That settles it: Newt's made up his mind to run for president, or he wouldn't be spreading this little story of his soul's redemption around the national media, would he? (Kind of traditional for Republican candidates to take a quick run through the All-Purpose Drive-Thru Jesus-Lovin' Sin Washer!)

Setting the stage for his entry into the presidential race, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., gave a radio interview to be broadcast today with Focus on the Family's James Dobson, in which Gingrich for the first time publicly acknowledged cheating on his first and second wives.

"There were times when I was praying and when I felt I was doing things that were wrong. But I was still doing them," Gingrich said during the interview. "I look back on those as periods of weakness and periods that I'm not only not proud of, but I would deeply urge my children and grandchildren not to follow in my footsteps."

What, you mean asking for a divorce while your wife's recovering from cancer surgery, Newt? You mean there was something wrong with that?

Gingrich argued that the Clinton case was different from his personal transgressions.

"The president of the United States got in trouble for committing a felony in front of a sitting federal judge," he said, arguing that Clinton had "deliberately committed perjury."

Because he had been through a divorce, Gingrich said, he knew the importance of telling the truth during a deposition.

"The standard is: In a court of law should somebody who's popular get away with perjury?" Gingrich said. "And I drew a line in my mind that said, 'Even though I run the risk of being deeply embarrassed, and even though at a purely personal level I am not rendering judgment on another human being, as a leader of the government trying to uphold the rule of law, I have no choice except to move forward and say that you cannot accept felonies and you cannot accept perjury in your highest officials."

Even though Bill Clinton did not commit perjury, and Gingrich knows it.

It's worth noting that Gingrich did not limit his comments about Clinton and the Democrats to legalistic allegations of perjury.

Constantly espousing family values even while he carried on an affair, Gingrich linked his party to wholesome family values and Democrats to, well, something else.

During the 1992 Democratic National Convention, Gingrich said, "Woody Allen having nonincest with a nondaughter to whom he was a nonfather because they were a nonfamily fits the Democratic platform perfectly."

In 1994, Gingrich linked Democrats to Susan Smith, a woman who had murdered her two children in 1991.

Even though it turned out she'd been molested by her stepfather, a South Carolina state GOP executive, of course.

"I think that the mother killing the two children in South Carolina vividly reminds every American how sick the society is getting and how much we need to change things," he said. "The only way you get change is to vote Republican."

I really hope Gingrich does run. Because there's a question I've wanted to ask him for years (Hill staffers are such gossips!): "Can you confirm or deny the allegations that, during the same period you were attacking Bill Clinton for adultery, you were serviced by your employee/mistress (soon to be Wife No. 3) in the front seat of your car while waiting in the parking lot of your kids's school?"

Because I've heard that story for years and inquiring minds want to know. I mean, that's some real family values, right there. Maybe we should call Ken Starr to look into it.

Rush Limbaugh's ongoing assault on family values continues.

This ugly excuse for a human being actually went on the radio and went off on hungry children in the US. Whether he likes it or not, hunger becomes a real problem when children don't have even a school lunch because many children rely upon the federal school lunch program to get their one decent meal a day.

Here's what Limbaugh said:

God, this is just -- we can't escape these people. We just can't escape them. They live in the utter deniability of basic human nature. They actually have it in their heads somehow that parents are so rotten that they will let their kids go hungry and starve, unless the schools take care of it

Sometimes it's not a question of "let". Sometimes it just "IS".

There's more:

I think, you know what we're going to do here, we're going to start a feature on this program: "Where to find food." For young demographics, where to find food. Now that school is out, where to find food. We can have a daily feature on this. And this will take us all the way through the summer. Where to find food. And, of course, the first will be: "Try your house." It's a thing called the refrigerator. You probably already know about it. Try looking there. There are also things in what's called the kitchen of your house called cupboards. And in those cupboards, most likely you're going to find Ding-Dongs, Twinkies, Lays ridgy potato chips, all kinds of dips and maybe a can of corn that you don't want, but it will be there. If that doesn't work, try a Happy Meal at McDonald's. You know where McDonald's is. There's the Dollar Menu at McDonald's and if they don't have Chicken McNuggets, dial 911 and ask for Obama.

There's another place if none of these options work to find food; there's always the neighborhood dumpster. Now, you might find competition with homeless people there, but there are videos that have been produced to show you how to healthfully dine and how to dumpster dive and survive until school kicks back up in August. Can you imagine the benefit we would provide people?

The idea of this fat bastard SOB ridiculing hungry children by telling them if they just look in the kitchen cupboards they'll find Ding-Dongs, Twinkies, Lays ridgy potato chips and all kinds of dip just makes me sick. It makes me want to deface his pudgy ugly picture.

Let's look at what it's like to be a child whose only reliable meal is a hot lunch. This was written by a friend of mine. I keep it bookmarked and read it weekly to remind myself to have gratitude that my children aren't hungry, aren't cold, have a home and their basic needs met.

