I have to give credit to BoF's "hypocrisy" thread on this. It has come out that Newt Gingrich has admitted to having an affair while the whole Clinton impeachment saga was going on.

Questions for debate:

1.)Is Gingrich a hypocrite?

2.)In making a distinction between the president and his actions, is Gingrich brushing off what he did and not owing up to it more fully?

3.)Are bad actions bad actions, or do other circumstances make them different? In other words, are some things *relative*?

1.) Is Gingrich a hypocrite?

If Gingrich's rallying cry was to cast aspersions upon Clinton's morality (i.e., acts of adultery) while in office then indeed he was being hyprocritcal. Was this the case?

2.) In making a distinction between the president and his actions, is Gingrich brushing off what he did and not owing up to it more fully?

I assume you mean "between the president and Gingrich's actions"? I could be off the mark but the link you provided did not report any such distinction being made. Gingrich raised the issue of Clinton's perjury being unacceptable and not his acts of infidelity. Gingrich had not perjured himself regards to infidelity.

3.) Are bad actions bad actions, or do other circumstances make them different? In other words, are some things *relative*?

I think we could all ease up a bit on judgmentalism and especially from within my own party. However, I cannot fathom many scenarios where Clinton's perjury should be viewed in relative terms. The President of the United States lied while under oath. His reasons for doing so do not exonerate him from having to deal with the consequences of his actions (much like the unfortunate fate that awaits Mr. Libby).

Bad actions are bad actions. Contextual variables many times will inform the "consequence severity" the perpetrator may receive.

1.)Is Gingrich a hypocrite?

Nope. As vanguard has pointed out, this is apples and oranges.


2.)In making a distinction between the president and his actions, is Gingrich brushing off what he did and not owing up to it more fully?

Not really. I'm actually pretty amazed that he admits to an affair in an interview with "Focus on the Family." I will be very interested to see if this hurts his standing with the Religious Right -- if he has been "tainted" in their eyes -- or if it might actually help him, as a symbol of repentence.

3.)Are bad actions bad actions, or do other circumstances make them different? In other words, are some things *relative*?

This is the sixty-four thousand dollar question.

Actions must always be judged with a consideration of the circumstances. Sometimes this is very clear; other times the judgement is very difficult.

1.)Is Gingrich a hypocrite?

According to ABC News Newt Gingrich’s remarks about Bill Clinton involved more than perjury and obstruction. I don’t like the practice of looking for hypocrisy in every dusty corner. If, however, those on the right are so hell bent on branding Democrats hypocrites, I don’t think Gingrich can be given a pass.




http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?i...7633&page=1

Gingrich linking Susan Smith to a justification for voting republican is wrong on many levels as I don't think you can, or should politicize something as horrible as Smith's crime against her own children.

As to Gingrich being a hypocrite for his affair. He sure is if he claims an air of superiority to Clinton during those hearings. Although Gingrich did not perjure himself he did commit the same kinds of acts that did get Clinton into this mess in the first place.

Gingrich should not "be given a pass". If the Republican party publicly espouses those virtues that I too consider to be very important then they must "face the fire" when falling short of that mark. Gingrich's actions have run contrary to his family values platform making it all the more difficult to garner the respect that he will need if he does make a run for the presidency. Coming clean with the American people is one step toward potential reconciliation. I am frustrated by his inconsistency between word and deed and will watch closely how he handles himself over the next several months.

I haven't seen anything yet that would merit labeling him a hypocrite. He should be careful however that he does not come off as one who looks down on others who have stumbled into such unfortunate circumstance as he once did. This will be a difficult high wire act for sure.

I fully support his actions taken regards to Clinton's perjury. Clinton allowed his first offense to bleed into something that I consider to be worse. Clinton himself should be careful not to come off as one who looks down on others who perjure themselves in a court proceeding lest he incur the wrath of some on this thread!

The real question should be when are we going to stop judging people based on what they like to do with their sex organs? There couldn't be a better example of apples to oranges than comparing a blow job to a tax policy.

Is Gingrich a hypocrite? To some extent he is. This was a smear campaign. You need political support to oust a popular President. The only way the Republicans could get that support was to attack Bill Clinton's person, because his policies were very beneficial to the entire country. On the contrary, today the Democrats could attempt to impeach Bush on his policies. They don't need a sex scandal to gain that political support.

It exposes a greater hypocrisy, the hypocrisy of the Christian nation. Christians expect a candidate to be Christ-like, yet they know he/she cannot be. They also judge knowing Jesus said "Judge not, lest ye be judged." Newt's admission makes two points, ad hominen's have no place in politics, and neither does religion.

