Gingrich signs pledge against gay marriage

  • KissTheSky

    Posts: 1981

    Dec 12, 2011 10:32 PM GMT
    Gingrich has signed onto a document from the anti-gay group "The Family Leader," declaring his opposition to same sex marriage and has promised to uphold the Defense of Marriage Act.

    Romney and Ron Paul have refused to sign the document.

    Interestingly, the pledge also prohibits adultery. Gingrich has a long history of cheating on his wives:

    Gingrich is currently married to his third wife Callista, who he married after cheating on his second wife while she struggled with a diagnosis of multiple sclerosis. He divorced his first wife to marry his second, his mistress at the time, presenting her with papers the day after she had surgery for uterine cancer.

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/12/12/gingrich-signs-pledge-forbidding-adultery/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 12, 2011 10:41 PM GMT
    The thread title should be "Gingrich signs pledge against adultery." icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 12, 2011 11:15 PM GMT
    paulflexes saidThe thread title should be "Gingrich signs pledge against adultery." icon_lol.gif

    Well, he's certainly the "Subject Matter Expert" (SME) on the topic, as we used to call highly trained guys in the US Army. I have this image of Gingrich addressing a company of soldiers, all packed together sitting outdoors on rickety wooden bleachers on some training range --

    "Alright, soldiers! Listen up! I'm Newt Gingrich, and... what's your problem, troop, you think my name is funny? Get your ass down here and knock 'em out until I get tired!"

    "Yes, Newt Gingrich! One, Newt Gingrich, two, Newt Gingrich, three, Newt Gingrich, four, Newt Gingrich..."

    "Now today's instruction is how to be an adulterer. I know many of you will resist the idea, even among those of you not yet married. But there's comes a time when yah gotta do what yah gotta do. Like when your wife is gravely ill, and needs your support most. You can't be bothered with that shit, and she, or he, has gotta be made to understand that.

    Rule One: Always think of yourself first! That's how I built my career, and so can you, if you follow these easy rules.

    People are your pawns! Now repeat that after me: people are my pawns!"

    "People are my pawns!"

    "Good! Nobody matters but me!"

    "Nobody matters but me!"

    "Outstanding! The truth is what I make it, it doesn't make me!"

    "The truth is what I make it, it doesn't make me!"

    "I like it! And you, you can stop the pushups now and get your sorry ass back up there!"

    "Yes, Newt Gingrich!"

    "Today I'll introduce you to my 'Contract With Adultery.' You will learn to be faithless, deceitful, lying, but at the same time, also learn how to put an innocent, totally guiltless face on it, ignore it and deny it. Do you think you're good enough to do that, soldiers?"

    "YES, NEWT!"

    "And preach morals to others when you are the most immoral bastard in the US?"

    "YES, NEWT!"

    "ALRIGHT! In a few moments we'll begin some practical exercises..."

    It's about here my mind rebels at further thoughts of Newt Gingrich and his travesty of a life. And wonder how Republicans can flock to him, while telling us gays that it's our own personal lifestyles that're reprehensible, not his. icon_mad.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 12, 2011 11:24 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidThe only difference between Gingrich and Mr. Obama on this issue is that Obama isn't bothering to defend the law via the Justice Department anymore, however, when Mr. Obama, Mr. Reid and Madame Pelosi controlled the Congress for two years they didn't bother repealing DOMA. Quite telling.


    You really like to keep resurrecting that lie about 2 years control of Congress, don't you? You're the best example of a 1-trick pony I've seen here.

    Your were saying Democrats had controlled Congress for 2 years at about the 14 month period, as I recall. Which was untrue, since they only had a super-majority in the Senate for ONE MONTH, to override the Republican Party of No, that blocked every bill the Democrats advanced.

    Republicans who blocked any repeal of DOMA. You should blame them for upholding DOMA, and not the Democrats for not having the votes to override the Republicans in the Senate. More revisionist lies from you.
  • KissTheSky

    Posts: 1981

    Dec 12, 2011 11:30 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    KissTheSky saidGingrich has signed onto a document from the anti-gay group "The Family Leader," declaring his opposition to same sex marriage and has promised to uphold the Defense of Marriage Act.


    The only difference between Gingrich and Mr. Obama on this issue is that Obama isn't bothering to defend the law via the Justice Department anymore, however, when Mr. Obama, Mr. Reid and Madame Pelosi controlled the Congress for two years they didn't bother repealing DOMA. Quite telling.



    I don't think Gingrich is in any position to be casting moral judgements on others.
  • KissTheSky

    Posts: 1981

    Dec 13, 2011 12:10 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    KissTheSky said

    No, the difference is that Romney said he would repeal state laws allowing gay marriage. (Or at least that's his latest flip-flop on this issue.)
    Obama is not doing that and has never said he will.
    For the people who live in those states it's important.


