I heard Newt say this on Fox the other day (thanks, Mudrake, for a copy):
GINGRICH:
Look, I think there is a gay and secular fascism in this country that wants to impose its will on the rest of us, is prepared to use violence, to use harassment. I think it is prepared to use the government if it can get control of it. I think that it is a very dangerous threat to anybody who believes in traditional religion. And I think if you believe in historic Christianity, you have to confront the fact. And, frankly -- for that matter, if you believe in the historic version of Islam or the historic version of Judaism, you have to confront the reality that these secular extremists are determined to impose on you acceptance of a series of values that are antithetical, they're the opposite, of what you're taught in Sunday school.
I believe he spoke truth. They are going to emulate the public demonstrations of civil rights and pro-life movements and see if they can't get sympathy for sodomy. But they will be more militant, like the paradoxically violent peace demonstrators. It's been wild enough to see their conduct in their Gay Pride Parades.
The civil rights and pro-life demonstrators have typically chosen pacifism as their method --seeking approval and sympathy for their causes. (The violent fringe of pro-life movement did justify shooting abortionists as murderers, which "vigilante justice" didn't win friends for their cause.) Champions of evil tend to use violence or at least the brat behavior we saw in the Lansing church and the recent California demonstrations.
We are asked to overlook the reality of homosexual behaviors and see homosexuality as inborn, like race. If it is inborn, it is a genetic flaw, like other conditions which we would normally and rightfully try to cure--UNLIKE race.
Tom Foley told recently how he didn't feel terribly perverse/wrong for writing seductive emails to 17 year old male pages in D.C. After all, they were almost 18 and didn't object. He does tell that he got into homosexuality via a priest who molested him for some length of time. He verifies all my statements on that condition --that some are seduced/molested into it --and that homosexual adults prey on adolescents --our kids.
We need to protect children and youth from such influence. Instead we have embarked on a publicity campaign, propaganda, to convince youth that some of them are "born gay," and that being gay is as fine as being straight --nevermind the high rate of promiscuity, STD's and the public health hazard that homosexuality has proven to be in the USA.
I believe the condition is preventable, and that's where our education, parenting, and policy efforts should focus --on helping kids be normal. No bashing allowed. Affirmation of their normalness would help kids with self-image issues. Diversity is a positive emphasis when it says our body type (muscular or not), our interests in the arts or sports, our non-stereotypical features --do not predict abnormal sexual orientation. Boys are boys to become husbands and fathers; girls are girls with the potential to be wives and mothers. That's what our sexual differences are for. End of story in the sex ed class.
"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible
46 comments:
How can anyone listen to a word gingrich has to say, he's the very personification of a lying weasle money grubbing politician. He's what's wrong with the Republican party... the same ilk as Abrahmof and the coingate guy.. what's his face...
He gave his divorce notice to his wife on her CANCER BED. How evil does one have to be. He should do a rap album cause that dude is straight up GANGSTA.
From some article:
"But the most notorious of them all is undoubtedly Gingrich, who ran for Congress in 1978 on the slogan, "Let Our Family Represent Your Family." (He was reportedly cheating on his first wife at the time). In 1995, an alleged mistress from that period, Anne Manning, told Vanity Fair's Gail Sheehy: "We had oral sex. He prefers that modus operandi because then he can say, 'I never slept with her.'" Gingrich obtained his first divorce in 1981, after forcing his wife, who had helped put him through graduate school, to haggle over the terms while in the hospital, as she recovered from uterine cancer surgery. In 1999, he was disgraced again, having been caught in an affair with a 33-year-old congressional aide while spearheading the impeachment proceedings against President Clinton."
Gingrich is a ball of slime and Christians should not look to him for help just because he says some good things.
Newt has repented with the blood of Jesus for his sins and shortcomings. Jesus will save you too if ye are born again.
He is a great leader of the Republican Party and will lead us to victory in 2012. I know this and Sarah Palin will be his VP and she will bring God back to the classrooms and to our government.
We need to bring this nation back to Christian values and to stop the homoxex agenda that Obama is going to bring when he gets into office.
Our marriages are threatened by gay marriage, porn, and the rotting sins of this nation. This country needs to repent, fall on its kneed before God the Almighty or He will send another hurricane just like He did to New Orleans because of the sodomy, gay sex, and perversions going on there.
The Lord created man and woman to have babies. We need babies and those murdering abortionists will spend eternity in Hell for what they are doing to 2 million babies.
