A true mark of a dumbocrat (as opposed to an "honest" democrat) is insisting that Clinton's impeachment was over an extra-marital blowjob. It was not. It was about the leader of the United States lying under oath in court.
The fact that the lie was about a blowjob is merely embarassing yet oddly convenient to Clinton apologists who use it as to distract everyone from the actual crime he comitted.
If the country decides that Gingrich's political career is over because of his affair, that's fine. But if you put him under oath and asked him about it, he would tell the truth. If you want to say he doesn't deserve to be in office, that's fine. What's good for one party is good for another. But there is a clear distinction between people who will lie under oath to protect themselves, and those who will not. Clinton lied under oath, Gingrich told the truth without even being sworn in.
I haven't seen any quotes where Gingrich said Clinton should leave office because of the blowjob... Mostly he goes on about the lying under oath thing. That might be opportunistic, but certainly not hypocritical.
