he himself was cheating on his wife! The article I linked above says that he and Dobson, in their interview, said Clinton was impeached for lying before a federal judge about the matter. But that was not their rallying cry! They impugned Clinton for being a cheating husband, for his loose morals, for being a slimy creep. The fact that he lied was just the technical point of the whole thing.

People today still impugn Clinton for his morals - painting the entire Democratic party with this "family values" brush. Mitt Romney is running on it himself now, criticizing Rudy Giuliani for his messy divorce and lauding his only and faithful marriage.

Next fact I've been mulling - Newt has had three marriages himself. I'm not clear exactly on what happened with the first marriage transition, but the second - he was having an affair with a (much younger) congressional aide, and divorced wife 2 for said aide, to whom I assume he is still married.

Now, here's the big thing that's been with me all weekend. Sure Bill noodled with Monica (although apparently they never actually had technical intercourse, whatever). And maybe he was noodling with Paula Jones (although I'm inclined from what I've heard to think that that was more flirtation and kissing than actual affair, and a lot of media whoring by Jones). But - and think about this - Bill and Hillary stuck together. They have sorted out their problems (presumably). They took the hard road and stayed married - trust me, I know, this is in many ways the harder road (sexual preference issues aside). Working out your problems and issues and finding forgiveness for one another. Maintaining the ability to look one another in the eye.

So, wouldn't you consider this the more "moral" thing to do?  Or the thing that would be considered better "family values?" To stick with the person you married "for better or for worse?"

Now, I'm not criticizing any one who is divorced. Every single situation is personal and private and complicated. I know divorced people myself, and none of them went about the process flippantly or callously. Life happens. Mistakes happen. Immaturity happens. Disaster happens. Whatever.

But staying together as a family is something that ssssoooooo many Christian Right wing folks trumpet above all. Keeping the family together is a major thing for Christians and right wingers. Strong solid marriages.

But what is getting me is that Dobson and Gingrich think it's totally okay to impugn one man for an affair while the one doing the impugning is doing the same damn thing. And that's exactly what this is. You can bullshit me all you want that Clinton was impeached for lying to a federal judge, but the reason he was in front of a federal judge in the first place was because of the affair! They were trying to drive him out of office because he cheated on his wife! In the White House! He'd never have had to lie to a federal judge if they weren't all rabid over the fact that they had something on one of the most popular presidents of our generation!

But now Newt has found forgiveness and God. The man who has had three wives (and multiple rumored affairs)! Dude, I'm all for finding God/Jesus/religion, but don't excuse your past actions with it. Inmates that find God/Jesus/Allah while in prison aren't trying to excuse past hypocrisy for being a murder or rapist or whatever - they are trying to make the rest of their lives right. Certainly not run for president, for pete's sake!

Gingrich and Dobson deserve to be crowned Hypocrites of the Freakin' Decade for this bullshit! Hillary and Bill should be out there ringing the bell on how long they've been married, how they've weathered their problems and stuck together! Isn't that the kind of family values Christians and Right Wingers throw in liberal faces all the time? Vs. men who've been married three times and have had affairs? So it's okay for God to forgive Newt but Bill and Hillary are still Godless liberals?

WTF???!!! I know you all probably agree. I know you all know how hypocritical it is. But I just had to get this out of my head. It stuns me that the American public is letting Gingrich and Dobson get away with this. That Dobson still has any kind of moral authority in this country. That he is allowed to pontificate on this subject. That he is still accepted by the Christian community. That the media allows this kind of hypocrisy!!! That the democrats are sending Dobson down to d-list celebrity status, instead of the revered Reverend that he is still.

Don't moms around the country get it? Am I too liberal to forgive? Is it okay because he's Christian - do they all just automatically forgive each other, as long as the sinner is pro-life?

I'm not sure this will get this out of my head, because I'm even madder about it now that I've typed it! WTF is wrong with our society that people don't see the hypocrisy here? No one in this situation is Donald Trump or Marla Maples or The Black Widow or Cassanova. No ostensible careless marriages here.

Part of me wishes that some Democratic lackey would make Newt and Dobson's hypocrisy the issues of the year - instead of doing what most liberals/Democrats I've observed usually do, and that's take the high road.

Anyone feel like explaining this to me, about the Christian Right and Republicans? I'm at a total loss.

Thanks for tolerating my rant.

Tags: (all tags)

Permalink | 8 comments

  • Interesting spin (0 / 0)

    One defense I've heard (which I find to be complete and total garbage) from Rush Limbaugh during his drug fiasco, was that just because he's made mistakes, should that mean he can't weigh in on moral issues?  He's a true master of manipulation.  Of course you can make mistakes and still have opinions, but if you want those opinions to be respected, you have to acknowledge those mistakes and hopefully allow them to influence those opinions.  If, say, you've said for years that drug addicts were criminals who should rot in prison forever, you can't respectfully defend your own illegal actions without admitting that you really had no understanding of addictin when you were running your jerk mouth before.  And sure, murders and rapists find Jesus in prison, but George Bush and his buddies laugh and execute them anyway.

