[Guest post by DRJ]
Should South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford resign?
I hadn’t given this much thought because I believe it’s a matter for the citizens of South Carolina to decide, but Toby Harnden offers 10 good reasons why Sanford must resign as Governor.
Read the link and then vote here:
— DRJ
Pronounced "Patter-EE-koh"
E-mail: Just use my moniker Patterico, followed by the @ symbol, followed by gmail.com
Disclaimer: Simpsons avatar may resemble a younger Patterico...
The statements made on this web site reflect the personal opinions of the author. They are not made in any official capacity, and do not represent the opinions of the author's employer.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 | |||||
Powered by WordPress.
I like Toby and I agree with him on many things. I think Sanford should resign because it has been reported he planned to spend 10 days with his lover. How on Earth did he plan to achieve that? He is clearly besotted. A clear thinking man would have designated his Lieutenant as being in charge. This is a mid-life crisis gone way out of control. Better we find out now rather than in the midst of a presidential campaign. Shades of John Edwards.
Gazzer (f027c2) — 6/25/2009 @ 11:16 pmHarnden makes some veery good points, but the thing about Clinton is clueless and detracts.
No matter how the press spun it, Bill Clinton’s troubles came from being a serial sexual harasser and on-camera perjurer. It was not about sex any more than rape is about sex.
Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 6/25/2009 @ 11:31 pmThe man is an elected representative of the people and left them alone — without hading off the reins of power — for several days. IF you’ve a Governor and the people don; tknow where you are for an extende dtime period )other than a national security reason) then you are grossly unprepared for the responsibilites of office.
Buh Bye!
Robert C. J. Parry (50a453) — 6/25/2009 @ 11:32 pmI voted yes but not for any of the reasons in the article. I would have the same answer to any similar question about any politician right now. I want them all to resign. Right down to dog-catcher if that’s an elected position. Then,
1. Ban public money for political parties.
2. Term limits for all positions.
3. Any primary election is the responsibility of that party… not the government or the taxpayer (make it purely internal to the party).
4. Any elected position (including POTUS) is subject to impeachment if 50.1% or more of the registered voters in that jurisdiction petition for it.
5. Anyone using the initials DCSCA will now muck stables by hand for life. It won’t be much of a change from how they behave here, but it will keep them off the computer.
I can probably come up with a few dozen more real quick.
Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 6/25/2009 @ 11:43 pmFor someone like Sanford to know how visible he is, to know how various scandals have impacted other politicians (eg, the previous governor of NY), and to have flaked out on his job by disappearing for a few days — and that is what is most crucial and telling in this matter — indicates the guy is a fool. If his genitals and heart are prone to shredding apart the portion of his brain that controls his judgment and sanity on occasion, he is a liability.
Plus, he must be crazily self-centered and self-entitled since he has to know that his recent behavior was going to negatively affect lots of people, his family for one, his constituents for the other, and the people in his party and on his side of the political spectrum in general.
Mark (411533) — 6/26/2009 @ 12:07 amI wouldn’t want him as my governor, but it’s up to the people in S.C., not me.
Anyway, he’s term-limited out according to what I hear, so it’ll be a moot point soon enough.
Dave Surls (d48f41) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:32 am#4
If I was going to reform the electoral system, I would…
1.) Raise the voting age.
or
2.) Try to figure out some kind of literacy/educational level test. If you can’t read/write and you don’t know anything about how the government is supposed to work…you can’t vote.
and
3.) Add a property ownership/income qualification. If you don’t have any money…you can’t vote.
Dave Surls (d48f41) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:37 amEvery place I’ve ever been before, three days of no call/ no show was considered job abandonment.
I feel somewhat sorry for Governor Sanford, but if his judgement is so fornicated up that he thought a sitting governor could just disappear and no one would notice, he clearly lacks the judgement to hold his current position. If he had any sense at all, he could have arranged for a vacation, a trip, something as cover, and left the wheels of state government turning.
Sorry, but the man has got to go.
It’s pretty sad when Eliot Spitzer and Jim McGreevey are better models for behavior than Mark Sanford.
The Dana with a job (3e4784) — 6/26/2009 @ 3:33 amWasn’t there a guy who gave up the throne of England so he could marry the woman he wanted? South Carolina … big deal.
nk (d78a32) — 6/26/2009 @ 3:45 amNK: Were you referring to King Edward VIII, or the current Prince of Wales? 🙂
The Dana with a job (3e4784) — 6/26/2009 @ 4:11 amIt was Edward VIII in 1936 nk, but you knew that. But he did not already have a devoted wife and family, while Sanford, (pathetically), thinks he can maintain his “throne”.
Rovin (363536) — 6/26/2009 @ 4:13 amEdward VIII, because he was already king and he abdicated.
nk (d78a32) — 6/26/2009 @ 4:15 amI was going to post about the Governor, but after reading Stashui3 #4, I could only think: Where do I sign the petition to make you Earth Czar? I would like to add:
Corwin (ea9428) — 6/26/2009 @ 5:54 amBan all individuals with law degrees from any non-manual labor position.
