It isn’t the views of the RR or the Rep’s that bother me. It’s that they attempt to impose those views on me, by law.

Yes, doma, but plenty of liberal groups also try to impose their views on me by law as well. Radical greenies want to impose their morality into law, civil rights leftists want affirmative action laws which discriminate against the majority race and gender, and feminists sometimes call for PC laws to ‘protect’ against sexual harrassment. And what about banning trans fats? All of these groups often go too far in trying to impose their own view of morality by enshrining it into law.

While I think character should be an issue, one can have one wife, go to church regularly, have a beautiful family and still have a weak or immoral character. A man or woman should be judged in total- not just on the basis of whether they have been divorced, or smoke some pot in college. If you go by those standards, you will end up with a ridiculously small pool of candidates for the presidency, and risk eliminating potentially terrific people.

It isn’t the views of the RR or the Rep’s that bother me. It’s that they attempt to impose those views on me, by law.

So my point is, condemn the action but accept it as a human foible and deal with the person on the basis of how he/she does the job. I would prefer to have leaders who have strong personal character and if everything else is equal I’d vote for the guy who is happily married and not cheating, but I’m not going to make this a litmus test.

But I agree with your point; they’re all very human and comparing which party is worse is pointless. What I find frustrating is that because the GOP is supported by the religious right, and some of the politicians obviously do pander to them, then every Republican is held to a different standard because they are seen to be this judgemental party. Well, first of all just because the religious right believes that there should be standards doesn’t mean that on the whole they believe people should be condemned for immoral actions. They generally do believe in forgiveness.

Second, there are some pretty intolerant factions on the Democratic side too. Take NOW, for example. Why is it not more hypocritical for Dems to treat women as objects when they are supported by people who unequivocably say that that is unforgiveable (or at least it seems to be unforgiveable when a Republican does it)? And mind you, I’m not saying that this kind of behavior shouldn’t be condemned, but there just seems to be a double standard and a different form of hypocrisy there; many liberal voters seem very concerned about hypocrisy on the right but they are completely blinded to it on the left side.

Should we give them morality points to see who loses?

Sometimes it’s the man and not his party who is misbehaving.

Politicians can no longer afford to be unscripted with cable talk shows obsessing over their every unguarded moment. They also now have to contend with u-tube and people from the other camp following them around with video cameras. Remember the joke Hillary made about dealing with bad men? It was the talk of the town.

The thing that’s great about Obama is that he is really good at acting like he’s talking off the cuff. If its not an act, he’ll have his foot in his mouth any day now.

That’ll show ‘em.

Black churches love forgiving sinners— that’s why the black people love him so much.

First of all, I have to say that if a Republican had made such a statement, he/she’d be tarred and feathered for reinforcing a stereotype. And even if we could say that the stereotype fits in this case, is it right to say that it wasn’t so bad that Clinton took advantage of the black church leaders in this way because they really didn’t mind??

The white religious right and the black southern religious groups are all being used by politicians and it’s a shame.

People are hypocrits.

Therefore politicans are hypocrits.

Hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue. In moderate amounts, it’s perfectly normal. I would hate to have my own exposed, but occasionally it happens. Everyone (but me) smirks…and life goes on.

Newt’s problem isn’t (so much) that he’s a hypocrit. It’s that he was such a public moralizer, all the while his plying private vices.

By the way, is there any policy idea of his that has been impemented and actually impoved life in America? I hear a lot about his great ideas. What are they?

Marlowe said that neither Newt nor Clinton is believable in their contrition.

You then said:

Marlow- both Newt and Bill did sleazy things–but the GOP touts itself as the party of family values, thereby holding themselves to a higher standard. I never saw Bill kissing Dobson’s tush!

To which I replied by bringing up the fact that Clinton kissed lots of other tushes (and not referring to his sexual pecadillos here!)

The point is, I don’t randomly bring up Clinton, and I only point out the comparisons when you have already done so and in the process said that the GOP side is worse. That leads me to point out that you are applying a double standard. In other words, I’m not trying to say that everything Clinton did was worse, but I’m trying to get you to stop saying that everything he did was excusable while everything Republicans do is not.

Rudi: Links? It’s common knowledge that Clinton campaigned heavily in black communities by buddying up to their religious leaders. And how about when he lied about witnessing AR black churches being torched when he was growing up? It was only when people in AR called him on the lie that he admitted that he was embellishing…why else would he have done that if not to pander for the religious black vote?

I want to emphasize I’m not trying to use Clinton to divert attention from Newt. I think both are despicable in terms of moral character even though both are highly intelligent and gifted politicians.