    No, the difference is that Mr. Obama believes marriage is "the union between a man and a woman." Which is no difference at all.

    As for repealing "state laws"... sorry, the President can't do that. If he could, think of all the other good things Mr. Obama could have "accomplished" so far! icon_razz.gif

    BTW: I thought this topic was about slaming and distorting Gingrich - why did you bring up Romney?


    I misposted about Romney -- it's hard to keep all the anti-gay Republicans straight.
    How is Gingrich being distorted? He's the one who chose to align himself with this anti-gay group and sign their pledge.
    I'd say his message is quite clear.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Dec 13, 2011 12:34 AM GMT
    KissTheSky said
    Romney and Ron Paul have refused to sign the document.


    I thought Romney DID sign it. I think it's actually HUNTSMAN and PAUL who refused to sign it. In fact, Huntsman said the only pledge he would ever sign is a pledge for "No Pledges".
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 13, 2011 12:35 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    KissTheSky said
    Romney and Ron Paul have refused to sign the document.


    I thought Romney DID sign it. I think it's actually HUNTSMAN and PAUL who refused to sign it. In fact, Huntsman said the only pledge he would ever sign is a pledge for "No Pledges".


    So you are saying Huntsman prefers Endust?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 13, 2011 12:37 AM GMT
    I think Obama doesn't want to lose the votes for 2012 by being for gay marriage.
    I think it would be different in his 2nd term.

    However, Southbeach is completely right on this as it stands right now.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 13, 2011 12:40 AM GMT
    effen saidI think Obama doesn't want to lose the votes for 2012 by being for gay marriage.
    I think it would be different in his 2nd term.

    However, Southbeach is completely right on this as it stands right now.


    Obama is playing this exactly the way he should. He is going to say as he has always said, its a state issue. Which of course, it cannot be. It will eventually be a SCOTUS decision and his finger prints wont be on it. A very smart political move on his part.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 13, 2011 12:57 AM GMT
    i fear it does not matter who is in political power....................both side have their bad points....they are politicians...like lawyers,they are all LIARS...and they make a career out of sucking ass with the American people to get into power.................







    and just like every other time...we get fooled again...
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Dec 13, 2011 1:01 AM GMT
    Dallasfan824 said

    So you are saying Huntsman prefers Endust?


    icon_lol.gif
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Dec 13, 2011 1:02 AM GMT
    Dallasfan824 saidA very smart political move on his part.



    Exactly! If Obama is anything he is a SHREWD politician
  • HndsmKansan

    Posts: 16311

    Dec 13, 2011 1:04 AM GMT
    Definitely a new chapter in "How the Grinch Stole Christmas"....

    EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW

    icon_evil.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 13, 2011 1:22 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    KissTheSky said
    southbeach1500 said
    KissTheSky said

    No, the difference is that Romney said he would repeal state laws allowing gay marriage. (Or at least that's his latest flip-flop on this issue.)
    Obama is not doing that and has never said he will.
    For the people who live in those states it's important.


    No, the difference is that Mr. Obama believes marriage is "the union between a man and a woman." Which is no difference at all.

    As for repealing "state laws"... sorry, the President can't do that. If he could, think of all the other good things Mr. Obama could have "accomplished" so far! icon_razz.gif

    BTW: I thought this topic was about slaming and distorting Gingrich - why did you bring up Romney?


    I misposted about Romney -- it's hard to keep all the anti-gay Republicans straight.
    How is Gingrich being distorted? He's the one who chose to align himself with this anti-gay group and sign their pledge.
    I'd say his message is quite clear.



    This "pledge" is exactly what Mr. Obama has allowed to continue. Don't know why you can't see that.


    Incorrect. Obama has done more for gay rights in 3 years than any president in the history of our union. Of course, he supports gay marriage and I expect he will say so once he's reelected. Right now, he's playing it smart and not giving the douche bags you will inevitably vote for a wedge issue. icon_cool.gif
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Dec 13, 2011 1:27 AM GMT
    Christian73 saidRight now, he's playing it smart and not giving the douche bags you will inevitably vote for a wedge issue. icon_cool.gif




    Ahhhhhhhh, I get it. When Romney says he believes in marriage to be defined as between a man and a woman -- he's being a "douche bag" --- but, of course, when Obama says the very same thing he's just "playing it safe". icon_rolleyes.gif I guess Obama is the only one allowed to "play it safe" in your world. Have you forgotten that it was actually Governor Mitt Romney that signed gay marriage into law in Massachusetts????
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 13, 2011 1:42 AM GMT
    CuriousJockAZ said
    Christian73 saidRight now, he's playing it smart and not giving the douche bags you will inevitably vote for a wedge issue. icon_cool.gif




    Ahhhhhhhh, I get it. When Romney says he believes in marriage to be defined as between a man and a woman -- he's being a "douche bag" --- but, of course, when Obama says the very same thing he's just "playing it safe". icon_rolleyes.gif I guess Obama is the only one allowed to "play it safe" in your world. Have you forgotten that it was actually Governor Mitt Romney that signed gay marriage into law in Massachusetts????


