I Don't Know What Not To Like

I'm not quite sure why I'm going to take this time to talk about Newt Gingrich because he will never be President. But it does seem like he might be positioning himself for a run at something, so I thought that I'd just get my dislike of him out of the way.

While I know that intellectually, a candidate's personal life shouldn't factor into whether or not the position that they're running for can be performed, I have a hard time getting to that point emotionally. Newt's a cheater. No one likes a cheater. And he didn't just cheat on one of his wives. He cheated on both of them. No one likes a serial cheater. Not even a little bit. Does his being a cheater impact how he would do his job if elected? Intellectually, I wouldn't think that it would. Emotionally? It seems like whatever he said would not be able to be trusted. Especially when he gives lame excuses for why he cheated.

Let's go over to New York Magazine for an explanation of his cheating. "There's no question at times of my life, partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked far too hard and things happened in my life that were not appropriate." That's right. He was passionate about 'Merika, so that's why he cheated. Intellectually, should that matter? Considering that it's a dumbass excuse and is not very intellectual? Maybe it should!

Then there's the latest dust up that he's answering for. According to Politico, he had "...a “revolving charge account” at Tiffany and Company" with a liability somewhere in between $250,001 and $500,000. At freaking Tiffany's. Tiffany's, known equally for their breakfast as well as their jewelry, is about as uppity as you can get. Now, it could be that he has this account because he buys his wedding rings in bulk. But regardless, does anyone really need over $250 grand in jewelry? I don't think that they do! Should that disqualify someone from being a legitimate candidate for office? I want to say yes, but why does that feel wrong?!

He kind of made a good point on Sunday when he said that "...the spending was his "private decision." He does have a point. He can do whatever he wants with his money, no matter how idiotic I think it may be. (Or no matter how idiotic it just is. And come on! Who needs $250,000 in jewelry? No one! There are SO many other things that one could purchase with that kind of cash! So many BETTER things!) He also claims to be debt free. Should it make a difference if he is able to manage his money to where he incurs a debt and then pays it off? That's sort of the point of having good credit, isn't it? I'm so confused!

Let's review: I can't decide if people who are despicable individuals should be automatically discounted from running for or fulfilling a public office. Emotionally, I say screw 'em. Intellectually, I say it maybe shouldn't matter. Why is emotional me winning?! Why isn't intellectual me dominating this issue?! What is wrong with me? Am I missing something?

moreless