Close all law schools
Force all governing regions to repel 90% of all their laws (and follow the K.I.S.S principle when legislating)
This guy used taxpayer money to go see his girlfriend. I think we could save time by indicting all politicians during their swearing in ceremonies.
joan callender (feb19f) — 6/26/2009 @ 6:13 amThe first one, lying, is enough. The other nine are all valid.
I am tired of defending the indefensible, and it would be great for a Republican to do something in the interest of his family and party. He’s a distraction to rebuilding, he cannot lead (anybody else seen a colleague or acquaintance in this situation go to pieces and be worthless for six months?), and he is soaking up media by turning Republicans into a punchline. Very disappointing.
Times Disliker (7a46d2) — 6/26/2009 @ 6:27 amThis is to those folks like The Dana Who Refuses To Get His Hands Dirty, who insist on throwing perfectly good, PRINCIPLED, folks like Mark Sanford in the garbage at the first sign of being HUMAN:
Who, to this very day, is the only divorced US President? I believe that would be one Ronald Wilson Reagan. Wonder how St.Dutch escaped the “HYPOCRISY!!!” tag?
Too far back in the past? OK. How does Sarah Palin keep shrugging off shrill charges of being a bad parent because her daughter Bristol got pregnant by an utter dope like Levi Johnston? Heck, how come David Vitter is a shoe-in for reelection to the US Senate from Louisiana, despite his diaper-wearing fetish issues?
Wouldn’t you say a good PERSONALITY might have something to do with being able to survive being human in the political world? That it’s not just solely about the IDEAS? Nah, couldn’t be that, could it?
Brad S (9f6740) — 6/26/2009 @ 6:37 am“He’s a distraction to rebuilding, he cannot lead (anybody else seen a colleague or acquaintance in this situation go to pieces and be worthless for six months?), and he is soaking up media by turning Republicans into a punchline. Very disappointing.”
WAAAHHH. Please save me from the nasty bad press!! I can’t handle the bad press anymore! SAVE ME!!!!!!
Please grow up.
Brad S (9f6740) — 6/26/2009 @ 6:41 am“On the bright side, I doubt his indiscretions will affect the FisCon movement.”
Then again, nobody on here is quite as delusional as Erick Erickson is. He says he’s getting laughed at by the Left for his response to the Sanford mess. I’d laugh at him just for the statement above.
http://www.redstate.com/erick/2009/06/24/the-real-lessons-of-mark-sanfords-hike/
Brad S (9f6740) — 6/26/2009 @ 7:04 amDon’t worry, Brad. We are laughing at you.
I think he should resign, but not for any of the reasons listed in the link, and sadly, for reasons that do not occur to politicians.
He should resign because it would be the right and honorable thing to do at this point.
JD (c4dd89) — 6/26/2009 @ 8:17 amBrad S wrote:
If you’d notice what people have said, the problem with Governor Sanford is that he abandoned his job for the better part of a week. If I did that, I guarantee you I’d get fired!
As Governor, Mr Sanford had all of the resources available to him to take a week’s vacation if he wanted, if he had just set it up first. How hard would it have been to say, “I’m taking a week off; he’s my Blackberry number, and the Lieutenant Governor can run things while I’m gone.”
The public problem isn’t that Governor Sanford had an affair; the public problem is that it affected his job.
The Dana Who Refuses To Get His Hands Dirty (3e4784) — 6/26/2009 @ 8:18 amAfter so many (on both sides), why are we even surprised any more…?
JEA (1eb0e1) — 6/26/2009 @ 8:46 amBrad continues to try making his points more coherent by using BOLD CAPS WHEN HE REALIZES HIS REASONING IS ONCE AGAIN INANE!!!
Dmac (f7884d) — 6/26/2009 @ 8:50 am
Times Disliker (7a46d2) — 6/26/2009 @ 8:56 amBrad, the press isn’t the problem. It is Sanford’s lying. The press is simply reporting it, and they will make hay for a long time just like late-night comedians. Everything they say is accurate and correct about Sanford, and conservatives and Republicans have to pay the price for his behavior. That is grown-up, not blaming the “nasty media”;-)
YES, he is nothing but a disgrace to SC anyway, Kick him back to Argentina this state does not want him here.
Amy (2ab07d) — 6/26/2009 @ 9:04 am“He should resign because it would be the right and honorable thing to do at this point.”
We now have JD going on about “right and honorable things” while he performs the anything-but-right-and-honorable action of throwing Mark Sanford in the dumpster.
Who are you trying to please with your “right and honorable” backstabbing, JD?