    The Demcrats and Obama didn't use gay marriage as a scare tactic to win elections as the GOP did in 2004 and 2006.

    And check your facts, because Romney didn't legalize gay marriage in Massachusetts, the state Supreme Court did. In fact, "Romney responded to the 2003 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision by vowing to keep the state from becoming, as he put it, "the Las Vegas of gay marriage." At the time, Romney stated: "I agree with 3,000 years of recorded history. ... Marriage is an institution between a man and a woman.""

    http://www.npr.org/2011/12/12/143590615/romney-stance-on-gay-rights-issues-its-complicated

    And there's a huge difference between fighting for gay rights in general and politically not support gay marriage because the Republicans would use it against him and fighting against gay rights and using any support for those rights against your opposition.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Dec 13, 2011 1:47 AM GMT
    Christian73 said
    CuriousJockAZ said
    Christian73 saidRight now, he's playing it smart and not giving the douche bags you will inevitably vote for a wedge issue. icon_cool.gif




    Ahhhhhhhh, I get it. When Romney says he believes in marriage to be defined as between a man and a woman -- he's being a "douche bag" --- but, of course, when Obama says the very same thing he's just "playing it safe". icon_rolleyes.gif I guess Obama is the only one allowed to "play it safe" in your world. Have you forgotten that it was actually Governor Mitt Romney that signed gay marriage into law in Massachusetts????


    The Demcrats and Obama didn't use gay marriage as a scare tactic to win elections as the GOP did in 2004 and 2006.

    And check your facts, because Romney didn't legalize gay marriage in Massachusetts, the state Supreme Court did. In fact, "Romney responded to the 2003 Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court decision by vowing to keep the state from becoming, as he put it, "the Las Vegas of gay marriage." At the time, Romney stated: "I agree with 3,000 years of recorded history. ... Marriage is an institution between a man and a woman.""

    http://www.npr.org/2011/12/12/143590615/romney-stance-on-gay-rights-issues-its-complicated

    And there's a huge difference between fighting for gay rights in general and politically not support gay marriage because the Republicans would use it against him and fighting against gay rights and using any support for those rights against your opposition.



    If you got paid for each time you used a double-standard you could retire and move to Aruba
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 13, 2011 1:50 AM GMT
    Gingrich is a garbage can full of ugly...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 13, 2011 1:51 AM GMT
    Art_Deco saidYou really like to keep resurrecting that lie about 2 years control of Congress, don't you? You're the best example of a 1-trick pony I've seen here.

    Your were saying Democrats had controlled Congress for 2 years at about the 14 month period, as I recall. Which was untrue, since they only had a super-majority in the Senate for ONE MONTH, to override the Republican Party of No, that blocked every bill the Democrats advanced.

    Republicans who blocked any repeal of DOMA. You should blame them for upholding DOMA, and not the Democrats for not having the votes to override the Republicans in the Senate. More revisionist lies from you.

    They did not need a supermajority as they were able to employ parliamentary procedures to get what they REALLY wanted with a simple majority. Republicans have done the same in the past, but the point remains that the Democrats could do what they wanted, as evidenced by Obamacare. So the point will be HAMMERED, AND HAMMERED, AND HAMMERED.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 13, 2011 1:52 AM GMT
    ron-paul-2012.gif


    At this point for me, it is either Dr. Paul, or re-electing the TelePrompter-in-Chief.

    The rest of the GOP field seems intent on sucking the ass of the Bible Belt.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19138

    Dec 13, 2011 1:54 AM GMT
    socalfitness saidSo the point will be HAMMERED, AND HAMMERED, AND HAMMERED.



    You know how they hate that, SoCal. icon_lol.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 13, 2011 1:57 AM GMT
    It would be very VERY easy to honor that pledge not to commit adultery with any of those candidates. bleh
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 13, 2011 2:18 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    Christian73 said Obama has done more for gay rights in 3 years than any president in the history of our union.


    Yeah... if you are a Federal employee. Does all the rest of us absolutely no good whatsoever.


    Nah, federal wages (except possibly for the Senior Executive Service and certain other appointee positions) are frozen in pay - no cost-of-living or CPI increases until FY 2013 with a likely extension of that until 2015 pending.

    Earning 2010 wages while paying the (inflation adjusted) bills in 2015 ?

    Not exactly a thing federal employees are cheering about, at least in the rank and file grossing under $100k/year.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 13, 2011 2:23 AM GMT
    I heard he didn't sign it just that he supports it. Splitting hairs but just saying for the sake of accuracy