Thursday, January 26, 2012

It Would Have Made Perfect Sense If It Had Made Any Sense, But That's Moot Now Anyhow.

Hey kids!  Remember when Newt went all Hulk at the GOP debate because it was so despicable to ask him to respond to one of his ex-wives' allegations about him asking for an open marriage?  Regardless of how despicable the question was, he had a prepared answer.

"Let me be quite clear. Let me be quite clear. The story is false. Every personal friend I have who knew us in that period said the story was false. We offered several of them to ABC to prove it was false. They weren't interested because they would like to attack any Republican."
I have to admit this didn't make any sense to me at all. Was he claiming that he had a bunch of personal friends in attendance at all times?  Did he and his wife have no privacy?  In which case, they were already having something of an open marriage to begin with?  It's kinda like if he claimed he was all alone in the tundra and he killed a bear with his bare hands and ate it raw to survive and then he scaled a glacier and walked 800 miles all alone back to civilization "and I have the video footage and interviews with my three cameramen and my bear wrangler to prove it!"

Well it turns out I can stop trying to wrap my mind around how Newt had a completely traditional marriage where the couple has moments to themselves and conversations that aren't meant for anyone else, and a bunch of personal friends who could attest that no such conversation ever took place -- because they were there at all times when Newt was reassuring his wife that...oh, never mind.  I can stop wondering because apparently, Newt's personal friends were actually his daughters from his first marriage.

So, Newt's daughters from his first marriage were an audience to every private moment Newt had with his wife in his second marriage?  Yeah.  That's better


Eric said...

Wasn't it obvious that either he was lying or his "close personal friends" would have been lying if they'd actually existed?

I may have said it before elsewhere, but I'll say it again, here: the problem isn't that Newt Gingrich asked his wife for an open marriage--that's what you're supposed to do if you want to be in an open relationship--the problem is that he asked after he'd already begun having an affair, which is exactly what you're not supposed to do in one of these things. What he was supposed to do was go to his wife first and ask her, "How do you feel about an open marriage?" and if she kiboshed the idea, drop it, and if she was open to it, discuss the rules they would follow re: paramours. Now, those things hardly ever work out, but that isn't the point: the point is that people who are in ostensibly-successful open marriages all agree that this is how you do things in a relationship built on trust and mutual respect, versus how you do things when you're a seedy, nutsless philanderer who (has been)/(is about to be) caught stepping out,

Not that Newt's second wife should have expected anything else, having been there and done that from the other side when Newt was cheating on his first wife with her.

vince said...

Gingrich is just a despicable human being. Always has been, his claims of being a pious Christian notwithstanding.