Breathtaking Hypocrisy

Both Gingrich and Giuliani, of all people, are hitting the circuit to attack same-sex marriage.

Rudy, who has been married three times:

“Marriage, I believe, both traditionally and legally, has always been between a man and a woman and should remain between a man and woman.”

Newt, who has also been married three times:

“The Democratic Party has been the active instrument of breaking down traditional marriage.”

Combined, these two hypocrites have worked their way through as many wives as Henry VIII, and they’re hectoring other people about traditional marriage? That’s rich. I wonder when the Republicans will hire some firearms assailants to speak out in support of assault weapons.

This entry was posted in Rudy Giuliani and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • thruwithbuzz

    I’m still waiting for someone to tell me how 2 gay men getting married damages a marriage between a man & a woman. Bob, you’re married right? How do you and your wife carry on knowing that Gary & Steve down the block want to get married?

  • http://nanotyrnns.blogspot.com/ Nanotyrannus

    I do believe I’ve heard more than once the past month the phrase “we believe marriage is between one man and one woman for life.“But, you know, beggars can’t be choosers. These two bozos happen to be the most articulate chaps these fools have on hand, so that’s who they’re running with.

  • http://www.windonwater.net QueenTiye

    I’m not comfortable ragging on divorcees (of which I am one), unless we’re about to say that same sex couples are never going to get divorced…That said, as a New Yorker, Rudy isn’t someone who should be a defense of marriage spokesperson…QT

  • jjasonham

    I’m pretty comfortable ragging on divorcees when they argue “for” the sanctity of marriage.

  • Guest

    Tradition? According to what tradition?I’m not the first to observe or mention this, but many of the Old Testament patriarchs had gozillions of wives, all at the same time.

  • D. C.

    thruwithbuzz, I’ve been waiting for years for somebody to explain how legalizing gay marriage will destroy my heterosexual marriage. People keep telling me how it will “damage” marriage. But no one will ever explain to me exactly how it will damage it.QT, it don’t think it’s fair to rag on Gingrich and Ghouliani for being divorced. I do, however, believe it’s fair game to rag on them for being serial adulterers and making a complete mockery of the “family values” they claim to support.There are more important things about values than which gender you want to have sex with. It’s about actually having respect for the person you’ve made a commitment to.Gingrich and Ghouliani have never had any respect for any of their wives.My sister’s cheating scumbag of an ex has done more to make a mockery of family values than a thousand homosexual couples.

  • http://www.xkcd.com/ • Silly Ratfaced Git •

    Very well said D.C.I am also still waiting for the explanation of how same sex marriage will ‘damage’ ‘traditional’ marriage. All I get is arm waving and a bunch of bollocks about how ‘gay’ marriage demeans the sanctity and other such meaningless clap trap. The only thing allowing same sex marriage does is make it harder for these self righteous twatwaffles to discriminate against Teh Gay™.

  • http://nanotyrnns.blogspot.com/ Nanotyrannus

    (welcome) Guest said:

    “I’m not the first to observe or mention this, but many of the Old Testament patriarchs had gozillions of wives, all at the same time.”

    Indeed. I heard one biblical scholar say it was between one man and as many wives as he could afford.SRFG- we are starting to see, as in that stupid NOM video, the Anti-Gay Imbeciles — and they are anti-gay, not “pro marriage” — redefine their argument to suggest that we are not just after the right to marry, but the right to tell them they can’t be the paragons of religious virtue they pretend to be. You know, like by being able to deny medical services that go against their religious beliefs, and being allowed to make accommodations only to those that think like them.They are retooling their agenda to reflect what they really want and that it is to further infect civil law with religious doctrine. And not just on the issue of gay marriage, but on abortion, hiring, firing and whatever else they can pull out of their absurdly and hypocritically pious assholes.Isn’t that what the Taliban does?

  • GItheJOE

    As a divorcee, I believe that marriage is a farce. How in the fuck do two teenagers know what the fuck love is? It is purely lust that the church has manipulated into the production of future christofacists. My parents(preacher father) held an intervention at my apartment with my former wife and I to explain how, “We were living in Sin”. If that was sin, call me a fucking Sinner. I am happy now with my current girlfriend and we avoid the “M” word like the plague. Marriage or the union of two people for life is a mature adult decision that can only be made when two people love/friend/lust/respect/enjoy/like each other enough to make that decision. The government/family/church need to stay the fuck out of the bedroom all together and in the words of my favorite prophet,”get back into the womb were they belong”.All of this is my drunken rambles and if I have offended anyone, I apologize.More…LGBT can marry a fucking goat for all I give a shit because I don’t care if mature adults marry each other. It is the blind teenagers that should have limitations placed on their marriage. Sorry.

