Good start. I’d say Noot represents all that is wrong in a human being. grins.

I’m curious, Steve (and I’ve been thinking about this for quite a while and wondering why nobody else is asking this question): which traditional value, regarding marriage specifically, are you recommending we espouse?

The tradition practiced during Biblical times that held that men could have multiple wives? How about having children by household servants, like Abraham?

How about the tradition that held that a man’s wives followed him into his grave if he predeceased them?

Or the tradition that held that a wealthy man could own a harem, the size of which was only governed by his wealth?

The tradition that held women as chattel property to be married off for the purpose of creating strategic alliances between families or countries or to increase the wealth of the clan leaders?

The tradition that held that a husband had the legal right to do whatever he desired with his wife, including beating her or even killing her if he chose?

Y’all keep talking about defending “traditional marriage” and some have even claimed that this “traditional marriage” has held throughout the whole of human history (a mouthpiece for the National Organization for Marriage made that claim, again, today on Morning Joe). Now, all the traditions I mention above applied to marriage as practiced during various periods of human history. A couple still apply in some cultures so, I ask again: Which traditions of marriage are you defending?

I bet he would.

I’ve been divorced once, but managed not to serve papers to my soon to be ex on her deathbed. Little nuances like that make a difference.

I think you’re missing the qualitative side of Newt’s marriage habits.

Don’t feed us after midnight either!

I’ve discovered giving vitriol to con commenters is like giving water to gremlins….they multiply and they get ugly. 😉

Well that is where we differ. I believe, most liberals believe, that if you choose to go into Public Life and espouse a value then you need to have lived that value. Hell we’d accept someone who acknowledges that they didn’t follow that value in the past but have had a change of heart and have tried to follow those values since that conversion point. However, we don’t see that in the case of Newt. We see no acknowledgement of his past and how it doesn’t jive with what he is saying.

It was for this very reason Liberals weren’t quick to condemn Weiner. He never held himself up as a family values person. If he had, we’d have skewered him (pardon the pun) just as we are with Newt. If I were to ever run for office it would be as “sinner” aware that people who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

Why is that disconnect important? Because it speaks to how that person would judge others in public office. Newt is running for the most powerful position in the world. His being judgmental of others and his inability to engage in any introspection regarding his own behavior signals a VERY IMPORTANT lack of personality development. Such narcissists in positions of power can be dangerous because they tend to be lacking in empathy. And that’s what we as Liberals worry about.

Agreed , this tool doesn’t deserve a “reasonable” response, what he needs is an education (and quite possibly a heart)

“traditional values”

So traditional values apparently include denying other human beings their civil rights. At least in your view.

Nice. You are a right winger.

IG is always reasonable. Sometimes, as in your case, too reasonable, IMO.

You forgot to call me a racist and homophobe as well. I expect better out you Robert.

Now go out there and do better next time!