We need to protect children and youth from such influence. Instead we have embarked on a publicity campaign, propaganda, to convince youth that some of them are "born gay," and that being gay is as fine as being straight --nevermind the high rate of promiscuity, STD's and the public health hazard that homosexuality has proven to be in the USA.
Barb, I'm beginning to think your blog is a hoax and you are some kind of evil genious at satire for stringing us a long all this time with your crazy talk. That last post takes the cake. Gingrich + Sarah Palin in 2008. gha hahahaha!
Yes, Gingerich ruined himself and the GOP took him out of the Congress for it. All the while that Bill Clinton was being exonerated by his party. Gingerich is obviously a very flawed individual.
I don't think we should probably call Newt a "ball of slime" without knowing him lately, should we, Matthew? As Mudrake would point out, our King David was a slimeball if Newt and Clinton were. But we know David was remorseful and repented.
I don't know anything about Gingerich's spiritual life since those days. I haven't yet read his book, "God in America."
He is brilliant and correctly understands the issues for the religious these days --how they are coming into an era of persecution where lefties are trying hard to squeeze them and their beliefs and their evangelism about Christ as the only way --and their moral stands --into a closet --while bringing sodomy out of the closet.
In Canada, a minister cannot preach on the air against homosexuality. In a European country, there is a law against even preaching against homosexuality in the church, and a minister challenged the law, publicizing what he was going to do by telling the newspaper, and he nearly went to jail for it. He may have served. At my last reading, it was not certain if he would serve time or not --but he said he was willing to do so for the right to preach the truth of the Bible.
Steve, The only part of that last post that was written by me was the last paragraph. How can that happen? Has someone the capability to crash my blog??? using my name?
I'll have to get to the bottom of this and in the meantime, I'm erasing the phony post.
I see I have a new profile --when I clicked on the new "Barb."
there is no depth too low for a mudrake, no muck too deep, no hatefulness too great.
He personifies the liberal left to me. No morals. No ethics.
I've reported him to Blogger and hope to hear from them. Impersonating a blogger is against their policy, of course.
THE THIRD COMMENT HERE IS NOT BY ME, DEAR READERS. I'm leaving it up in case Blogger wants to check it out.
It's not plagiarism. I guess you weren't an English teacher, that's for sure. I attributed to you--and you didn't write the Gingerich quote yourself --so if I plagiarized, you did, too. but neither of us did, here.
Your sin is impersonating a blogger.
Steve, if you did the new Barb profile and impersonating post, you had better fess up and cease and desist. I'm assuming Mudrake --but you did follow up immediately.
He would mean it maliciously; you would think it a good joke.
I have no idea what you are talking about.
Barb,
Newt is a slimeball.
Of course there is forgiveness for any sin but Newt's sin is very public and so his repentance would be public, as well. He's not done this. He does not appear to be repentant at all.
I cannot judge his heart. We are not to judge what's inside a man but we are to judge what we can see. What I see is rotten and cruel and wicked. Particularly when you remember what he was publicly saying about Bill Clinton while, at the very moment, cheating on his wife.
It's sick that Christians are so enamored with his intellect.
We aren't even to say, "Thou fool!" Matthew.I don't think it becomes YOU to refer to Newt as a slimeball. If I said it, Mudrake would remind me to hold King David in similar contempt. These flagrant adulterers are egregious sinners --as we all are sinners--but some sin is too egregious to make one a viable candidate for the Christians.
I think he did make some statement of regret about past sins to Dobson who entertained supporting him (as McCain referred to his mid-life infidelity as a regret, also, for the sake of us who consider repentance for sin of adultery important) --but most of us would never think Newt worthy of the high office --nor was McCain worthy in his moral history.
Reagan was a good president despite a divorce and remarriage, and Dole had divorce history, also. We would always be suspicious that Newt was insincere --He does understand the Religious Right and does realize they are a power base that could propel any candidate to victory if they campaigned better than the last crew--with a consistent, multi-faceted expression of core values and explanations for them. This campaign allowed the ignorant to believe Obama was pro-life and for DOMA. And failed to make the case that Socialism (spreading the wealth) just makes everybody poor and unemployed.
As it is, the party shied away from emphasizing the social issues --and this was their downfall --because these are really good reasons for voting GOP whose presidents don't sign FOCA and would support DOMA, BAIPA, etc.