  • (welcome) Guest

    >Marriage or the union of two people for life is a mature adult decision that can only be made when two people love/friend/lust/respect/enjoy/like each other enough to make that decision.

  • GItheJOE

    >Marriage or the union of two people for life is a mature adult decision that can only be made when two people love/friend/lust/respect/enjoy/like each other enough to make that decision.GItheJOE:Not so, Joe — There’s an ancient tradition of parents choosing wives or husbands for their children, while many of those children haven’t even reached puberty.This still happens all over the world every day (legally), and has for centuries.Posted by: (welcome) Guest at April 21, 2009 1:00AMWhich only reinforces this point:>>It is the blind teenagers that should have limitations placed on their marriage. Sorry.I don’t give a flying spaghetti monster if the parents choose or the children choose either way it is not good for modern society and keeps us locked into the paradigm of “tradition”.Can we please move forward?

  • (welcome) Guest

    GItheJOE:You made MY point, thanks. There’s no single model that defines ‘traditional marriage.’ There are as many traditions regarding marriage as there are marriages.PS: You don’t have to be married by a clergy member, or even appear in front of a justice of the peace in my Bible-Belt home state in order to be considered legally ‘married.’ Fill out the papers, sign them, and you’re done. They don’t ask what your sexual orientation is, whether you’re fertile, whether you plan to have sex with each other, or even if you plan to live together.I have many gay friends here who’ve married members of the opposite sex (also gay) in order to get insurance. Marriage is sacred? Yeah. Right.

  • http://cousinavi.wordpress.com cousinavi

    The whole argument from the anti-gay marriage side is constructed out of bullshit, lies, and venom soaked papier mache, wrapped around a toothpick framework of historical ignorance, religious intolerance, fear and (I suspect) some deeply repressed desire to kneel and suck a giant, throbbing cock.In any case, some of the more common canards they like to trot out:That marriage is an ancient human institution. Simply not true.That marriage has always been between one man and one woman. Simply not true, and still not true in places like Africa, the middle east, and certain areas of Utah.That marriage is some heavenly union between a man and a woman. Not true – it was initially designed as a transfer of property (the father of the bride gives his daughter, who adopts a new fucking NAME as the sign of transfer in bondage from one family to another…see dowry).It’s one thing to make the argument that there is no harm in allowing same sex marriage; that they will not be forced to divorce and remarry someone of the same gender, or even to approve of it…they just have to keep their meddling fucking mitts off other folks.It’s another thing to demonstrate that all their ridiculous arguments in support of “traditional marriage” are bunch of convenient heaps of bullshit without ANY historical or factual evidence to support them beyond what they’ve convinced themselves in order to justify bigotry.From Obama shaking hands with Chavez, to the torture memos, to the budget, to gay marriage…every single time these right wing nuts open their mouths and express an opinion, I want to abandon the high road and say “Fuck it!”…grab my stick with the nails in the business end and open up Cousin Avi’s School of Political and Social Re-education.Yeah…Michelle Bachmann was right. Not in terms of policy…but she sure figured me out. In fact, I want to start with her. WHACK!Gingrich, Rush, Hannity, Beck, Boehner, Steele, Cantor, Cheney, that vicious incompetent spic Gonzalez…one after another…I want to whip on the ignorant fuckwits until they either see things my way or promise to STFU.

  • http://www.osborneink.com Matt Osborne

    cousinavi,I feel your pain. Which is why I’ve adopted Phrenotherapy, a bold new discipline that improves people’s personalities by rearranging their head-bumps with a large wooden mallet.

  • Zenaphobe

    I like the way one can label something “traditional” and somehow this alone confers the mantle of legitimacy upon it.

    It used to be traditional that the populace were considered subjects of the king and any thought of allowing them a say in things would get you skewered on a sharp stick.

    It used to be tradition that non-whites were savages and slaughtering them to take their resources was considered the duty of God fearing people.

    It used to be traditional that humans could be enslaved and handed down as property to ones heirs.

    It used to be traditional that a woman in an abusive marriage should take her licks, keep her mouth shut, and submit to her husband as she would to Christ.

    Of course, these examples are probably of no weight to many “traditionalists” because they would be comfortable re instituting any of these “traditions” as long as they were in charge.

  • http://www.xkcd.com/ • Silly Ratfaced Git •

    Well said Nanotyrranus

    Isn’t that what the Taliban does?

    Yes it is.

    This is why I call NOM the Christian AntiGay Jihad™. Several right wingers have told me that the name exaggerates the situation, however I think it is exactly appropriate and they could not displrove why it is not.I will fight any and all theocratic activities as unconstitutional. If the Christofascists wish to continue on their Talabangelical death march to ignorant superstition supremacy, then they will have me throwing up all the roadblocks I can manage. I like my Constitution. They may not inflect their religion with laws. Period.