GOP Death Watch

Clown Car Pulls Up at GOP Debate and the Presidential Candidates Get Out

Anyone who watched Thursday night’s GOP debate in South Carolina would be forgiven for wondering whether the candidates arrived for the evening in a limousine or a clown car. Following a day when Mitt Romney discovered that he lost Iowa after all, Rick Perry decided to quit (two weeks late), and Rick Santorum could credibly argue that he was the most stable candidate in the race, the exchange of verbal gunfire at the debate was only to be expected. Of course, no one could top Newt Gingrich’s day, which included a dramatic rise among South Carolina voters in a poll and the accusation from his second wife, Marianne, that he wanted an “open marriage.” That might be a enlightened gesture in some circles but certainly not within the Grand Old Party.

Gingrich, who lives in a glass house and throws stones, is most motivated when he’s angry, and he was steam-pouring-out-of-every-orifice angry at the debate. When the moderator, CNN’s John King, opened the debate by asking about Marianne’s open marriage comment, Gingrich all but lunged for King, accusing him of being an Obama stooge. “I am appalled that you would begin a presidential debate on a topic like that,” Gingrich fumed before ripping King a new one, to the applause of the right-wing audience. Good thing it wasn’t FOX doing the questioning–or King Newt might have actually felt compelled to anwer the question.

Long distrusted by evangelicals because of his revolving door at the wedding chapel, Gingrich is now able to cast himself once again as a victim of the liberal media. Rush Limbaugh said that Marianne’s accusation was actually a mark in Newt’s favor. “Newt’s slogan ought to be, ‘Hell, yes, I wanted it,’” Limbaugh said on his radio show. And forgotten-but-not-gone Sarah Palin said Gingrich would “soar” because conservatives would see through “the politics of personal destruction.” Only in the through-the-looking-glass world of Republican politics would the notion of an open relationship suddenly be a political asset after years of hitting everyone over the head with a cherry-picked version of the Old Testament.

Meantime, Rick Santorum spent the debate excoriating Gingrich for being so “grandiose” that he was incapable of being president and accusing both Gingrich and Romney of “playing footsies with the left.” (Careful, boys. Next thing you know you’ll be marrying dogs.) And Mitt Romney spent the debate being, well, Mitt Romney. Meaning that he dodged questions, most notably about the release of his tax returns. After all, by his own admission, most of Mitt’s money comes from investments and he makes “not very much” for speaking fees. “Not very much” to someone of Romney’s enormous wealth translates into $374,327.62. 

As for Ron Paul–he continues his fight to defeat Woodrow Wilson.

By all accounts, President Obama has a tough road to re-election. But has the Republican party ever fielded a sorrier lot than this crew? By the time they are done demolishing each other, there may not be that much more for Obama to do. And if Saturday’s vote in South Carolina turns out not to seal Romney’s coronation, the demolition derby could keep on playing for weeks.

Photo via ABC News

Get Queerty Daily

Subscribe to Queerty for a daily dose of #politics #2012election #marriage stories and more


  • Scott Rose

    These are the stinking cesspool turds that aspire to undo all advances towards LGBT equality.

  • jeff4justice

    Too bad LGBT media and the mega LGBT groups prefer to ignore the alternative party options conditioning voters to accept lesser of evil limited options. Of course, LGBT groups can also be corporately controlled as we saw last year with the AT&T/Tmobile/net neutrality scandal.

    The Greens, Peace & Freedom, and Libertarian parties would produce better candidates than the corporately-controlled 2party system establishment.

    If we can elect a black President and openly-gay candidates, what’s keeping us from electing alternative parties – especially considering the anti-establishment momentum of the Tea Party and Occupy movements; the increase in decline to state/independent voters; and Congress having the lowest approval rating in history.

    I still think Ron Paul is the least-worst Republican of the contenders and I think strategic voting liberals should vote for him in open primary states like California in the primaries – since Obama has no challenger.

    Do you believe Obama is the great liberal he sold himself as or is he GWB’s third term regarding indefinite detention, rich people tax cuts, failing to protect the environment, expanding the war, using drones to kill innocent civilians, increasing government secrecy, cracking down on whistleblowers, and appointing some of corporate Americans most despicable people to regulatory agencies?

    If you realize Obama is GWB’s third term in many ways then will you vote for the lesser of an evil (strategic voting) or will you vote for an alternative party candidate?

    My plea for strategic voting is for lesser of evil voters. Now if you don’t mind all the ways Obama has been GWB’s third term then by all means stick with Obama unquestionably.

    If you know very well Obama is GWB’s third term regarding indefinite detention, rich people tax cuts, failing to protect the environment, expanding the war, using drones to kill innocent civilians, increasing government secrecy, cracking down on whistleblowers, continuing the drug war, and appointing some of corporate Americans most despicable people to regulatory agencies then you should have the conscious to support another candidate – just as MLK could not stand by LBJ regarding the Vietnam war.

    So if you realize Obama is awful in many ways, do you stand by him blindly and vote for him as a lesser of evil or do you support liberal or libertarian alternative party candidates?