Brad S (9f6740) — 6/26/2009 @ 9:17 amThe Dana Who Refuses To Get His Hands Dirty,
Let’s be honest here: You and a lot of the commenters on this blog are getting so “right and honorable” about Gov. Sanford because he was the Last Great White Hope for a “resurgence” of “Fiscal Conservatism.” You’re angry because Gov. Sanford became human and derailed that hope you had. Ratz. Now you’re going to have to take a step forward and support that trailer-trash hick known as Sarah Palin, and it really embarrasses you to have to do that.
Unlike some folks on both sides of the divide, I think the glee at Mark Sanford’s travails is disgusting. My hope is that he uses this newfound quiet time to repair the damage. I suspect he will without any real problem. Too bad he can’t repair the hopes “fiscal conservatives who refuse to get their hands dirty” had in him.
Brad S (9f6740) — 6/26/2009 @ 9:35 amBrad S,
Let’s be honest here. Most of us think you’re a Moby, but all of us know you’re a jerk. You object to calls for Governor Sanford’s resignation while calling Governor Palin a “trailer-trash hick”? This is after calling JD a backstabber? Nobody here has shown “glee” at Governor Sanford’s problems (brought on himself) and I really don’t care about his private life. In his public life however, he abandoned his duties and should resign. As for your other rantings:
God
Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 6/26/2009 @ 9:45 amForgives
You
It always comes down to Sarah Palin eventually from the picklebiters. If that lady has the so scared shitless, there’s got to be something to her. I should send her some money.
nk who can surf while waiting for a train to pass (d4812e) — 6/26/2009 @ 9:48 amAnd to be completely clear, I think you’re an excellent Moby. If I’m wrong though, you’re just a far-right jerk instead of a far-left one. Either way… let’s just say I read your comments with the same credulity as DCSCA’s.
Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 6/26/2009 @ 9:49 amWho am I backstabbing? Why should I support someone who is not my Governor, and has done nothing to win over my support other than stand up to Teh One on the “stimulus” money? Stash is spot on. Either a Moby, or a jerk. Either way, it is an arse.
JD (453b7a) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:09 amAh, yes. I’m now a Troll. Or is it a Moby? Or am I, a supposed far-right jerk, being told yet again to “GFY?” Great use of wordsmithing, guys. Way to show the world that you have an inability to deal with some who hit a little too close to home.
Just to let you know: I am as big of a Sarah Palin fan as you can imagine. When she reaches her full potential this time in ’12, she will not only beat the incumbent president, but will also be the first Billion-dollar Presidential candidate. And if there’s one thing I know so well about Sarah, it’s not just lefties who are scared witless of her.
I have this picture in my mind of certain folks who comment on this site who simultaneouly have their noses in the air and look down on the goober Republicans who go gaga over commoners like Sarah Palin. I know this attitude all too well, as these same folks got into a “identity politics” snit over Mike Huckabee’s campaigning last year.
Brad S (9f6740) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:09 amYou hit nowhere near close to home, except in your own mind, Brad S. What you “know” about us would not fill a thimble.
JD (49fac5) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:16 am“In his public life however, he abandoned his duties and should resign.”
Nice little figleaf, Stashiu3. Neat little way to show you can conduct “higher-level discourse,” as opposed to the rabble who can’t get over their glee over seeing some conservative Republican fool around on his wife.
Brad S (9f6740) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:17 amYes, us conservatives are fucking gleeful, Brad S, that a once-promising potential candidate went loco, cheated on his wife, and disappeared for almost 5 days, abandoning his office. Fucking gleeful, I tell you.
JD (49fac5) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:22 amTwo South Carolina papers have called for the governor’s resignation. What I want to know is, why should the governor have to resign if Clinton as president was guilty of the same charge–and he didn’t have to resign?
Adam R (7b3e77) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:31 amI don’t get the democrats on this.
Obama in particular and sleezebags like Edwards pray and bring up morality far more often than Republicans.
they want to have it both ways. Sorry, but the idea that only GOP cheaters are hypocrites is extremely silly and only dumbs buy it. the secret is that democrats generally realize that Obama is lying when he talks about religion, Edwards is lying when he talks about family and devotion to his wife (which he went on and on and on and on about) whereas this Sanford mimbo seemed to be sincere in his ridiculousness and other GOP figures like Palin actually seem to be serious and not ridiculous.
It’s projection when those who defended Clinton and Edwards call Sanford a slimeball. And as far as I know, other than the recent idiocy, Sanford was doing a good job for his state. But we can’t moveon.org
Juan (bd4b30) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:32 amAdam R – Clinton was guilty of perjury. Has Sanford perjured himself?
JD (e69a5a) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:34 am“Two South Carolina papers have called for the governor’s resignation.”
Adam R, I am about to tell you why those two SC papers are calling for his resignation, and this is going to hit certain commenters on this site right in the gut. It’s NOT what Sanford did, it’s not his record.
It’s because those SC papers know from experience that most conservatives will not stand behind Republicans, and will find whatever high-handed reason they can think of to abandon ship. IOW, they know YOU CONSERVATIVES DON’T STICK TOGETHER.
There. I said it. I await your Moby/Troll comments.
