Put these two together and what we have is a man, a leader in government, who is not only dealing to avoid what would be prosecutable for others not in government, but also to keep his high profile, high power, high income job in our government.

First of all, a man that is allowed to lie about stealing and admit to it while holding high office is the worst villain of all, ethically and criminally speaking.

He doesn't just damage one or a few victims. He damages all that many of us hold as truths, that honesty must be prevail in our dealings with other people and, certainly, in government. This is America, isn't it?

Unbelievably, many GOP associates are supporting Gingrich. This means they accept a man that lies and commits felonies as a leader.

Carrying this idea further, it teaches young people that lying is okay as long as you get away with it. But, doesn't this mean stealing, using illegal drugs, defrauding innocent people, and so on, are okay as long as you get away with it?

As many will recall, Gingrich was big on jumping on every Democrat he could for family values, political contributions and ethics, to name a few. While doing so, he was not telling the truth about his own activities but, instead, lying day after day, week after week, month after month for two years.

Don't you find this as offensive as the writer finds it? Afterall, lying is wrong and cheating taxpayers is illegal, at least for most of us. When put together, we have a person who has violated public trust AND legal codes. This is the basic definition of a criminal, plain and simple.

The evidence seems to support this contention. As quoted by the article, "According to the ethics complaints, the speaker would use tax-exempt entities to raise money that would be deducted form donors' federal income taxes" and, further, that "many of the donors were the political committee's regular supporters."

Hold on. Unless the writer has lost much of his command of the English language, Gingrich seemed to have had a conspiracy to commit tax fraud going, and may have had it going for many years since he was an extremely effective fund-raiser.

How about this? Rep. John Boehner, chairman of the House Republican Conference, wrote GOP lawmakers, "While the mistake is regrettable, it's not significant enough to deny his continuing service as speaker of the House." (This and the above quote were taken from the Dispatch.)

Not significant? How long has it been since many politicians have seen daylight? It doesn't matter if the fraud, and it is tax-fraud and fraudulent use of the money (stealing), was for a dollar or, more likely, millions since that is the range our government acts in. Fraud is fraud.

As most of us recall, tax fraud is also illegal and punishable by heavy fines, including loss of properties to pay the taxes due, and/or imprisonment. That is what happens to other people who defraud on taxes and to those who embezzle.

Boehner, along with other lawmakers, seem to support the activity. Why do they support what is a criminal activity? Just a thought but are we perhaps getting to the opposition over the FBI files?

And to call the activities of Gingrich an "ethics violation".

No, guys, it was an illegal and willful violation of tax codes, ethical standards, and legal codes. And that makes it a crime against society which means every person involved, from Gingrich on, has been conducting a criminal action.

Gingrich commented the purpose of the tax-exempt organizations was educational, as required by federal law. But, also, that he failed to "seek and follow" legal advice that would have clearly shown he was using his methodology improperly.

(If the writer was going to conduct an illegal activity, he would avoid discussing it with others that might blow the whistle, too, especially with all the leaks in Washington, DC).

But, then, think about the phrase "seek and follow." Why did Gingrich use the phrase when, in reality, one can't follow what one hasn't seeked.

Isn't it far more likely while designing the system, he did seek advice but then elected NOT to follow it? That would prompt the phrase, "seek and follow".

Then there is the question as to whether or not that the people he attracted, those who made donations, had complete knowledge of the situation. Since they were high-dollar supporters of the Republican political machine, one would think so.

If so, they would have to be assured that illegal decuctions could not come back on them, that their intentions would remain out of public and legal scrutiny. It seems this would take advice given by experts the donors respected and had faith in, experts whose assurances would be accepted.

There is also the fact he was using his political position to conduct the successful operation. This is a crime against the people of this nation. The only suitable actions are to "take his stripes" and remove him from public office now and forever, followed by criminal prosecution.

Remember, this situation is concerned with a high Washington politician that has been using the system for years, a politician who, by his own admission, has NOT been straight forward in his political dealings and his statements to the public. That alone should damn him forever from public office and disbar him.

You know, just as the writer does, if he were to steal from the rich to give the poor, a far more admirable goal than what appears to have been Gingrich's actual goal, he would be prosecuted, if caught.

Oddly enough, Gingrich's scheme has been to steal from the poorer (middle-class taxpayers in the form of education funds) to give to the rich. How ironic is that?

Additionally, if caught in as many lies as Gingrich has, he might also be convicted for perjury, particularly if those lies were to an investigative body, such as a congressional committee. For certain, he would be astrocized by others.

And, just as certain, this and Gingrich's responses to the situation are indicative of Gingrich's true character.

Sadly, we don't know if he has had other dealings just as dishonest. We don't know how many other times, or about what, he has lied. Perhaps a complete investigation of Gingrich as a politician needs to be conducted, just as the President and Mrs. Clinton were investigated.

For now, Ladies and Gentlemen, call it anything you want, an ethics violation in an attempt to tone it down, or any other high-minded phrase, but the simple truth is that designing and implementing a system that allows people to illegally deduct donations is tax fraud. For that, Gingrich should be investigated and inevitably prosecuted, not supported.

Let's send, for once, the right message to the people of America, including those that are too young to vote, the message that violators, regardless of position and power, will be arrested, prosecuted, hopefully convicted, and appropriately punished.

Special Addendum: It took the Republican Party many months to finally go against Gingrich and, I believe, demand his resignation. Supposedly, he resigned under his on volition but I personally believe it to have been forced by the Party. He had become a liability rather than an asset.

It didn't matter what he had done as far as legalities, ethics, and morality (yes, Gingrich had screwed around, too, and lied many times about it) are concerned - it only mattered to them when they realized he would hurt the party in the upcoming presidential and congressional elections.

And, that, as you know, is an absolute Washington political 'no-no'.