    If you realize Obama’s faults and support him as a lesser of evil, then you are a strategic voter more than a principled voter. If you are a strategic voter more than a principled voter then you should vote for whoever you think is the least damaging Republican or a Republican who you think cannot beat Obama if you live in an open primary state as I do.

  • FYI

    Ron Paul does not believe that there should be any Federal Laws protecting minorities (including GLBT people) from the tyranny of the majority. His grand “idea” is to turn the United States into a patch-work quilt of fifty autonomous countries — each with their own set of laws that are not answerable to a constitutionally constructed strong central federal government. Paul and his fascist Senator son believe that individual “freedom” means the “freedom” to discriminate by any commercial business which holds a public operating license == i.e. welcome back the 1950s Old Style Southern Segregationist kind of “individual freedom”.

    Likewise, Obama is a sham and a liar (typical Democrat) who could have ended DOMA by doing what he is doing now, by not defending it when he had Nancy Pelosi and control of the Senate. I doubt if Nancy would have hired a House lawyer to defend DOMA as ol’ limp Speaker Boner has.

    Additionally, Obama (and Senate Democrats) quickly scrambled to cobble together the repeal of DADT only after two federal courts ruled against Obama’s sham (in)Justice Department. The only reason the congress pushed the repeal through was because they realized they lost and they want to still have some control over Gay and Lesbian service members’ lives — such as not giving them a final federal court victory which could have established the GLBT community as a “legitimate” minority entitled to full constitutional protections. As it is, Gay and Lesbian service members still are discriminated against and are denied equal treatment — furthermore, DADT can be brought back into effect anytime by the next president without congressional action.

    Bottom line: Obama is a piece of shit. Republican candidates are bigger pieces of shit. And Ron Paul is the biggest piece of shit of them all. Don’t be fooled by the so-called “libertarian” concept of “individual freedom” — it favors the mob even more than the Republican swine party does.

  • stevoj

    @jeff4justice: if you actually think for one second that Obama is simply Bush in black face then YOU should be a republican candidate for president

  • jason

    Gingrich impressed me. It was about time somebody put the disgraceful media in its place.

    I will vote for Gingrich or Romney. While they may not seem as gay-progressive as Obama, keep in mind that Obama has failed us on so many fronts.

  • Trent

    @FYI: I would be interested to know who you will be voting for then?

    It is easy to criticize all of them and say how things should be, but how about actually changing things. You don’t go from step 1 to step 7 in one jump. There are steps in between. Everyone wants 7 but doesn’t like that they have to deal with 2-6. Its ridiculous.

  • Scott Rose

    @jason: What you said is so stupid, that you can only possibly have said it because you are so stupid that you are incapable of understanding how stupid it is.

  • AedanRoberts

    Gingrich can dish it, but he apparently cant take it. Then again this should have been obvious to anyone paying even the slightest bit of attentions to this egomaniacal douchenozzle over the past several decades.

    He rails against Clinton and a host of other politicians because of their private romantic lives and suddenly finds the whole practice distasteful when the spotlight is swung back around on himself- a man with more sexual skeletons in his closet than most of those he criticized combined?

    Fuck him and fuck these ridiculous Repug Debate Audiences for smiling and clapping at the shiny angry spitball of pathetic hypocrisy because he was given an excuse to act like a victim.

  • AedanRoberts

    @Scott Rose

    Don’t feed the troll.

  • the crustybastard

    Neither Newt nor this Republican debate audience can imagine how exercising good judgment is indeed relevant to being POTUS.


  • Markie-Mark

    Jeff4Justice (#2) & FYI (#3): I agree with your comments. I’m with you; voting Green. Indefinite detention is just the latest outrage from that corporate hack.

    Btw, I was at the laundromat last night and unfortunately saw some of the Republican debate. Sickening.

  • FYI

    @ TRENT who wrote: “It is easy to criticize all of them and say how things should be, but how about actually changing things.”


    Typical lemming. That’s like blaming the passengers on that cruise ship that floundered off the coast of Italy because the Captain was incompetent.

    I’ll tell you what I am doing (as well as countless other people of conscience) we are no longer going to reward betrayal and indifference. If you enjoy kissing the asses of Democratic porcupines, well, then go for it. I’m also considering the Green Party as a matter of principle and because I refuse to vote like a stampeded herd of cattle for an asshole like Obama or anyone else who thinks that my citizenship rights should be inferior to theirs.

    By the way, a jerk like McCain would have done the same thing that Obama did on DADT, ie using his (in)Justice Department to defend DADT and DOMA — just as Obama did — ultimately leaving it for the courts to decide and force the Congress to pass watered-down legislation. How soon you forget, the sodomy laws were struck down under GW Bush’s watch and the first same-sex marriages occurred also then. So POTUS has proven rather irrelevant to the advancement of our rights.

    As I said, the so-called “Fierce Advocate” in the White House is a backstabbing liar. That chicken-shit even went to New York for a fundraiser during the last few days of critical debate on marriage equality in Albany and Obama couldn’t even offer a word of encouragement as his greedy money-grubbing hands reached into our pockets for campaign cash.

    If Obama does not come out for full equality before next November (that is, marriage and everything else other Americans enjoy) then he does not deserve to be president next year.