Brad S (9f6740) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:40 ambrad s is significantly overstating Sanford’s merit to the GOP.
I don’t know anyone who thought of him as a favorite. And I work for the GOP in elections, and have a lot of very politically interested friends.
He pioneered the stimulus rejection. Which was great.
Pawlenty, Romney, and far more prominently, Palin are all in the top tier of potentials. Rick Perry, Gingrich, Huckabee, and Sanford were in the second tier of people who probably won’t even run and wouldn’t win if they did.
But really, the GOP has no leader. I guess that’s why it’s so easy to pretend whoever is ebing demonized this week is that leader.
Juan (bd4b30) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:40 am“You conservatives don’t stick together”
In other words,
We don’t support corrupt slimeballs like the democrats always do. Where’s Dodd, Frank, Pelosi, Clinton, etc? Even Obama has far more scandal to his name than any GOP potential could survive.
You’re right, we conservatives are not really all that interested in having kings.
Juan (bd4b30) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:42 amBrad S wrote:
If we are going to be honest, Mr S, we’d be debating what was actually written, not what you wish to believe my motivations to be. You can read this site, and you can read mine, and you aren’t going to find a single word from me which says that he needs to resign because he committed adultery.
In fact, were you to check my article on it, you’d note that I said:
Please note that the comparison was made concerning their job performance, not their various dalliances.
This is an educated community here, Mr S: we recognize it when you make straw man arguments, and we don’t fall for the bait.
The Dana who is responsible for what he said, not what Brad S thinks he meant (3e4784) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:48 am“He was just not going to go to work.”
That’s it right there.
Juan (bd4b30) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:50 am“We don’t support corrupt slimeballs like the democrats always do. Where’s Dodd, Frank, Pelosi, Clinton, etc? Even Obama has far more scandal to his name than any GOP potential could survive.”
Just out of curiosity, under what succesful Presidential administration was the term “sleaze factor” entered into the national vocabulary? And did it hurt this particular administration, despite the attempts by some to “head for the tall grass?”
Hint: We haven’t canonized the guy yet, but that’s only because conservative connections to the Pope are a little disconnected at the moment.
Brad S (9f6740) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:52 amYep. As credible as DCSCA. Ignore him.
Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:58 amHoly Jeebus. Brad S follows the exact same pattern every time. Party and person ahead of principle.
JD (cd825f) — 6/26/2009 @ 11:01 amHe should stick with his woman and tell South Carolina to see if they can do better than him.
At the end of Bulgakov’s “The Master and Margarita” a man who has fallen under the spell of a witch is freed by the Devil and allowed to go back to his life as part of Stalin’s nomenklatura. He spends the rest of his life saying, “I should have stayed with her”.
nk (d78a32) — 6/26/2009 @ 11:03 amFrankly, I’d never heard of Mark Sanford prior to his statement that he would reject stimulus funds. I fail to see how he’s “the face of the GOP” for that one thing.
Phil Smith (1cf25d) — 6/26/2009 @ 11:05 amYeah, but Brad was kind enough to explain that the GOP does not abide its sleezeballs.
And that’s so fundamental. Our government is so powerful and has no term limits for many powerful positions. So corruption will always be some kind of a problem. Either party will have to deal with humans being human.
Sanford isn’t a good example of that, because all he really did was skip work for a while (which is unacceptable, but not horrendous). But we see good examples of that on both sides of the aisle. Sadly, with the democrats it’s the same people getting far worse each time. Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Rangel would all have been tossed out at the ‘skipped work for a week’ stage under the GOP.
Consider if Sarah Palin attended a white supremacist church for 20 years. No chance that would fly. The democrats don’t mind that from Obama.
Because we don’t stick together as a party. We don’t even care about the GOP. we just care about the country. Democrats like Brad think this is some kind of ‘contest’ that they are ‘winning’. They take personal pride when they ‘score a point’… for example when republicans get mad at Sanford.
Juan (bd4b30) — 6/26/2009 @ 11:12 am#43- Uhhh, both parties do. Unfortunately, it was the GOP that cultivated a strategy of ‘family values’ and set itself up as the party of higher morals than the other guys and then continually trips over its own standards. It’s quite a list. Lest you forget Randy ‘Duke’ Cunningham, blindly defended by many local constituents, in the face of his crimes and convictions, because he was an aviator who simply strayed off course. The party machines keep coughing up these hairball candidates to run and support them with party funds as special interest donations float them as well. And that list has names from all sides and we’re all tired of it.
