LETTER: Gingrich’s affair brings to mind philanderers of past parties
To the editor:
As I read the rather lengthy diatribe about Newt Gingrich as expounded by Jim Crees in his editorial of Dec. 14, I feel the need to perhaps offer a little insight of my own.
I am not enamored by his past record of side dalliances either, and wouldn’t vote for him on a bet.
However, as I read each item of sin and ribaldry, I recognize a strikingly similarity with several past and present members of Mr. Crees’ side of the fence.
Enough of which I would suggest that Newt has enough qualifications to join “The Democratic Party.”
As Jim cites the fact that Mr. Gingrich left his wife during an extra curricular affair and even filed divorce papers as she lay in a hospital bed fighting cancer.
Did not Jim’s party have a presidential hopeful (I believe his name rhymed with “Edwards”) whom managed to produce a “love child” with a “campaign worker” while his wife was dying of cancer?
And too, I believe there is scrutiny afloat that some campaign dollars may have been used to cover up this small aberration of Mr. Edwards “high moral standards.”
Yet in the “arena of financial shenanigans,” I would call him a “minor leaguer” in comparison to Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and others whom played major roles in the housing catastrophe.
To be chastised as having played both sides of the fence with more than one issue. Can Jim name more than a handful of his parties participants whom haven’t “flip-flopped more than the pancakes at IHOP?”
Quoting his statement that: “He is a noted and documented womanizer” seems to bring from the back of my mind: That we once had a President whom left a trail of womanizing that would easily qualify “Newt” to be a “choirboy” if it wasn’t for his age.
Ala: Paula Jones, Juanita Brock and of course, whom can forget the infamous Monica Lewinski?
I rest my case,
Editor’s note: It’s interesting to note that when I pen an opinion piece (not an editorial), castigating some politician’s behavior and policies, some readers seem to understand that I immediately infer approval of the opposing party’s immoral behavior.
Just to make things clear: The Democratic Party is not “my side of the fence.” It certainly is not “Jim’s party.” I vote for people who I believe will do the best job. My past votes have, indeed, included Democrats and have very often included Republicans.
When I consider my vote I look at a person’s qualification. I look at how they will serve me and my neighbors. I also consider a person’s integrity — or lack thereof.
John Edwards is a scoundrel and a weasel — just as is Newt Gingrich.
Edwards does not get a “pass” because he is a Democrat.
Bill Clinton was a man lacking a moral compass. He was a philanderer and a cheat.
I wouldn’t vote for him if you held a pistol to my head.
But ... the column in question was about Newt Gingrich, a man running for president — the highest office in the land.
Clinton is not running for office. Edwards is not running for office (thank God).
Gingrich IS running for office, and he is a man lacking in both integrity and a nominal dose of humility.
It has nothing to do with “my party.”
It’s a matter of integrity.