i think most people consider fidelity in marriage a sacred vow - but willing to trust someone that would casually, repeatedly break that trust
it is also a HUGE problem for me if he LIED about offering friends to abc - to refute the ex’s claims - during a self righteous, smug smackdown of that moderator - that makes me think he believes he is above criticism - that makes me think his ego is overinflated
That’s my bigger issue with today’s information. NOOT says he didn’t in fact have any friends who he could offer to ABC. I’m fine with not having any friends knowing whether or not you have an open marriage, but don’t scream at ABC for lying and distorting, and then lie and distort while screaming at ABC. It’s not just that you forgot or were mistaken; it’s an outright lie, while self righteously screaming at the media.
As for the Reagan quotes - I don’t know how many times I’ve said it but I hate hearing people trying to take on the mantle of Reagan, as if they are Reagan incarnate. Noot has repeatedly tied himself to Reagan, so the truth comes out that perhaps he has again purposefully misstated his accurate record (which, he smugly touts that he is a “great historian” while everyone else either has “poor historians” working for them or can’t recall history like he can because he was a professor). I think I’ve mentioned a few times how I wanted to beat Noot with Reagan’s femur for his continual “I am Reagan’s torchbearer” act, when he isn’t.
Reagan is dead; Reagan wasn’t perfect. He was a damned fine President, but no one, now, or ever, will be the second Reagan and it’s asinine to pretend otherwise. It’s doubly asinine for a candidate to pretend otherwise and I’m all in favor of calling out people when they falsely tout inaccurate records. For example, the whole purpose of my tagline is to show the Paulbots who try to lure people into their cult with “Reagan loved Ron Paul; Reagan would endorse Ron Paul.” BS.
If that’s how Noot feels about Reagan’s policies, he should be proud of that and highlight why his ideas are better. His supporters should be glad he has ideas on how to improve on what was a monumental and great Presidency, instead of pouting because the truth was revealed.
Bah. I don’t get why people get so caught up in people, and forget their principles. Imagine the hootin’ and hollerin’ that would be going on if Romney had an open marriage, or Santorum had an open marriage. (I distinctly doubt Ron Paul could have an open marriage, because frankly, I’m still stunned one person agreed to marry and have relations with him. I could be wrong, though, because Noot has found at least three women; and I would have thought that number would have been much lower too. ;o )
— i think most people consider fidelity in marriage a sacred vow - but willing to trust someone that would casually, repeatedly break that trust—
Casually? Really? At 16 his HS teacher began a relationship with him. He married her at 19 because she was pregnant. This marriage would be civilly null, never mind null by Catholic standards.
So that leaves what appears to be one true civil divorce, not unusual by today’s standards, and who knows all the facts? If his daughters by the first marriage have forgiven him, maybe we should.