    However, Gingrich can't even use the defense of making a judgment and later learning that perhaps these things can be complex, since he was having an affair at the exact same time.  I would be interested to hear the conservative spin on this.  They always manage to come up with some unthinkably insane defense of their leaders.  Maybe I'll listen to some conservative talk radio today.  It's always a gamble to do that--on one hand, it's interesting, on the other hand, it makes me so mad I could spit.

    Simone (1/04) and Milo (9/07)

    by Erin on Mon Mar 12, 2007 at 09:47:05 AM PDT

  • The Gingrich Defense (0 / 0)

    I haven't read this completely either, but I believe Gingrich's "defense" to Dobson was "yeah, I was having an affair, but Clinton lied to a federal investigator and that's why he was impeached."

    The hypocrisy of Gingrich's dalliances during the Clinton thing galls me, but not nearly as much as this "but he lied!" thing. Because these are the same people who are saying that Scooter Libby never should have been prosecuted because he wasn't the original leaker. Well, guess what? Libby was prosecuted (and convicted!) for multiple lies to the FBI and special prosecutor. How different is that from Clinton, who lied about an affair?

    Oh, and wasn't Gingrich's then-wife (#2) also in the hospital dealing with cancer when he asked for the divorce?

    • Right (0 / 0)

      and do you think that, had Gingrich been asked by a federal investigator if he was having an affair, he would have been honest and 'fessed up?!

      During the whole imbroglio, one of the few things that made me laugh was an interview with historian Shelby Foote (he was a big part of Ken Burns' Civil War series), an ooooooold time Southin' Gentleman. He was asked about how Le Laison Lewinsky should be considered in the grand sweep of things, and he said (and I'm paraphrasing here), you know, in the South, this would only be considered Lying with Honor. No Geeeeentleman would ever tell the truth about having an affair, for fear of shaming his wife and the lady in question. I just about died laughing when I watched that, and boy, did I need it. I loved that...

  • oh yes - that's part of the rhetoric (0 / 0)

    of evangelical Christianity as I understand it. You're a better believer if you've been a sinner. Therefore, Bush's cocaine use and alcoholism (which I realize is a disease, but not every drunk gets arrested for DRIVING drunk) makes him MORE worthy than Clinton, because he's asked for and recieved forgiveness. (Never mind that Clinton is a man of faith, as well...)

    Now, the truly faithful extend that to mean that you can't throw stones at other sinners, but that wouldn't be politically expedient for Newt and James.

    You tease out a point I hadn't thought of: that in other circumstances, Bill and Hillary staying together would be evidence of her 'standing by her man' in the Christian heirarchical sense, but to those people who smear them, she only did it for political ends.

    It is truly, truly disgusting, isn't it?

    • Agreed (0 / 0)

      It's all pretty disgusting. I wasn't even thinking of the "stand by her man" angle, I was more thinking of the "keeping the family together" angle.

      You really, seriously could not pay me enough to have to be in the public eye that much. Photographers following you around all the time. Zero privacy.  (this said having just gone through the People mag website for the most recent StarTracks photos). I would HATE for people to be commenting on my life and my choices (a la, do you like Lindsay Lohan's new hair color?)

      I guess, personally, I have respect for Hillary for riding out the mess and staying married having rode out some pretty damn rough stuff in my own marriage. Did they do it for political gain - I don't think anyone could really say except for the two of them.

      "the "well-informed citizenry" envisioned by our framers has degenerated into a "well-amused audience." Tad Daley, Alternet - interview w/ Al Gore 05/22/07

      by cgiselle12 on Mon Mar 12, 2007 at 11:22:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  • On hypocrisy (0 / 0)

    My suspicion is that a lot of lip service is paid to this issue (and many others), but that many of those paying said lip service give themselves and their own family members a pass when it comes to the issue.

    Kind of like the woman who was in the NYT Magazine a few weeks ago about abortion.  Several years back she had more than one abortion (I can't remember exactly how many), but now she is a big anti-abortion crusader.  Do as I say, not as I do.

    The "sanctity of marriage" is absolute as a general rule, but when it comes to my family member's or friend's no-good lousy cheatin' husband, well, it doesn't quite count.  And I think they'd put their favorite politicians in that category, as well.

    Katherine, mom to two boys 7/00 and 1/04

    by pat of butter in a sea of grits on Mon Mar 12, 2007 at 11:58:03 AM PDT

  • Hypocrisy (0 / 0)

    Newt was a hypocrite back in the early nineties, when he wanted to put poor kids in orphanages, while it was known that he was a deadbeat dad to his own kids.

    One thing I've always observed in life; those who publicly judge the morals of others usually turn out to be the most awful hypocrites. About 99.999 percent of the time this is correct.

  • I have always been surprised (0 / 0)

    By the way the "moralists" denigrate Hillary Clinton for staying married to Bill after the whole Lewinsky mess. Maybe I'm just completely naive here, but I always thought that was her way of showing her commitment to her marriage. I've heard people say that she only stayed married to him for political reasons, or "for the money", but I can't buy that logic. I mean, she was a successful attorney, so it wasn't like she really needed Bill to "support" her.

Permalink | 8 comments