ShareThisReally, social conservatives? Really?
I thought that, to us, private lives matter and character counts. Oh, and the media are supposed to go after a candidate's history when it might tell us something about the person. Of course, let's not forget what a terrible thing it is to employ a "nuts and sluts" strategy to automatically undermine women accusing a candidate of sordid behavior.
All true, by the way. Unless it's one of "our" guys?
That was my reaction to hearing the audience "whoop-whoop" in solidarity with Newt Gingrich's combative, self-righteous indignation in response to CNN's John King in last week's debate in South Carolina.
The question, of course, was about ex-wife Marianne's claim that when they were married, Gingrich asked her for an "open marriage" to accommodate an affair with Callista Bisek, whom Gingrich later left Marianne for. And married. Gingrich acknowledges that that affair with a congressional staffer (not his own) was taking place at the same time that he, as speaker of the House, oversaw the impeachment of President Bill Clinton stemming from his own extramarital affair.
Yeah, yeah, supposedly the latter was about perjury, but really, it was about the sex.
And Gingrich has the gall to be shocked by the question? "I think the destructive, vicious, negative nature of much of the news media makes it harder to govern this country, harder to attract decent people to run for public office, and I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate with a topic like that," he said. On it went.
It reminds me of the old comedy skit where a man is caught in bed with another woman by his wife. He so befuddles things by indignantly asking "What woman?" long enough that, in the end, she's apologizing for doubting him.
Actually, I'm not so shocked that Gingrich would go after King. His reputation for having an outsized ego is the stuff of legend. I am shocked, though, that conservatives would reward him for his self-righteous attack by jumping to their feet and cheering him.
Could there be anything more likely to undermine a social-conservative agenda?
Yes, the hypocrisy of liberals and the media is present and accounted for. Women who accused President Clinton of lechery and worse were treated to the "nuts and sluts" strategy. Later, then-presidential candidate Barack Obama's ties to race-baiter Jeremiah Wright and Vietnam-era radical Bill Ayers went largely unexamined. In contrast, media interviews with Marianne Gingrich hit two days before the South Carolina primary, which marked the candidate's first win in the GOP nomination sweepstakes. The media are hopelessly hypocritical.
So what?
Since when does that give conservatives the right to be the same? Those supporting Gingrich, seemingly standing with him as he defies those calling him on his behavior, should be ashamed of themselves. And I thought that even before I heard some conservative commentators suggest that Marianne, who has said that Gingrich has never apologized to her over his betrayal, might be kind of, well, you know -- bitter.
Gingrich was in that spot to be so questioned by King because Gingrich put himself there. I wish he could have said, "I don't like the question, but I have it coming. I betrayed my wife Marianne, and I am so sorry. I acted in a way that was breathtakingly risky, and utterly wrong. I have personally gone to her and sought her forgiveness. I so hope she can one day offer it to me. In any event, you have every right to ask me about these matters, and, in fact, I'm glad you did. Because now I have an opportunity to talk to Americans about how I have changed."
If he had said that, if he had been able to say that, I would have applauded him!
But that's not Newt Gingrich. In fact, he even stubbornly insisted in a later interview, this one with Univision, that anyone who thought his and Clinton's affairs were comparable has "a mental synapse missing." That's because, Gingrich says, he himself didn't commit perjury or otherwise break the law. And why not keep on the attack? For starters, social conservatives at the South Carolina debate leaped to their feet and cheered him for essentially saying he shouldn't have to face his sordid behavior.
I don't know what will happen to Gingrich and his quest for the presidency. I do know that if anyone is looking for more reason to be cynical about politics, he or she found it last week in South Carolina.
(Betsy Hart is the author of "It Takes a Parent: How the Culture of Pushover Parenting is Hurting our Kids -- And What to do About It" (Putnam Books). Reach her through hartmailbox-mycolumn(at)yahoo.com. For more stories, visit scrippsnews.com.)
FROM THE HART
