Sinners, Saints, and Political Ambition

Share

I rarely quote Rush, but his comment about ex-wives is quite funny.  It is also quite revealing.  Ex-wives can be a problem.  Then again, there are a heck of a lot of times when a man deserves everything he is going to get, both barrels.  If Marianne Gingrich had not been in on the first divorce, I might be more sympathetic.  I’m not.  Women who live by the sword, die by the sword.  I think if you were to take a poll, most women would end up laughing at the “other” woman getting her just desserts.  It’s karma.  I think anyone who gives any creedence to something said by an ex wife who was in on making another wife an “ex” has no validity or a right to complain about how badly she was treated. She’s getting everything she deserves, in spades.

Back to my comment that ex-wives are a problem.  We all know that hell hath no fury.  Case in point is Celia Ann (Mattie) Blaylock, better known as Mrs. Wyatt Earp #2.  I have argued for years that Wyatt and Mattie were legally married.  Mattie, according to the story I was told, was basically a party girl.  She had serious health problems and knew she only had a limited time on this earth.  She made the most of it.

Now, I can’t see why any woman would want to play around on a hunk like Wyatt Earp with his strawberry blond hair, bright blue eyes, six foot frame and broad shoulders.  Wife #3, Josie, once described him, well, he must have been a one hot looking man.   Wyatt caught Mattie fooling around with one of the Patterson brothers.  To keep her busy, he sat her up with a seamstress shop – she was a couture designer and seamstress.  She took the money and rented a love nest for she and her numerous stud-muffins.  The day of the Gunfight at the OK Corral, their marriage basically ended.

In June of 1883, after everyone had left Tombstone, Mattie was living with her in-laws in Colton, California.  She wrote to Wyatt asking for a divorce so she could marry this gambler from Arizona.  She was in love with him.  Wyatt refused, saying that he did not believe in divorce.  Mattie deserted him.  The moment Wyatt heard that she had left him, he high-tailed it from Gunnison to San Fran to Josie.

A few years later, when Mattie was dying, she told the person she had hired to help her, that “Earp ruined my  life”.  So, after she was murdered (and it was not suicide), the report by the acting coroner is that she took her own life, blaming Wyatt Earp for ruining it because he would not giver her a divorce.  She blamed him for being dumped by the man she had deserted Wyatt for.

Wyatt’s detractors have used those four words against him since 1887.   Having spent 15 years researching Wyatt Earp, my only conclusion is that Wyatt Earp ruined her life because he would not give her a divorce.  She blamed everything on him – always.  There is a good bit of evidence that she was unable to take responsibility for the mess she  had made of her own life.  It was easier blaming Wyatt Earp than looking at Celia Ann Blaylock in the mirror every morning.

“…”‘He can’t do it without me,’ she replies. ‘I told him if I’m not in agreement, fine, it’s easy’ –she giggles at her naughtiness. ‘I just go on the air the next day, and I undermine everything…I don’t want him to be president and I don’t think he should be.’ Why not?'”…”

Evidently, when Marianne Gingrich delivered those lines, in a 1995 interview, she’d already moved out on Newt and cleaned him of the contents of their home, and moved back in with him.  It is obvious they had problems.  Everyone is blaming Newt, but is it possible this woman is a bit nuts?

 

NRO

“…In an Esquire interview in 2010, Marianne Gingrich already painted an unflattering and highly detailed portrait of her ex. Here are just a few of the lowlights from that outing, in which Marianne Gingrich was described as chain-smoking Benson & Hedges while spilling that:

1. Newt actually started seeing his geometry teacher, the first Mrs. Newt Gingrich, when he was only 16. (I’d start the TV movie with that, but a career-ender, no).

2. Early in their marriage, she had to take over the budget “because it was too stressful for Newt.’’ Lots out there on “temperament” already.

3. That unlike Chris Christie, who recently told Oprah he’s over the stupid fat jokes, Newt found such remarks painful. “You know what he hated most?” Marianne says. “When they talked about him being fat. That weight thing was personal.” Endearing!

