"Gingrich wanted open marriage" claims 2nd wife

[rosenewock21]

http://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-gingrich-lacks-moral-character-president-ex-wife-135852543--abc-news.html

Newt Gingrich lacks the moral character to serve as President, his second ex-wife Marianne told ABC News, saying his campaign positions on the sanctity of marriage and the importance of family values do not square with what she saw during their 18 years of marriage.

In her most provocative comments, the ex-Mrs. Gingrich said Newt sought an "open marriage" arrangement so he could have a mistress and a wife.

She said when Gingrich admitted to a six-year affair with a Congressional aide, he asked her if she would share him with the other woman, Callista, who is now married to Gingrich.

"And I just stared at him and he said, 'Callista doesn't care what I do,'" Marianne Gingrich told ABC News. "He wanted an open marriage and I refused."

Ah, Newt, where are your traditional family values now?

Don't get me wrong. I feel that consenting adults should be able to do whatever they want with other consenting adults as long as everyone's okay with it and no one dies. I was going to say "as long as no one gets hurt" but then that would cut out consensual BDSM. I just happen to love a good slice of irony pie.

[Da Rat Bastid]

I have mixed feelings about this.

On one hand, there's the schadenfreude I feel concerning Salamander getting lambasted for being the flaming hypocrite he is.

Then, there's the sadness I feel.  Though polyamory and swinging are two different things (on the off chance someone reads this who doesn't already know, the former deals with romantic relationships, while the latter deals purely with sex partners), I say with zero shame that I gladly embrace both.  The reason I'm sad about this development is that it gives those of us who aren't hypocritical about non-monogamy an awful name.

[armandtanzarian]

Don't get me wrong. I feel that consenting adults should be able to do whatever they want with other consenting adults as long as everyone's okay with it and no one dies. I was going to say "as long as no one gets hurt" but then that would cut out consensual BDSM. I just happen to love a good slice of irony pie.

It never the actual lifestyle that gets social conservatives. Its the hypocrisy that's the reason their sex scandals are so delicious.

Anyway when I think of Newt I think of him as:

[N. De Plume]

Don't get me wrong. I feel that consenting adults should be able to do whatever they want with other consenting adults as long as everyone's okay with it and no one dies. I was going to say "as long as no one gets hurt" but then that would cut out consensual BDSM. I just happen to love a good slice of irony pie.

It never the actual lifestyle that gets social conservatives. Its the hypocrisy that's the reason their sex scandals are so delicious.

The problem is that there are a lot of people that confuse the lifestyle for the scandal. It is really difficult to call a person out on hypocrisy—and just hypocrisy—without someone thinking you are condemning the act that the hypocrite participated in.

[Da Rat Bastid]

The problem is that there are a lot of people that confuse the lifestyle for the scandal. It is really difficult to call a person out on hypocrisy—and just hypocrisy—without someone thinking you are condemning the act that the hypocrite participated in.

Hence my sadness. *nods in agreement*

[sandman]

What strikes me even more than the "open marriage" thing (which frankly I could care less about if the people involved are cool with it) is how he treated his wives. First wife gets cancer....divorce her ass and marry the woman you were cheating on her with. That wife gets diagnosed with MS....divorce her ass and marry the woman you were cheating on her with. This is just the behavior of an EPIC douchebag.

What's also very astonishing is that his current wife agreed to marry him knowing his history, and she apparently trusts him to be faithful.

[Captain Jack Harkness]

We again have another tick against an already enormous douchebag.

What is it with the Republican field this year?  I know they've had problems with having good candidates in the past, but this year....ugh.

[Bezron]

This is their also-ran year.  It is generally considered to be exponentially harder to unseat an incumbent president. There have only been 3 one termers since WW2 and about 10 in history (technically including Cleveland, who did serve 2 terms, but no-consecutively).

I think it was on this board that someone brought up the fact that the Republicans will only field someone one time on the big ticket.  So they bring out the also-rans in the incumbent years.  If the guy wins, great.  If they lose (more likely) then they can be done with the guy.  I wouldn't be surprised to see Newt get the nod, since the party is about sick of him begging to run.  He loses, we never have to hear from him again.

[sandman]

No, Mitt will get the nod. He's "earned" it by paying his dues and waiting patiently. The GOP is all about getting your due. When he is (reluctantly) nominated, this will piss off the evangelical Christian base of the party so much that many of them will abandon Mitt in favor of a third-party "Christian" candidate. (Probably Huckabee or Rick Santorum on some wacky "'MERICA!!!" party pulled out of the ass of the religious right.)

This will serve several purposes. It will split the GOP vote and hand Obama a second term, which was probably going to happen anyway, so it's no real loss to the party. It will effectively end Mitt Romney's political career, which will sit very well with the GOP base. They never wanted him in the national scene anyway. The GOP to blame Romney, personally, for the loss, rather than themselves. Whoever that third party spoiler turns out to be will be welcomed back into the party with the intention of using the influence they garnered in the 2012 campaign to lend strength as the running mate for the REAL GOP presidential hopeful (probably Chris Christie, but maybe Jeb Bush) in 2016. 

[N. De Plume]

What you just described, sandman, is why I hate politics.

[Eniliad]

...this is despicable, but I'm sorry, Gingrich already topped himself with the "cheating on cancer-stricken wife" thing. That's far worse in my opinion than philandering and douchebaggery.

[Caitshidhe]

Like others, the source of my anger here isn't that Newt wanted a relationship or marriage arrangement other than the Leave-It-To-Beaver, nuclear-family, vanilla kind. As long as everybody involved is consenting to it, there isn't a problem. The problem here is that he's a raging hypocrite. He wants to enjoy a lifestyle himself that he is actively campaigning to deny to everyone else. 'Traditional family values' are bullshit and he doesn't even want to comply with them anyway.

I don't know why anybody takes him seriously on this crap. Three marriages, two affairs, and HE'S worried about the 'state of marriage'? Go sit on a cactus, Newt.

[QueenofHearts]

Go sit on a cactus, Newt.

What did the cactus do to deserve such a punishment??

[rosenewock21]

Go sit on a cactus, Newt.

What did the cactus do to deserve such a punishment??

It was a gay cactus and refused to accept Jesus as its lord and savior. /fundie

[Caitshidhe]

Because the cactus wasn't satisfied with 'marriage equality'. It was out to completely destroy all traditional family values--first gay couples can get married, next thing you know people are going to want to marry CHILDREN or ANIMALS or OBJECTS or WORSE! And the cactus said it had the right to marry its underage dead puppy 'partner'. It's disgusting!

Ow, my head...