In making a distinction between the president and his actions, is Gingrich brushing off what he did and not owing up to it more fully?
No, Gingrich owned up to his mistake. I'm not so sure it's a mistake though. Marriages go bad, is living the rest of your life in misery make you righteous? I don't think so. Also, Christian doctrine teaches that a wife cannot wed another man unless there has been infidelity. I don't believe Newt made a conscious decision to cheat so he could keep his wife righteous, but that is Christian doctrine.

Are bad actions bad actions, or do other circumstances make them different? In other words, are some things *relative*?It really depends on the nature of Mr. Gingrich's marriage. Was he and his wife living in total contempt for one another, or was she a loving wife that served her husband in the way the Christians believe a woman should serve her husband? So yes, some things are relative.

If it were only as simple as the mechanics of copulation. Cheating, by it's very nature calls a person's honesty into question. Yeah, before someone asks, that goes for Bill Clinton as well.

Yet this issue doesn't really make much difference to me. There is no way in hell I'd ever vote for the man who deposte Jim Wright - my Congressman at the time - who represented the 12th Congresional istrict of Texas, centered largely in Fort Worth. I still see Congressman Wright occcasionally at local restaurants. To me he is still Mr. Speaker, at least that's what I call him.

I wouldn't get up from my table to do the Heimlich Maneuver on Gingrich if he were choking.

This just adds another sordid chapter to Gingrich's history.

Nebraska29:
2.) In making a distinction between the president and his actions, is Gingrich brushing off what he did and not owing up to it more fully?

Vanguard:


From the hyperlinked article I posted in the first post, bolded words are Gingrich's.





I agree with you there, but the question has to do with in bringing up the fact of perjury, is he not excusing his own actions? In doing so, he risks of making the situation *relative* in regards to interpretation, and we all know how bad *relativisits* are in some circles.

Of course he's a hypocrite. He was placing his penis inside another woman's vagina at the same time he was condemning Clinton for his having placed his penis inside of another woman's mouth. It's not apples and oranges. I believe the term is "same crap different pile".
As for the question of perjury...it's so easy to stand on the moral mountain and proclaim whatever garbage people want to hear at that present time. Let's not play games with words here. Look at it realistically. Ginrich has soooo much respect for the sanctity of marriage he decided to embark on the mission more than once. And his first wife was told about his desire for divorce when she was in her hospital bed recovering from a cancer operation. Let's please hear some condemnation about that vile action, ok?
One thing I hate is the way people use the 'morality car wash' whenever it suits them. How many times have we heard some politician spewing some tripe about the 'opposition' then backtrack and say 'we have too much respect for the judicial system to reaspond to anything right now" or how they "must let the legal system do it's job and we can't comment on anything right now..."? Morality is relative. "They did something wrong? Confound those sinners. Tell the media about their skeletons in their closets and insinuate how they're morally wrong!" We did something wrong? Let's let the judicial system do it's job so we won't stoop so low as to speculate...".

Nebraska - I would not be surprised if there were many Gingrich quotes available from the archives that reveal something approaching hypocrisy. However, I make no such claim until I have seen evidence of this. From what you've provided (including sections in bold) you have not adequately made the case.

It seems to me that Gingrich recognized that in pursuing the perjury case against Clinton he could be potentially embarrassed if others found out about his infidelity. This does not reflect a hypocrisy in and of itself but rather an understanding that others, apparently much like yourself, would lynch him for doing the same thing Clinton had done. While I'm sure Gingrich would rather avoid such difficulties I don't believe he would have lowered himself to committing perjury in an effort at subterfuge.

His speaking out against Clinton's perjury is not a commentary on any hypocrisy but rather a reflection of how those on the left were not able to get beyond the sex themselves.

Gingrich isnt a hypocrite but it is ironic that he was impeaching the president for having an affair while he was doing the same thing at the same time. At least Gingrich did apologize. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't believe Clinton ever did. I'm not sure if my memory serves me right. I was only 8 years old at the time of the impeachment trials, and all I can remember is my dad yelling at the Fox New Channel.

sigh... Clinton wasn't being impeached for having an affair, he was being impeached for lying under oath in a sexual harrassment lawsuit. The lawsuit in question wasn't brought by the individual with whom he was having the affair.

Curious. What was he yelling?

My dad, a huge conservative, was yelling at how he lied under oath and should be impeached and this and that. I think, what my dad didn't realize, was that a successful removal of office of Clinton would have left us with Gore. But I was too young at the time to tell him that (8 years old). And I know he was being impeached for lying under oath, I wasn't thinking at the time that I wrote that he was being impeached for having an affair.