SOUNDING BOARD: Presidential morality counts, but how much?
Should perceived moral and ethical lapses in a candidate make a difference to voters? Newt Gingrich almost certainly has the experience to run our national government, but he also has been married three times -- and had an extramarital affair with his current wife, Callista, while still married to his previous wife, Marianne. He was also fined by the House for ethics violations. Should any of that matter? We asked members of The Californian's Sounding Board for their take on the issue.
***
The House voted overwhelmingly, in bipartisan fashion, 395-28, to reprimand House Speaker Newt Gingrich and order him to pay an unprecedented $300,000 penalty, the first time in the House's 208-year history it has disciplined a speaker for ethical wrongdoing. The comments by his fellow Republicans made it clear that by Newt admitting guilt, agreeing to the fine, and keeping his mouth shut, he got off easy.
Anyone who read the 84 ethics charges shook their head in disbelief how a man could walk the fine line of wrongdoing for so long. Rep. Mark Sanford (who a decade later would face his own moral charges while "walking the Appalachian Trail" as governor of South Carolina) was quoted as saying, "The gray got grayer when you read the report. When I think of my three boys and what kind of example I want to set for them for leadership in this country, gray is not the example."
Newt has never stopped walking that fine line. The reason the old guard of the GOP is having a fit over his presidential run is the fact that dozens of congressmen know that Newt is a lobbyist by every meaning of the law. He has called fellow congressmen on voting, he provided advice and counseling to the chief lobbyist for Freddie Mac, and is clearly lying when he says he was consulted as a historian. Remember, we had a president who stated, "I am not a crook." Yes, he was. How can anyone take Newt Gingrich seriously?
Dan McGuire of Bakersfield is a writer and musician.
***
Obviously, in order to survive the "slings and arrows" of political life, one must have extreme self-confidence. This would be a positive attribute if that self-confidence was in the sincere belief that your political aims are in the interest of the public as a whole rather than self-aggrandizement. It would be an ethical and moral goal and would be reflected in one's personal life choices. I could respect this politician even if I did not share his or her political views.
A candidate who proclaims marriage as a contract between one man and one woman but does not honor that contract in his own life does not inspire my confidence in his convictions. However, this is only one of the many reasons I would not vote for Newt Gingrich.
Louise Bond of Bakersfield is a retired teacher.
***
Newt Gingrich was unfaithful to his first two wives, having an affair with his current wife while married to the second. Since that time, he has embraced Roman Catholicism, confessing his sins and repenting.
It is said we are a forgiving nation. While his serial sexual affairs were brought to light after his death, John F. Kennedy is still considered by many Democrats as a political icon. Camelot, if you will. Bill Clinton's oral sexcapades in the Oval Office were passed off as being between consenting adults, a matter between his family and him. His infidelity was defended by partisans as "So what?"; by Jesse Jackson's bible quoting, "He among you who is without sin cast the first stone;" and others saying he was elected president, not pope! Today, he enjoys a positive public image.
Jimmy Carter's high moral character and family devotion was unquestioned. President Obama has been faithful to his wife and the first family is portrayed in a wholesome light. Jimmy Carter's presidency is widely considered a dismal failure with his policies leading to double-digit inflation and interest rates, and high unemployment with the term "misery index" being coined.
Obama's policies to date have made the economic conditions he inherited even worse with 23 percent higher unemployment (from 6.9 percent to 8.5 percent) with 2 million net jobs lost and a $5 trillion increase in our national debt. Clinton's mantra was, "It's the economy, stupid!" and his infidelity did not harm the economy. Moral character and integrity are desired presidential attributes. The question is can we accept Gingrich's contrition and evaluate him accordingly or not?
Angelo Haddad is an Anglican lay minister at St. Paul's Parish.
***
"People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones." -- George Herbert, "Outlandish Proverbs," 1640.
It is an old, if not well-used adage, and it always comes to mind whenever I hear any politician speak of morals and values, particularly the conservatives. I am equally reminded of the $40 million fiasco to impeach former President Bill Clinton. Clinton's behavior was inexcusable and perjury is a serious offense. However, a great deal of effort was expended to impeach him by those who would later be found engaging in similar, unsavory behaviors.
We find ourselves once again visiting the question -- how important are Newt Gingrich's multiple marriages and ethics violations as House speaker? Well, pretty important, according to the party that speaks of values and morals incessantly. And now to employ William Shakespeare ("Hamlet"): "The lady doth protest too much, methinks." We should always beware of those railing about morals and values. Generally, they have more issues than those toward whom they are wagging their fingers.
Alas, what's good for the proverbial liberal goose is now good for the proverbial conservative gander and vice versa. While we would like our presidents to portray a reasonably high standard of morality, ethics and values -- we have to figure out what that means? Clearly, Newt doesn't seem to think it means him. In the end, our leaders should be elected based on intellect and their capability to lead effectively. We have such a leader.
W. Cheryl Robinson of Bakersfield has a law degree and works for a school district.
***
In our country, where so much is falling apart, we are asked about Newt Gingrich's failings. I say who cares. The news media want to harp on this and to keep us off the real problem. I refer to one of The Californian's favorite syndicated columnists, Dana Milbank, and his Feb. 2 article "Gingrich's biggest fans." He says, "we are your most ardent fans," not because they really care about Newt or America; but they can play their favorite game to get more audience and revenue for themselves. They had no interest in exposing the womanizing of John F. Kennedy when he ran for office and they covered it up while he was in the White House -- their favorite son, you know. It was Camelot. I want to focus on the real problems and not the red herring of Newt's problems. I say follow the money. President Obama has said he is going to raise a "billion dollars" to run for his second term. I want to know where this obscene amount of money is coming from. Is it coming from the billions of money that he has whitewashed and funneled from the taxpayers through the failed Solyndra and other failed green-energy businesses? Is it from all the union dues strong-armed by public-sector unions that are also paid by taxpayers?
Is the White House about to get its hands on the biggest pot of money in the world? I want to vote for the person who is going to clean up this mess and corruption we see in Washington, D.C., and get these crooks off hardworking Americans' backs. Stop wasting our time and insulting our intelligence with Newt's private life when America is almost ready to implode.
S.J. Milledge of Bakersfield is a retired homemaker.