Whether Sanford resigns over a personal affair is still his to make but in time may be out of his hands. If the people of South Carolina, a very conservative state, feel he’s no longer effective, they may push to shove him aside. State Democrats will feign outrage but the DNC will most likely be pleased if he stays. A swell target for hypocrisy. Unless he broke some laws or used public funds, he has a basis to stay anyway, legally, and coast through the rest of his term. Morally is another question. If the RNC makes exceptions for his transgressions, it’s just another torpedo to the very values it touts as their special moral high ground. From a political POV, I’m all for keeping him in office as another magnificent target for conservative hypocrisy. But personally, I don’t feel that’s in the best interests of the people of South Carolina. In any event, any aspirations he harbored for national office are finished. Dum. Dum. Dum… and another bites the dust.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 6/26/2009 @ 11:35 am#47- Frankly, I’d never heard of Mark Sanford prior to his statement that he would reject stimulus funds. I fail to see how he’s “the face of the GOP” for that one thing. Stephen Colbert, also from SC, ‘profiled’ Sanford on his show, comparing him to sheets of blank paper and manila envelopes taped to beige walls.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 6/26/2009 @ 11:43 am“You’re angry because Gov. Sanford became human…”
If it’s human to cheat on your wife, does that mean that’s it inhuman, if you don’t?
😉
Dave Surls (44ee22) — 6/26/2009 @ 12:39 pmJeez, fellas, we have about 300,000,000 people in America and only 58 states, we should be able to come up with 58 governors who don’t lie, don’t break their vows, don’t put satisfying their own lusts ahead of everything else, and don’t betray those who should be dearest to them.
I don’t think that’s too much to ask.
Dave Surls (44ee22) — 6/26/2009 @ 12:45 pmIf he thought that he could get away with being gone that long and NOT telling his staff, then he needs to resign. That shows a complete lack of intelligence. The whole moral issue to me is irrelevant because the real point is he left the people of SC without a governor. How would his staff get in touch with him if something horrible happened in the state? Liking himself to King David – HOW ARROGANT!!!! I think that infuriates me most of all.
Kristi (0b25e0) — 6/26/2009 @ 12:49 pm“Consider if Sarah Palin attended a white supremacist church for 20 years. No chance that would fly.”
Considering the cluck-clucking that Sarah got for Bristol’s pregnancy (and for having the temerity to keep her young son), I’m surprised you folks “who refuse to get your hands dirty” haven’t run her out of the party yet.
Then again, you don’t dare do it.
Brad S (5709e3) — 6/26/2009 @ 12:52 pm“Uhhh, both parties do. Unfortunately, it was the GOP that cultivated a strategy of ‘family values’ and set itself up as the party of higher morals than the other guys and then continually trips over its own standards”
Uhhh, DCSCA, I’d take you more seriously on this issue if you and your fellow Dems weren’t lying in the weeds, chomping at the bit to take some Evangelicals away from the GOP yourself. BTW, wasn’t that a nice little joke Sarah made about her son’s service in Iraq on Colbert a couple weeks back? Wonder if Colbert is more willing to go after her because of that?
Brad S (5709e3) — 6/26/2009 @ 12:55 pmJuan: I don’t speak for everyone on the left, but I do come from that side of the aisle.
I think Gov. Sanford should be impeached.
I don’t care about his affair. That’s between him, his mistress, and his wife. It’s their problem to work out; it’s none of my business one way or the other.
I do, however, care about the fact that he disappeared for five days after misleading his staff about where he would be. He had a responsibility to the people of his state to ensure that someone was in charge during his absence: either by providing an emergency contact so that his staff, or the Lt. Governor, or the chief officer of the legislative body could get in touch with him in an emergency; or, if he didn’t want to do that, by deputizing the Lt. Governor to exercise the executive power of the state while he was gone.
He failed to do either.
Had there been a serious crisis in South Carolina in the interim, who would have been in charge? How much time would have been spent figuring that out instead of dealing with the crisis?
This isn’t acceptable behavior in a Governor.
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 6/26/2009 @ 12:56 pmBarney Frank, Chris Dodd, Rangel
Skipping town for a week while you are a legislator is not comparable to skipping town for a week while you are the chief executive officer of your state.
Doing it while you are a legislator is obnoxious and insulting to the people. Doing it while you are the chief executive is a complete abrogation of your responsibilities and actually threatens the security of your state.
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 6/26/2009 @ 12:59 pmLol… DSCSA says it’s only the GOP that has a family values platform. Of course that’s a giant load of crap. Obama, that guy who compared gay marriage to incest in a recent legal brief, brings up family and says ‘jesus’ far more often than any other president in recent memory.
It’s just that the democrats have their hypocrisy covered up like mad.
Aphrael, you completely missed the point. And you’re crazy if you think Rangel, Frank, and Dodd’s crimes are actually LESS than Sanford’s.
Juan (bd4b30) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:02 pm#54- They cant. Palin appeals to the core base and draws crowds and cash into the party coffers. Sanford drew yawns. To run her to the side of the party road toward the 2012 nomination is to label her another Dan Quayle and admit McCain’s and the RNC judgement was again in error. Frankly, if she boned up on topics and showed some depth, she’d generate broader appeal and could very well develop into a formidable opponent. Especially if events break the GOP way. But all signs point against that.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:04 pmAphrael, you completely missed the point.
Perhaps. What was the point, then?