We haven't realized the power of a president and Congress to cause cultural sea-change in social mores through their judges and exec orders and vetoes--but Roe vs. Wade is an example.
Again, Matt and STeve, my comment --no. 3 on this thread --is not mine. Someone has created a phony profile, copying from my real profile, and is impersonating me.
It starts with, "Newt has repented with the blood of Jesus for his sins and shortcomings. Jesus will save you too if ye are born again."
I didn't write this comment.
so, Steve, you really don't know what I'm talking about?
Matt, by your rationale, it would be "sick" that we would be so enamored of King David's Psalms --since he was even guilty of arranging death for the husband of his lust object. Yes, he repented.
I believe Dobson did interview Newt and receive public admission of his regrets for past sins. I didn't hear it and don't know if he claims to be born again or not, appropriating the language of repentance and conversion that we look for in a true believer.
I don't think it's "sick" to recognize that newt has articulated well the situation for religious conservatives these days with respect to our liberties --because of our position on the social issues. He was responsible for the "contract with America" that helped to usher in the short Clinton prosperity that started because of Reagan policies --hope was seen in reigning in the welfare state at that time with the GOP congress.
no one is more opposed to adultery and wife and child abandonment than I. I think Newt has a gargantuan ego and desire to lead again. And may have figured the Religious Right is his best option--but he's mistaken--because we probably cannot trust his sincerity. All we need is a GOP president with women under his desk!
Meanwhile, if he articulates our cause well with respect to life and marriage and faith and family --(I need to read his book, God in America) we can certainly use help in that area.
Barb,
King David was a heinous sinner who repented and found forgiveness in Christ. I am a heinous sinner who repents and finds forgiveness in Christ.
My problem with Newt is that he's unrepentant and a hypocrite. And it IS sick that Christians give him a pass because he's so smart.
Well, my question to you is: how do you know he is unrepentant? Have you heard something lately? Is he still living a double life such that he is still a hypocrite?
I said I wouldn't trust him with the presidency because of his moral lapses in the past. I don't know that Christians are giving him a "pass" for his intelligence. That's not how I see my comments about him.
King David was a heinous sinner who repented and found forgiveness in Christ. I am a heinous sinner who repents and finds forgiveness in Christ.
Yes, I know. Didn't I just say that? Although I didn't know you were a "heinous" sinner! I figured you to be a more ordinary sinner.
Matt, I could care less about Newt Gingrich, but it seems that you're objection was dealt with. Newt confessed on Dobson's program, a public forum, that what he did was wrong, at least, that is the impression mom has. If the impression is right, your objection to Newt doesn't make sense unless you'd say the same thing about absolutely everyone else including your pastor. But I don't think that was you're intention.
Barb - did you get anywhere figuring out how to i.d. your impersonator?
NOt yet, Kate.
Well, I hope you can catch them. I'm going to talk to my program engineer in a few minutes and see if he has any input.
One of the perks of owning and I.T. company :-)
You own an I.T. company? Any legal way to find out Mudrake's identity? That would be so sweeet!
I don't know if it would be legal or not - but it would be an invasion of privacy although I can certainly see what the appeal is for you :-)
I think your choices are censorship - which in this case is clearly called for and it is your blog site - or just ignore it. It's an eerie sort of thing, his fascination with you and I've just skipped over those posts. But it does stifle healthy discussion and debate to have a mentally ill person constantly attacking and haranguing. It's a real distraction and that' the purpose no doubt. He has to be the center of attraction all the time in all things. Part of the make up of a narcissist.
I found out what happened here and how it was done. You have my email address? Send me an email and I'll give you my phone number.
I don't have your address or number that I know of. But Crusader or Measure a year might put me in touch with you.
I figure someone just opened a new blogger account with their email and ID and then used my screen name as their own? I would assume screen names aren't assigned only to one person?
Then I could pose as mudrake. And all blog integrity would go out the window. I could go and post scripture as him all over the internet and say nice things about Christians and GoP.
I think there should be some regulation to prevent this.
Crusader has my email address. I'm not going to post it here for obvious reasons :-)
Rob,
It's my understanding that Gingerich has never openly confessed other than to take responsibility for what happened. As in: It was my fault, not hers. That's different from repentance.
I could be wrong, here, and I would be happy for that to be the case. Again, I am not the judge of his heart.
