Those little GOP rascals were at it again today


I’ve missed a lot of opportunity for political commentary while focusing on the SOPA/PIPA activites, but that doesn’t mean I haven’t noticed.

For example, a few days ago Jon Huntsman dropped out of the GOP race for the presidential nomination and threw his support to Mitt Romney. Damn shame, I say, but it was pretty obvious he just wasn’t going anywhere. And I suppose he had to endorse someone. It’s pathetic, though, when politicians viciously attack an opponent one day and two days later endorse them as the “only candidate qualified to beat Obama,” or words to that effect. No wonder we can’t believe a word they say.

Then this morning (now yesterday) Rick Perry dropped out and endorsed Newt Gingrich. Perry’s departure was long overdue. He’d been driving me crazy for a long time, but moreso after I realized one day that he reminded me of Alfalfa, of the old Little Rascals. Standing on stage, all stiff and uncomfortable like a little boy afraid he’d forget his lines, his stiff white collar buttoned up high and tight under his ears, his mannerisms often awkward and apologetic. Top it off with an “aw, shucks” way of speaking, and I just couldn’t get Alfalfa out of my mind. (Okay, okay, first you have to be old enough to remember the Little Rascals, and then you have to be old enough for those memories to mellow and fade a bit. It loses something if you start comparing photos.)

Iowa announced that Rick Santorum was the actual winner of their caucus, by 34 votes. Sorta took the wind out of Mitt Romney’s sails; he’d been declared the winner by 8 votes. If you saw any video of the voting, and all those handwritten paper “ballots” flying around being counted by hand, you weren’t surprised. The really sad part is remembering that for all the hoopla about Iowa’s vote, only about 6% of their voters participate.

Not to be outdone with the headline grabbing, Gingrich’s second ex-wife came forward within hours with a press interview in which she revealed he asked her for an open marriage in 1999, before he asked her for a divorce, which came sometime after he found out she had multiple sclerosis, and about 6 years after he’d begun an affair with his now current wife. Coming 12 years after the fact and just 2 days before the South Carolina GOP primary, her motives are, shall we say … suspect. On a scale of 1 to 10, the sleaze factor in that family is about 20.

Oh yes, we also heard today about much of Mitt Romney’s money being stashed in offshore accounts. The Cayman Islands, to be specific. But it’s all perfectly legal, of course. Everybody does it! Well, all the rich folk, anyway.

I saw the beginning of tonight’s GOP debate. It started off with Gingrich displaying all the righteous indignation he could muster and angrily criticizing John King and the media for being “despicable” enough to bring up his ex-wife’s revelations. Who better to recognize despicable behavior …

And this is how Americans elect their presidents. Hoo, boy!

14 thoughts on “Those little GOP rascals were at it again today

  1. Newt’s ex has MS, too? I never caught that. I knew Mitt’s wife does. I see them (occasionally) on TV and cannot tell they do. I don’t know how they do it… I can barely walk across a room without having to stop or hold on to something most of the time.

    I did see the beginning of the debate last night when I went to bed. Didn’t make it far – fell asleep, and miraculously, no nightmares. But I was watching when Newt was asked if he wanted to comment about the news of his wife stating Newt asked her for an “open marriage” and he said, “no.” I know many will disagree with me on this, but for once, I liked his answer there. I have no respect for Newt for other reasons, and this only adds to my long list, however, all politicians – including those who run for POTUS – are, after all, only human. They make stupid mistakes in the love department… we all have. And I think their personal marriage woes should be kept just as such… personal. Unless, of course, they’re abusive and beat their wife. I most certainly do not condone this behavior, but in knowing that everyone is human and definitely not perfect in the relationship department, what happens in their own home really is not my concern when it comes to running a country. I am sick and tired of candidates attacking everyone around them, and that includes pointing out faults in marriages. Newt made a stupid move based upon emotions and his little head. What I want to judge a candidate on is what they do outside their home. I really do not want to listen to Newt have to give his side of the story – especially knowing that both sides contain a mixture of truths and lies. I want to know what he plans on doing for ME and the rest of the country. If he wants to answer that question on his own outside the debate, fine. But the debate should be completely for what the candidate’s plans are for the country

    1. HIs very curt “no” sentence was the perfect answer to an out-of-bounds question. And he rightfully reamed the press for all the tawdry stories they routinely spread. It just struck me as ironic that he, of all people, was lecturing them about propriety. I agree with your main point, however, especially being twice-divorced myself. The intimate details of one’s marriage are nobody else’s business. That’s another reason why I thought her coming out with her statements yesterday was so classless.

      1. Wow… I guess I’m not alone with my opinion on this one. I was laying in bed listening (watching the “rerun” later in the eve) and when he said “no” I thought to myself, “OMG, something spewed forth from Newt’s mouth that I actually agree with.” LOL…… And you’re right. That was very classless of his ex. Personally, dirty laundry needs to be left in the hamper.

  2. I do agree that wife #2’s timing is suspect, and likely a symptom of lasting bitterness on her part, but what comes through strongly to me in this matter is Gingrich’s personality. He is enormously self-centered, self-indulgent, and has a callous disregard for the rules of life he preaches to others. He is a hypocrite. If such things were ignored by the press and the public, repugnant as they are, then we would be denied understanding of one aspect of this man’s nature. IMHO.

    1. Yep. He’s a Class A hypocrite, many times over. And it’s not like the press is picking on him. Anyone and everyone who runs for public office is subjected to similar scrutiny. If you want to keep your personal skeletons in the closet, don’t run for office. Or try to keep your skeleton count down to a reasonable number.

  3. I was laughing all through this posting as I agree with every word and I say WELL SAID!!! 😆
    Gingrich is a little weasel, not as cute, a hyppcrite for sure, the man gives me a sour stomach.
    The drop outs didn’t surprise me either, I wonder who is next?
    I don’t like Romney and was waiting for something most likely of financial nature to turn up on that clean cut image.
    Politics were interesting to me long ago, but it is all so discouraging, full of hypocrisy and so frustrating anymore.
    I like what Robert Redford said from an interview at Sundance, “Our government is paralized” 🙁
    That sums it up for me.

    1. Oh, I’d go way beyond paralyzed. I’d say it’s irreparably broken, and all the king’s horses and all the king’s men …

      At least that’s how I’ve felt the last couple of years.

  4. The most interesting aspect in these continuing interminable debates is (to me) the fact that all of the participants have begun to echo one or more of Congressman Paul’s long held positions. Of course – even so, he’s still unelectable. Being right isn’t necessarily a benefit in presidential politics.

... and that's my two cents