And you’re crazy if you think Rangel, Frank, and Dodd’s crimes are actually LESS than Sanford’s..
I don’t think Gov. Sanford has committed a crime – dereliction of duty by a Governor is not a criminal act.
I think he’s demonstrated that he can’t be trusted to do the job the people elected him to do, and that it’s unsafe for him to remain in that position.
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:06 pmPatrick, we are having a load of DCSCA dumped on us over here. Could you do something ? Please ?
Mike K (2cf494) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:07 pm#58- Then by all means, ‘stay the course.’ Let’s see how many elections the incredible shrinking GOP wins in the times to come.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:07 pm“But all signs point against that.”
At some point, DCSCA, you have to keep your based fired up beyond “oh, look at the stupid Republicans.” You can’t rely on the travails of John Ensign or Mark Sanford that much longer.
Brad S (5709e3) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:09 pm#61- GOP whine? Aged and a little bitter, it seems.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:09 pmBrad S: for what it’s worth, I think it’s completely inappropriate to draw conclusions about Republicans in general from the behavior of Gov. Sanford. The man’s problems seem to be entirely the product of his own personality and the way he interacts with the people around him; they are an individual problem.
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:12 pm“I don’t care about his affair.”
I care. If he’s willing to stab his wife in the back, I’m pretty sure he’d stab me in the back without a moment’s hesitation.
I don’t want people who think like that having any power over me.
I want politicians who put the interest of others ahead off their own interests.
Dave Surls (44ee22) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:14 pm#63- If Palin showed some depth, I truly feel she’d be a formidable opponent. She has the basics down well and the superficial stuff all in her favor. Her family issues are irrelevant, really, unless she keeps injecting them into the fray, and then they’re fair game. Reagan’s family wasn’t all bliss and he was elected repeatedly with the help of crossover voters. Personally, I havent written her off yet. Three years is thirty lifetimes in politics and if Richard Nixon could remake himself, Palin can.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:16 pm#65- That’s true and a wider tragedy. There’s a lot of descent GOP pols who are getting smeared by the mud of scandal only due to party label. And if they voice strong objections of any kind, they’re condemned for grazing off the reservation and threatened with being purged from the party.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:19 pmI do not think that the International Man of Parody knows the meaning of the word hypocrisy.
JD (e5f48b) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:21 pmI do agree that Palin will need to show some policy depth to impress me. I think it’s funny that a hardcore democrat ‘hasn’t written her off yet’.
She’s a hell of a lot more deep than Obama. Her resume is that she’s actually cleaned up Alaska’s government and handled leadership tasks well. But that doesn’t really matter. The democrats would have picked Hillary if they cares about that stuff. Of course, Obama’s awful treatment of Hillary and Palin is a big reason why Palin is so powerful. It’s like supporting Rosa Parks… Rosa was a nice and brave lady, but really supporting her was about opposing monstrous democrats. Palin support today is entirely about opposing jerks. If she actually writes a couple of books or gives a couple of great speeches, she’s going to be a landslide winner.
Juan (bd4b30) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:27 pm#55- Uhhh, DCSCA, I’d take you more seriously on this issue if you and your fellow Dems weren’t lying in the weeds, chomping at the bit to take some Evangelicals away from the GOP yourself. BTW, wasn’t that a nice little joke Sarah made about her son’s service in Iraq on Colbert a couple weeks back? Wonder if Colbert is more willing to go after her because of that?
I dont sense the Democrats have a serious strategy for wooing Evangelicals over, especially with the party stand on abortion. Waste of resources. They’re the conservative core. They’ve got fresher generations to appeal to and that strategy seems to be working. Democrats won and hold majorities now so hiding in the weeds isnt realistic. As to Colbert? Well, he’s an equal opportunity lampooner. If it’ll get laughs, he’ll do the jokes. His schtick show no signs of waning.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:30 pmOnly after john Conyers resigns.
Oh yeah, Barney Frank had male prostitutes running out of his office, he should quit.
Bill Clinton needs to refuse his pension.
Then we talk about Sanford.
smarty (6d832b) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:42 pmThe International Man of Parody has started to hit on his memes again – Palin, Colbert … Boss Limbaugh, Newt, et al are sure to follow.
JD (e5f48b) — 6/26/2009 @ 1:51 pmWhat in the hell was that ‘boss limbaugh’ crap about, anyway? I think Obama said something off hand about Rush and convinced the world of trolls that Rush was in charge of something. Much to Rush’s delight I am sure. Can you imagine if the right clung to every word Bush said like that?
Of course, the truth is that perhaps all, certainly many, governors spend a lot of time not doing their job just as Sanford did. Who’s going to stop them?
I wonder exactly how many responsibilities could be handled by someone else in South Carolina and how many couldn’t. I imagine there were a couple of things only sanford can do, and he indeed deserves the flak, but it’s amazing that anyone would consider this serious potatoes relative to other things democrats and republicans have been caught doing.