I continue to stand amazed that so many Christians are willing to give him a pass on this. The more I read from Barb I don't think she's doing that, though.
Gingrich may have repented, but I think for someone aspiring for public office, his past shows a marked character flaw in that he is not loyal, not even loyal to the closest person to him in her hour of need. Can we risk him not being loyal to us, in our deepest hour of need? It's not a matter of repentence, but a matter of risk... people do "backslide". Just look at me, at one time I was "washed in the blood", but now, according to KateB and her unique mind melge with the almighty, according to her I'm a non repentent "unbeliever".
Well, steve, Kate and I just think Bobblehead Jesus is something to repent about!
Now I agree with you 100 percent about serial adulterers --if a wife can't trust him, how can we? So did you vote for Clinton??
The other issue --if a man is prone to promiscuity or closet homosexuality or liasons with prostitutes and holds power, can he be blackmailed into doing things he ought not because some country or some company, etc. has some goods on him and threatens to spill his beans??
that's why I thought Clinton should have been found guilty during his impeachment. He WAS guilty and his problem was potential for blackmail.
Had his party found him guilty, which he was, Gore might have gotten the presidency because he would've served a while before the next election. As it was, half the country was as sick of Clinton and his sordid appetite --as the media and democrats were of Bush--and with more reason.
No Steve, sorry to burst your bubble but it's isn't about you :-) Not this time....
My commentary is that many of us, if not each of us, has been exposed to the judge not lest you be judged trick. And for some time, I bought into it - until I read the entire passage.
It is a general comment on a tried and true tactic used by unbelievers and adopted as truth, simply because it's said so often, by many believers who don't do their own research.
Barb you are right on with the Clinton/Gore comment.
And I feel very sorry for Bill Clinton - for all the things he did that were good for our country and set us up for an economic boom - what is his legacy? A Trivial Pursuit card.....
He lied to Congress, which is one of the few impeachable offenses. And he was impeached by the House and very nearly by the Senate.
He's turned out to be something of a philanthropist in his older years. He's teamed up with Pres. Bush Sr. and the two travel around to hurricane and stricken areas and really make a difference. But his Presidency is destined to be remembered by his sexual indiscretion and his having lied.
And he was a big part of Gore's problem in that election. That's very right Barb - just as McCain had problems b/c the media has made such a hard case against Pres. Bush now.
But prior to President Bush - the media ATE Bill Clinton alive. Was a sad thing to see.
When JFK was in the Whitehouse apparently half the Secret Service personnel almost had break downs trying to keep his indiscretions out of the news, because it would have damaged the office of the President. The media didn't seek out to shame and humiliate the President. But they sure do now.
Check facebook Barb. There's a connection there for us to discuss this situation.
Gee golly Denny - do you really need this? Seriously? It's kind of painful to watch....
Who is Denny, Kateb? I don't see any comments by a Denny.
Oh you know - Dennis, Lime Drops, Man with the Muckrake - Liberal_Dem.
One who mistakes kindness for weakness. A Christian hating, misogynistic narcissist.
Barb,
By biblical definition Newt is an adulterer. He committed adultery on his two ex-wives while still married to them and continues to commit adultery with his third wife because the only biblical excuse for divorce is adultery. The offended party can get remarried, but the offender is still an adulterer.
He can advise the party because he has good ideas, but running for president is something I could not condone from a Christian standpoint.
The republicans didn't kick him out; he left because they lost seats while he was Speaker.
Sarah Palin does not have to settle for second on the ticket. She can sit in Alaska for the next few years and bone up on federal policy and be able to hold her own as a presidential candidate.
The question is, is the country ready for a woman president? Just as the blacks got the vote before the women, the blacks have gotten the presidency before the women.
If she doesn't get the presidency I believe she has inspired many young women to break that glass ceiling and show they can run the country as well as the men, but then I'm not sure that's biblically correct either.
Maybe I'll evolve in the next couple of years.
One thing is for certain: Hillary Clinton is washed up as a politician if she takes SecState. She will have no senate seat, cannot raise money as SecState and will be 69 years old in 2016.
We dodged one bullet but got hit in the chest with the other.
I don't see him as a pres. candidate either, Jeanette. I'm just willing to take a good statement from anyone --and use it if they are saying it better than I can--or having a unique but useful point of view --applying brilliance to problems.
God has used flawed individuals for our good throughout history.
HOpefully, Obama will be one of those and see the light!
Post a Comment