4. That after his Congressional career ended in scandal, he pretty much fell apart: “There were times,” Marianne told Esquire, “when he wasn’t functioning. He started yelling at people, which he’d never done before, and he’d get weirdly ‘overfocused’ on getting things done — manic, as if he was running out of time. He took to taking meetings while eating, slurping his food, as if he wasn’t aware or didn’t care how strange it looked.” If he ever sought treatment for depression, I would hope that wouldn’t be a disqualifier, but I wouldn’t bet on it.

5. That he has lost his way and wants more than anything a lifestyle that’s “opulent” or “self-indulgent.” Class warfare, anyone?

6. That he begged her to “tolerate” his affair with Callista, his third and current wife. Forgiven already.

7. That his conversion to Catholicism “has no meaning.’’ She can’t know that.

8. That he might go ahead and run for president anyway, because “he doesn’t connect things like normal people.’’ Does anyone who runs for president do that?

Whatever this new revelation is, it’s got to be worse than all of these. And for Marianne Gingrich’s sake, I hope she’s got proof….”

There are two stories here.  One version has it that the Axelrod may be behind this because they want to run against Romney.  The other is that Romney’s team did the dirty deed.

Canada Free Press

“...It’s likely that the sudden appearance of Marianne Gingrich will only strengthen this belief. After all, much of the right is convinced that mainstream journalists are engaged in a long-term pro-Obama conspiracy. Thus, if they’re attacking Gingrich now, it suggests that he’s a genuine threat to the president’s reelection. “Everybody has an angry ex-spouse,” Rush Limbaugh said on his radio show Thursday. “I don’t know how many people are going to get mad at the media for this, how many people are going to get mad at Marianne Gingrich. I have no clue.” On Fox News, Megyn Kelly said that “there will be questions raised by the American people about the timing of the interview, the timing of its release, and about Marianne Gingrich’s credibility.” Now, a vote for Gingrich isn’t just a vote against Romney. It’s also a vote against the mainstream media, and that’s something the right abhors more than infidelity….”

Those who don’t like Newt are starting to sound like a bunch of self-righteous you know what’s who have never done anything wrong in their lives.

“…Fair enough. But does that mean voters have to give Gingrich a pass because he has sought God’s forgiveness?

Ramesh Ponnuru, a senior editor of the conservative magazine National Review, wrote an article on Dec. 22 last year titled: “The Redemption of Newt Gingrich: Spiritual reconciliation does not mean political exoneration.”

Ponnuru argued that Gingrich’s repentance – – let us assume it is sincere – – removes obstacles to Gingrich’s entrance to heaven, not to the White House.

“A candidate’s conversion and repentance of past sins,” Ponnuru wrote, “cannot erase voter concerns that arise from those sins.”

But what about the three other candidates on stage with Gingrich Thursday night? John King asked each of them whether they thought Gingrich’s past behavior was an “issue.”

Mitt Romney gave Gingrich a pass. “John, let’s get on to the real issues is all I’ve got to say,” Romney said.
Rick Santorum was a little less forgiving. “I am a Christian, too,” he said. “And I thank God for forgiveness. But, you know, these are issues of our lives and what we did in our lives. They are issues of character for people to consider.”

But it was left to Ron Paul to make the best response. “I think too often all of us are on the receiving ends of attacks from the media,” Paul said. “And I’m very proud that my wife of 54 years is with me tonight.”

I am disgusted by all the hyperbole over this issue.  I suspect the things that have gone on in Newt Gingrich’s life are far more common than the self-righteous pundits and supporters of Mitt Romney might want to admit.  Heck, I have a friend who has been married at least four times.  He’s one of the most sensible, stable, and dependable people I know.  To me, damning a person who has been married more than once is deplorable.  It reeks of a lack of understanding of the human condition, tolerance, and just plain lack of human nature.

Maybe it might behoove these people to start asking themselves why a person wants to be POTUS so much they’ve spent their entire life preparing for it and have spent at least $50 million of their own money.  Sorry, but I don’t want someone that ambitious to be POTUS.  There is something almost pathological about a person like that.

Share