Continue reading »

What is it with these "family values" guys that compels them to mock and belittle kids? First Glenn Beck does it, then apologizes. Sort of. Now Rush Limbaugh, fresh from his honeymoon with wife #4 decides it's ok?

Enough with the mean Malia impressions already. My kids are both older than she is and they ask me the same question. Contrary to Rush's bombastic nasty worldview, they actually care whether the Gulf drowns in a pool of oil.

This is tag team desensitization, in my opinion. Rush knows full well how audiences on both sides reacted to Beck's nasty mockery of Malia Obama after the President's press conference. By engaging in the same behavior, he slowly brings his already-receptive audience around to the idea that it's perfectly all right to mock and belittle a 12-year old girl.

I sure am glad the right wing cares about family values. Aren't you?

(h/t Media Matters)

There was big celebration this past weekend in Palm Beach, Florida. Mr. Oxycontin and Dominican Republic Viagra Rush Limbaugh, 59, got married for the fourth time to the former Kathryn Rogers, 33. Aside from the poor track record on the matrimonial front (there's your conservative family values for you), the 26-year age difference (Hmmm...why does this song keep coming to mind?) and his proclivity for sex vacations to Third World nations, what's really disgusting was his choice of wedding entertainment: Rushbo hired Elton John to serenade his new bride.

That's right, one of the most vocal opponents to same-sex marriage was successful in buying off one of the most highly visible openly gay MARRIED entertainers in the world. Apparently $1 million dollars is the price tag to sell your pride, soul and dignity to entertain those who think you're a lesser being.

This is who you sold out to, Elton.

And that's not the first time that Elton has shown a love for money to trump principles.

Two politicians who have consistently voted against gay rights, Reps. John Shimkus (R-IL) and Jean Schmidt (R-OH), will be holding fundraisers at the Elton John/Billy Joel Face2Face concert in Washington DC's Nationals Park July 11, reports PartyBlog.

And Prop 8 supporters were only too happy to quote John in his less than supportive words for gay marriage:

Despite campaigning for global gay rights, Elton John is very not supportive of civil marriage equality. Or maybe he just doesn't understand that civil unions do not allow couples in the U.S. over 1,300 rights granted to heterosexual married couples. In November 2008, Sir Elton told USA Today:

We're not married. Let's get that right. We have a civil partnership. What is wrong with Proposition 8 is that they went for marriage. Marriage is going to put a lot of people off, the word marriage...I don't want to be married. I'm very happy with a civil partnership. If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership. The word "marriage," I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships.

Seriously, Elton. You're. Not. Helping.

Of course, after getting a glimpse of Rush's taste in interior design, I'm thinking ultimately that Rush and Elton have more in common than one would think at first and bride Kate may be the one humiliated in the end. I mean, how many straight men do you know with a taste for so much gilt?

Oh, like I wasn't gonna photoshop THAT. Original marketing image from Voyeur Nightclub, West Hollywood, found here. Attempts to reach the actual Voyeur website resulted in "server busy" errors.

Changing the image of the Republican Par-tay, Chairman Michael Steele spent almost two grand at a nightclub designed around a less-than-family-values theme, ahem.

Via Daily Caller:

FEC filings suggest, Steele travels in style. A February RNC trip to California, for example, included a $9,099 stop at the Beverly Hills Hotel, $6,596 dropped at the nearby Four Seasons, and $1,620.71 spent [update: the amount is actually $1,946.25] at Voyeur West Hollywood, a bondage-themed nightclub featuring topless women dancers imitating lesbian sex....

Steele himself declined numerous interview requests, though his defenders point out that luxurious accommodations are sometimes necessary to attract big-time donors, especially since Republicans remain in the minority in Washington.

Still, the nature and size of Steele’s expenses are likely to reignite persistent complaints from high-end donors and key party figures that the RNC is bleeding cash in the months before a pivotal midterm election.

Several sources indicate that one must reserve a table well in advance at Voyeur, which anyone with a web browser could research as being "bad for publicity with the Christian wing, if you know what I mean":

West Hollywood’s newest corset, leather, and other trap door lingerie-inspired den, Voyeur, has an inescapable link to Eyes Wide Shut – women in various states of undress line the club, some hanging from the ceiling above you in nets (equipped with whips, so watch yourself), and a photo booth to document the whole thing are just the tip of the iceberg. Around the room, you can catch men and women undulating (er, dancing) in cages, the décor distinctly feels as if you’re unveiling something naughty, and you’re met with a constant stream of various erotic multimedia like film clips and risqué photography. Sorry to have gotten you all worked up at the office.

Did they go on Gay Night? Honestly, I can't decide which is worse: that some GOP fundraiser committee thought the way to reach big donors was to spend two grand at an S&M-sex themed bar, or that GOP big donors are actually courted this way, in complete disregard for the "family values" planks in the party's platform.