It’s not even the worst scandal of the week. Look at Conyers passing on the ACORN probe in order to get his wife off easy on a bibery conviction.
Juan (bd4b30) — 6/26/2009 @ 2:16 pmSanford is one of many politicians who may find that the power of lust trumps the lust for power when one’s gonads rule one’s neurons.He also shares with many a complete absence of shame.
EJ (37d9c7) — 6/26/2009 @ 2:21 pmThis is one of those things…It isn’t my business. So he had something on the side. Most men do. Just because they don’t control their penis very well doesn’t mean they can’t do a good job in other aspects of their lives. Why is it ok to be judging people like this? Let his wife handle that part of it.
Merriam (1c82cf) — 6/26/2009 @ 3:20 pmNo, most men do not. Neither do most women for that matter.
Leaving your job as the Chief Executive of an entire State is not doing a good job. What he was doing while gone is less important than his disappearing.
Most of us are not judging him on his infidelity, we’re judging his job performance and integrity. That’s our job as citizens and voters.
Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 6/26/2009 @ 3:29 pmCharacter matters.
When someone says that “it’s just sex,” and “everybody does it,” they are selling something.
If a person doesn’t pay their taxes, should they hold political office? If not, why not?
And why is honoring a marital vow less important than paying taxes?
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 6/26/2009 @ 3:34 pmBut Brad THINKS THAT YOU’RE ALL TRAITORS, AND STOP BEING SNIDE ABOUT PALIN’S HILLBILLY WEDLOCK SCANDAL! I AM THE ONLY TRUE BELIEVER HERE! KNEEL AND BOW DOWN TO YOUR LORD AND HIGH EXECUTIONER!
Dmac (f7884d) — 6/26/2009 @ 4:02 pmMost men do.
I have a higher opinion of men than that.
Remember, if you say that most men do (have something on the side), then you must also say that most women do, too – because exactly who do you think men are having it on the side with? (Larry Craig and Barney Frank excepted).
I’m always amused when women with a cynical view of men leave that integral part out of the equation…
Dana (8d88ef) — 6/26/2009 @ 4:08 pm“So he had something on the side. Most men do.”
Not me.
I’ve seen the wife wield a cast iron skillet.
Dave Surls (44ee22) — 6/26/2009 @ 4:26 pmShould Sanford resign? Yes. His behavior has not shown him to be a man who has his priorities right. He is out of order and that’s very bad for a leader. The most honourable thing left for him to do now is to resign. He has embarrassed himself, his family, his state and his party. He should resign.
The Emperor (1b037c) — 6/26/2009 @ 4:35 pmSanford missed the new GOP instructional video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBKuRK1wD1A
Richard (4673a7) — 6/26/2009 @ 4:49 pmI think politicians – on both sides – suffer from this arrogance that they won’t get caught. We’ve had plenty of examples, from Clinton and McGreevye to Foley and Craig. You’d think they’d learn from past examples. But they don’t seem to.
JEA (1ec097) — 6/26/2009 @ 6:23 pm#61- GOP whine? Aged and a little bitter, it seems.
That’s rude.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 6/26/2009 @ 8:42 pmStatus quo for him.
Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 6/26/2009 @ 8:54 pmStash, I certainly agree that him abandoning his post for some drama queen fling with his email soul mate is completely ridiculous and unacceptable.
but we have to judge him relative to other potential governors. I think New York has shown us that replacing a cheater usually gets you a cheater who is probably also incompetent. I grant you aren’t wanting Sanford gone just for cheating, but still… I think he did a good job as governor aside from no-showing for a while. I just wonder how many governors really do show up consistently.
Not to bring Palin up again, and I have no problem with her, but she was out of Alaska for quite a while last year.
Juan (bd4b30) — 6/26/2009 @ 8:58 pmJuan,
I’m not really hot-n-heavy for him to resign. I think he should, but as I mentioned earlier, I want all the scoundrels out. There really aren’t many in office right now that are serving the people. To me, no-showing is more than an “aside”, it’s a core issue. I like Palin and she certainly didn’t leave her duties uncovered while campaigning. She also doesn’t put “Party-first” like too many others do. I’ll grant that Sanford isn’t as bad as many others, including some likely to replace him. That doesn’t make him good enough to stay. I really don’t care about it enough to work at getting him to resign, I just answered the question posed in the post and said I thought he should. So should Snowe, Spector, Reid, Pelosi, Kennedy, and dozens of others. They won’t, and Sanford probably won’t either.
Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 6/26/2009 @ 9:13 pmYeah, that’s a reasonable position to take. Sanford is below the acceptable standard for his station… but then again so many politicians are.
You say “she certainly didn’t leave her duties uncovered” about Palin. I’m glad to hear it, but not sure how that is. Granted, it’s not possible for ust o get good presidents if we don’t pull governors and such away from demanding jobs to campaign and I don’t see this as a big deal. I guess these days you only need a phone and a computer to do a good job, and unlike Sanford, Palin probably had good communication.
