I continue to hear the trumpet call to attack Newt for his past transgressions. I have even written that I was, and am, greatly concerned about what I considered his character flaws and that it was probably too much “baggage” to carry to the Presidency. But, I must admit, the farther we travel along the primary path the more I am discomfited by the attacks. Newt hit the nail on the head in the last South Carolina debate when he castigated the CNN Moderator for starting a Presidential Primary Debate with a question of purely prurient interests. The question was not framed in the practical as it certainly could have been. John King could have asked, “Character and personal issues come up in campaigns and are conversation starters for voters. Since you Mr. Gingrich are the central figure in one of these character issues, do you believe that candidates past marriages and or affairs are a legitimate concern for the voters?” A question framed as such would have forced Mr. Gingrich to open the question for himself or close the question for use against his opponents now and maybe in the general election. Roberts’s inelegant phrasing played into Newt’s hands. Newt pounced. The ugliness of the question gave Mr. Gingrich free reign to unload on an easy target, the media. Let’s face it, they are an easy target and deservedly so. The bias of the media is incredibly open. The formerly vaunted New York Times has trumpeted the Gingrich ex-wife’s disputed gossip from the front page but never published a word about V.P. candidate John Edwards confirmed infidelity to his cancer stricken wife. Easy target? I’d say so. But, easy or not the target was well and truly trounced. A sign of a championship team is that they rise up to beat the toughest opponents and soundly thrash the teams they are supposed to beat. Mr. Gingrich certainly did that and was so complete in his response that he was able to offer a firm denial of the charges and offer up the availability of corroborating witnesses for the defense. The fact that Newt’s ex is shopping this enhanced version of the failure of her marriage lends evidence as to why the marriage failed. Furthermore it mitigates the view of Newt as the sole perpetrator and villain. The ex-Mrs. Gingrich is so disgusted with Newt that even though her children are grown she has kept the name for the purposes of…what? Seemingly the answer is to bask in the reflected fame of her ex-husband and to be found easily in the phone book by ABC News and the Washington Post. The other thing that Newt has said on several occasions is that he was sorry for his past transgressions and failures and has a different perspective on his world now. He has admitted the folly of sitting on the couch with Nancy Pelosi and has apologized for the political act. He has been vilified for these things over and over and has essentially agreed that he was wrong and asked to be forgiven. A few years ago I was calling the bases in a college age ball game and a runner attempted to steal second. The throw was off-line a bit and took the second baseman to the first base side and he made a graceful swipe tag. He followed through on the tag and immediately celebrated the out. I punched out the runner and not a word was said. As I moved into my proper position I noted that the second baseman and short-stop were a little too giddy over the play. I had been straight lined or blocked by the second baseman because of the throw being up the line. It turns out that what looked like a tag to me was 6 inches short of a tag. When the player I called out came back on the field to play his position I took a moment of his warm up time to apologize for blowing the call. He was gracious in his acceptance of my apology and back to work we went. Later in the game another close play happened and I called out the same player on a tag play at third. (Got that one right.) But, one of his team-mates hollered out that I was gonna have to apologize to him again. He had taken my apology and thrown it back in my face. I looked at the kid I called out, twice, and told him, “When one man apologizes to another, a real man moves on. If you take that apology and use it against me then all bets are off. Go tell your buddy he’s made my list.” It wasn’t wrong for the guy to tell his team that I admitted I blew the call and was sorry for it. I did. And, I was. It was terribly wrong for a third-party to take that knowledge and use it against me; to attack my integrity even though I had already admitted my failing and asked for forgiveness. I begin to feel the same way concerning Mr. Gingrich. At what point do I, a third-party, recognize that he has admitted his failings, asked for forgiveness and apologized for the acts? At what point do I, a practicing Christian, forgive and forget and try to discern the character of the man now? At what point do I step down from my seat of judgment of the man’s past acts and start judging the man he is now by his qualifications for the job for which he is applying? I may come to the same conclusion but I am afraid I have been the guy throwing his apology back in his face. Shame on me.