And did they think the word "Voyeur" in the FEC filings would go overlooked by us bloggers? Just how stupid are they? Nevermind.

UPDATE: RNC releases a statement; Steele has "no knowledge" of expenditure.

DOWNLOADS: 1248

PLAYS: 191

Embed

Isn't it interesting that Cokie Roberts spends her Monday morning segment on NPR talking about two admittedly disgraced Democrats who will not be holding their positions come Election Day.

Charlie Rangel and David Patterson are an admitted embarrassment to the Democrats. Rangel, like much of Congress, is long overdue for retirement, and Patterson's made such a mess of his career the sooner gone the better.

But why other than pure partisan hackery would Cokie Roberts spend her Monday morning spot talking about them and not mention that Ensign, Vitter, and Sanford still have jobs? Ensign paid off his mistress's family, Vitter was involved with a prostitute, and Sanford was MIA from his job for days on end. These guys still have the backing of their party? Family values much?

Cokie can always be counted on to live up to the old joke by Driftglass:

Dick Cheney is caught setting kittens on fire and throwing them at homeless veterans. What are the first three words out of Cokie Robert's mouth?

"But the Democrats..."

Next she'll be explaining how much Republican scandals help Mitt Romney. Sigh.

Mock, Paper, Scissors: Family Values in Texas

Evil Slut Clique: Huge (un)ethical issues marketing to, and from, Mommybloggers.

Group News Blog: Lower Manhattanite is back, with a very long but very worthwhile post on Haiti.

The Black Snob: Something in R&B Music does not compute.

Rumproast: Republicans are weirdos.

Guest round up by Blue Gal; Mike returns tomorrow. Send tips to finnsagain AT aol DOT com

DOWNLOADS: (958)

PLAYS: (1336)

Embed

Above video is of the Diaper Dandy giving a presser after he got busted cheating on his wife with the DC Madam in 2007.)

Apparently David 'the Diaper' Vitter thinks we all have bad memories. Just to remind you, he's the Senator of Louisiana and a Mr. Family Values asshat who was caught in the DC Madam's phone book. It was also reported that he likes to wear diapers with his hooker buddies. Not that I'm against diapers mind you, but it doesn't get any creepier than how he uses them. Anyway, he now has come out and called Janet Napolitano "out of touch with reality."

Mr. Vitter's sharpest criticism was directed at Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano and her comment after the failed Dec. 25 bombing of a U.S.-bound flight that "the system worked."

"Clearly, those initial comments were crazy," he said during an interview with The Washington Times' "America's Morning News" radio show. "Clearly, she was out of touch with reality."

Mr. Vitter, a conservative facing re-election this year, didn't call for Ms. Napolitano's resignation but said her comments have "eroded confidence" and the decision about whether she remains on the job belongs only to President Obama.

Ms. Napolitano has attempted to clarified her comments by saying she meant that officials were alerted immediately after the bombing attempt and security measure swiftly were put in place.

Still, Mr. Vitter wants Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. to give a clearer explanation about who assigned a U.S. lawyer to alleged bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab and who authorized reading him Miranda rights.

What Janet said was clearly a mistake after the failed attack, but not a firing offense and for Vitter to say anything about another person's behavior is the old pot-kettle-black deal. I wonder why anyone in the media would ask him for a quote anyway. Ahhh, It was The Washington Times. My bad.

And you know, maybe in conservative-land we're all out of touch with reality because diapers and hookers is the norm for Congressman in the GOP.

Beggars Can Be Choosers: Vitter? Family Values? Yep.

Post Tenebras Lux: A cheap holiday in other people's misery.

Happy Jihad's House of Pancakes: Bad poetry. Reeally bad poetry.

David Rees: Democratic! Congress! Jokes!

Guest post by Blue Gal. Catch the weekly podcast with Driftglass, which this week mentions the round up but somehow forgot to mention MIKE!!! Here's hoping Mike is enjoying his cruise.

So someone from Minneapolis donates one dollar to the GOP Senate Campaign Committee and puts down an expletive taunt as his name. We at Crooks and Liars do not endorse this kind of silly hooliganism. This guy had to donate a dollar to the Republicans to say the Eff Word? Really.

What's totally newsworthy about this contribution is that the Republican Senatorial Campaign Committee's website posted the "thank you" above (minus the asterisks we added because guess what? We have editorial standards regarding that sort of thing.) and left it up at their website last night for at least 20 minutes (C&L staffers refreshed the site from 12:32 to 12:55 am Eastern Time and it was there the entire period) perhaps until the next contribution bumped it. [Jamie at Intoxination has the screenshot.] Who knew you'd need to install a net-nanny to protect your children's eyes from a GOP fundraising site? Well, everybody knows now!

I hate to let you in on any of our internet secrets, Mister Steele, but there are filters for that and other dirty words out there. Maybe if someone in your party knew how to use the Google other than to pick a Vice-Presidential candidate, you'd save yourself some family-values embarrassment.