Really? We're comparing families now?
um, you people did this first with the Clinton's.
but i'm mostly pointing out the hypocrisy of "pro-family" (by which we mean anti-gay, anti-choice) political rhetoric and how it measures with reality, as compared by pro-gay, pro-choice and also "pro-family" political rhetoric and how that measures with reality.
cases in point: Cain and Gingrich. these are men with messy, messy personal lives. and yet they believe that gay people choose to be that way, that there should be a federal amendment to the constitution to prevent gay people from creating families, and that women should be forced to bear unwanted children. all of this is to win over the "pro-family" groups.
and look at their lives.
and, to be totally fair, i personally don't care who Gingrich and Cain fuck outside of their marriages. if there's one woman, there's four; if there's four women, there's twenty-four. so long as it's legal and consensual, it's none of my business. just don't go around pretending that kicking gays and crusading against reproductive freedom is somehow pro-family, or that being inclusive and pro-woman is somehow anti-family.
however, that's not the world we live in, post-Lewinsky. it's the right wing that has made the "character" of a president an issue, so you live by the sword you die by the sword.
it was put beautifully thusly (and, as i read, earlier in the thread):
"We want a virgin to do a hooker's job," - Lori Klein, Herman Cain's Arizona state chairman
(and, ironically, it's slutty Gingrich who's going to gain Cain's support when he ends his candidacy by Friday and not squeaky-clean Romney)
), but issues like education and the sexualization of American culture, where I believe conservatives have the much stronger position. 
