If only. Gingrich is wealthy enough that he won't die before his doctors have done every single thing they can to buy his worm-eaten body a few more minutes.

He'll probably end up attached to whatever sinister device that is prolonging Dick Cheney's existence in this realm. And when that becomes a reality, I like to think that eventually Dick's gruesome visage will eventually consume Newt's bloated, pasty flesh in it's hunger for fresh meat. And then in Chris Christie's office, a phone rings...

I think I have that porn.

Newt Gingrich's face looks like a cheap Halloween mask that someone smacked against a wall for at least an hour.

Newt Gingrich's skull must have had creative differences with the rest of his face and left to start its own project.

Newt Gingrich looks like a jellyfish in an unconvincing wig.

Newt Gingrich's face is what happens when the Pilsbury Dough Boy rolls around in a pile of goat hair, melts partially, and becomes a deadite.

Newt Gingrich is the most consistently scummy man in American politics.

two related videos:
Demonius on his Tosh.0 Appearance
DwayneHollowayTV - How To Create A Killer In 3 Simple Steps

Newt Gingrich is basically the preppy version of these guys.

Time to throw some hay-makers at the gay punching bag.

Candidate 1 would like to clarify that he actually said "fuck blah people," and if you heard something else, then YOU'RE the racist.

When hell is full, the Republican candidates walk the earth.

It's just to whip up their base. If their idea of States Rights goes through, all the discrimination against non-heterosexual white males they could dream of will happen overnight in most places.

If someone thinks that without the Civil Rights Act of 1964, racism would have ended by itself due to "market forces" or some other fairy tale, they're either trying to hide a desire to see Jim Crow return for as many minority groups as possible, or they're just mentally deficient. Or both.

Small government unless it involves doing something with your dick, at which point the government's involvement simply can never be enough.

The first time I read it as "fuck children over", and then the second time... oh my.

Being technically correct doesn't make his statement any less reprehensible.

AFAIK it's actually closer to how Newt described it. Mass. said: "if you want to provide adoption services, you have to allow gays to adopt," and the archbishop closed them in a huff.

Is it ok to have private, politically motivated adoption centers? I'd say no, but it's at least tolerable if they don't break laws. Here, the state stepped in to prevent that from happening.

In my view, you don't get a pass for shit like that because you believe it. You're accountable for them. That's not the big bad secularists trying to remove religion from the public sphere, it's caring people deciding in the absence of a fixed ideology that gays shouldn't be the new mixed-race couples, and at least in Massachusetts, they're winning.

They chose to close. If you ask me, they should close the diocese while they're at it.

If my religion demands I sacrifice hobos three times a year by the light of the moon then yes the government is forcing me to disobey the dictates of my religion with their archaic 'anti murder' laws.

And fuck Newt for making a bunch of homophobic, child-sacrificing crybabies look like the victim here. Thank god he's so unelectable.

There are a couple of subtleties I failed to mention. The diocese had placed kids with gay couples in the past, but had been slapped down by the Vatican for doing so. The bishop is probably not a clear bad guy here.

Also, it happened in Massachusetts, while Romney was governor, so that's probably why Newt's making a big deal about it.

They're not being forced. They could stay open if all those "charitable" Christian folk decided to donate to and fund the adoption services. What happened to these good Christian Republicans not wanting government services and promoting private charity?

Yeah. I haven't looked into any of this because I couldn't care less about MA adoption laws, but the girl kept talking about funding, and Newt's at least not stupid but didn't harp on legalities here, so I'm very lightly assuming that you can operate an adoption center without government funding, but the church decided to be a baby about not being funded by the government any more.

It was a few years ago. The agency's employees had no problem placing children with gay parents. Doing otherwise would have meant breaking Mass's anti-discrimination law. The Vatican caught wind, and not long after, four bishops in charge of the agency asked Romney to be exempted from the law. He said no. They also planned to mount a legal defense using money that would otherwise have gone to getting kids adopted. They employees threatened to leave en masse if that happened, and eventually the bishops pulled the plug.

By the way, they were spending roughly mil/yr in mostly government money to place 30 kids (out of hundreds more). Now, *I* don't see a problem with that, but it sure seems like Newt's abandoning his core "save money by fucking over the weak" Republican values here.

dunno why I said archbishop before. "my" diocese has one but I have no idea if Boston's does.

Sometimes I think America just really likes being lied to. We rarely punish and often reward the best liars in politics.