    So, please don’t offer me dog shit in one hand or cat shit in the other hand and then demand that I must chose one or the other. You might be into scat; I am not.

  • Interesting

    If you got a choice between shit and shit, pretending you got a choice between shit and cake only means you end up eating shit.

  • Alex

    Well, to me the Demos and Repubs are two sides of the same evil coin; corporate vampirism sucking the life out of this country. Voting for the lesser of two evils is still a wasted vote for evil. I urge everyone to explore other political parties and find one that truly speaks to your own values and beliefs.

    I vote Green Party because I want real change.

  • ron t


    Obama hasn’t done anything for us? You think Mitt and Newt are the way to go?

    Let’s examine the records…


    JUNE 17 (2009): Ordered Federal Government to extend key benefits to same-sex partners of Federal employees.

    JUNE 29 (2009): Hosted first White House LGBT Pride reception in history.

    AUGUST 21 (2009): Awarded the highest civilian honor, the Medal of Freedom, to Billie Jean King and Harvey Milk.

    OCTOBER 21 (2009): Created a National Resource Center for LGBT Elders.

    JANUARY 1 (2010): Ended discrimination based on gender identity in the Federal Government.

    JANUARY 4 (2010): Lifted the ban that prohibited people with HIV/AIDS from entering the United States.

    MARCH 23 (2010): Enacted the Affordable Care Act

    APRIL 15 (2010): Ensured hospital visitation and medical decision-making rights for gay and lesbian patients.

    JUNE 9 (2010): Allowed trans Americans to receive true gender passports without surgery.

    JUNE 22 (2010): Clarified the Family and Medical Leave Act ensuring family leave for LGBT employees.

    JUNE 22 (2010): Released America’s first comprehensive plan to prevent and end homelessness, which includes LGBT youth.

    OCTOBER 21 (2010): Recorded “It Gets Better” video.

    DECEMBER 21 (2010): Led a United Nations measure that restored “sexual orientation” to the definition of human rights.

    DECEMBER 22 (2010): Signed the repeal of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.”

    JANUARY 20 (2011): Ensured Government housing programs can no longer discriminate against the LGBT community.

    FEBRUARY 14 (2011): Proposed more funding for LGBT priorities

    JANUARY 20 (2011): Declared the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional and announced the Administration will no longer defend it in court.

    AUGUST 20 (2011): Supported Lesbian Widow Edith Winsor in her suit against DOMA.

    SEPTEMBER 2 (2011): Issued guidance to foster safer working environments for transgender Federal Employees.

    Mitt and Newt want to end lots of these advances when they become President.

    As far as ‘the disgraceful media’…what was/is disgraceful about them? Are you referring to the news story on Gingrich’s ex-wife? I found Newt’s NON ANSWER to the question at the debate ridiculous.

    Newt was the #1 voice trying to bring down President Clinton talking about infidelity and the lack of morality that was so disgraceful, that the President should be impeached.

    Of course, at the same time he was railing against Clinton’s infidelities, he was carrying on an affair of his own.

    I feel this is a perfectly FAIR issue to bring to light, and John King should have went after Gingrich after he deflected the answer and made it about ‘the media’, instead of his own immoral behavior.

    And the fools ate it up.

  • jason

    ron t,

    Actually, Mitt Romney has said that he will not repeal the status quo. Under Mitt, repeal of DADT remains.

    As for that list, most of them are symbolic vote-chasers. Where is ENDA? Where is the end of DOMA? The Democrats had a filibuster-proof majority and failed to enact either of these.

    I’ll give Obama credit for repealing DADT – although, he had to be pushed on it – but, on the big ticket items, Obama has largely failed.

  • Interesting

    The absurdity of course is that the GOP is promising to make the gay rights situation worse. Obama sucks, but come on- you have to be a real nut job like Jason to not get that the GOP has no case to make for gay rights.

  • Toferdavid

    Nothing for nothing, but it is she said he said regarding whether newt asked for an open marriage. It’s not fact. Secondly, his attack of the media was electrifying and well deserving. That these media shrills would make someone’s private life part of the debate is something we should all object to, just as my being gay is no ones business.

  • Interesting

    @Toferdavid: I certainly hope Newt wins the nomination, but I suspect for different reasons than you.

  • Toferdavid

    @Interesting: I said nothing of wanting him or anyone else to win. I coUld care less who wins.

  • Interesting

    @Toferdavid: Sure, whatever.

  • ron t


    I think its a valid poin. Newt, himself, was the one rallying against immorality and infidelity.

    Now, suddenly, to ask about it in a candidate is despicable?

    Where was Newt Gingrich complaining about the media when they were going after Herman Cain?

    I didn’t hear him pipe up once, regarding the negative media…..

    …but when the focus is on him, he is suddenly angry.

    Spare me the theatrics, Newt.

  • Toferdavid

    I suppose some have more fear that Obama will lose than I, so who cares who the republican nominee is. Obama will win. Let newt say what he wants, but it is hypocritical of me as a gay man to bring another’s personal life into this. Don’t we want others to not judge us for our own, so why would we judge others for theirs?

Comments are closed.