Juan (bd4b30) — 6/26/2009 @ 9:22 pmAnd her Lieutenant Governor, staff, family, etc… all knew where she was, how to contact her, and what to do if something came up. Big difference.
Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 6/26/2009 @ 9:39 pm#85- IMHO, so was the whine that precipitated it in the first place.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 6/26/2009 @ 9:41 pmI don’t have much sympathy for Sanford. He apparently does have a good background or track record politically — although I don’t know if he actually may be a closeted squish (aka, “centrist”) — but his flaking out on everyone really irks me.
As for hypocrisy on the right, I’d say there is far more of that on the left, namely the phenomenon of limousine liberalism.
And because Democrats/liberals are into tolerance for tolerance’s sake, and certainly because of their tendency to treat politics/government as though it were an altar to be prayed at (ie, the Church of Socialism or Do-Gooder-Feelings), corruption is more likely to end up breeding and multiplying in settings dominated by such people.
Mark (411533) — 6/26/2009 @ 9:44 pmPost #91: People unclear on the concept of behavior in someone else’s “house,” when the “owner” of that house chides them.
Keep it up, slick. Speak truth to power. The sooner you annoy the crap out of Patterico with your repeated nonsense, the sooner you will be banned.
And you can guess how unpopular your banning will be around here. Right?
So don’t bother to insult me. Take it out on Patterico. Keep it up! You da man!
Eric Blair (acade1) — 6/26/2009 @ 9:53 pm#93- He’s been contacted regarding posted threats– and posts. Best you not worry yourself with it. But thanks for your concern.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:06 pm“I like Palin and she certainly didn’t leave her duties uncovered while campaigning. She also doesn’t put “Party-first” like too many others do.”
Yeah, she’s so non-Party first. Right before she goes and campaigns for the likes of Saxby Chambliss. And right before she endorses someone like Rick Perry for reelection (to a 3rd term!) as TX governor.
You have to stop it with this “I’m against homerism” nonsense. It really messes you up, and makes you fail to see the forest for the trees.
Brad S (5709e3) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:07 pmPersonally, I want you to quit insulting people and be pleasant. But that ain’t going to happen. You are just a troll, picking fights. Dana, one of the clearest thinking posters here, pegged you quite accurately.
The interesting part is how you feel you are the victim, after you have gone after a variety of people during the past several days.
As I say: unclear on the concept. If Patterico likes you here, great.
But I think he is one of the few, if so.
If I am wrong, good for you.
Eric Blair (acade1) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:11 pmOh, and so far as threats, you have quite a short memory. Patterico doesn’t.
Eric Blair (acade1) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:12 pm#96/#97- You may very well think that. I could not possibly comment.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:21 pmBrad S,
I don’t understand what you mean by “homerism”, so I really can’t answer whether it’s nonsense or not, or whether it applies. As far as having to “stop” because you say so… not likely. I’m as likely to take advice or direction from DCSCA.
Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:22 pmTo beat everyone to the rush:
If only.
Eric Blair (acade1) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:25 pmOkay, wiki says:
Not any clearer how you mean it. Or how I’m against it… or for it… or doing it. Never mind, the answer won’t really matter.
Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:34 pmPalin’s problem is she lacks gravitas. She’s a swell draw for the base and tosses red meat out to the base like it was feeding time at the zoo. I genuinely think if she boned up on two or three key issues to some depth, she’d be capable of drawing in moderates and independents. She has the basics down and is more media savvy and telegenic than most candidates and more than HC could ever hope to be. Most moderates would entertain a Sarah Palin personna with a HC intellect as presidential timber. Three years is a long time and I wouldn’t write her off yet, but if she tries to run in 2012 using a 2008 playbook, she’ll be Dan Quayled quickly. I can see her running 2016, slightly grayer, wiser, and still younger than HC, and give her a run for her money.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:35 pm#100- “Eric”, give it a rest. Best you not worry yourself with it. It’s really not your concern. But thanks for your interest.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:38 pmI nominate this response as the new answer to everything DCSCA posts. Every time he comments, someone should just cut&paste this in answer. Nothing else. It’s all he deserves.
Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:42 pmKeep it up, champ. We all know your game now.
Eric Blair (acade1) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:42 pmYou have to know that wasn’t directed at you Stashiu3.
Eric Blair (acade1) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:44 pmI know, but he’s a dishonest, condescending, serial fabulist who cut&pastes his talking points, ad homs, and irrelevant distractions on almost every thread. People should ignore him, but since they can’t, I think that response will let him know exactly how unwanted his presence is.
Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:47 pm#95- Brad, they want President Obama to fail. And Palin appeals to the core base. That’s fine but as long as that’s all she does, she’ll never be taken seriously enough to rise to higher office. Even a senatorial run would be a stretch today. Only if Palin broadens her appeal to moderates and indys does she have a chance. If the breaks go the GOP way over the next few years, there’s a chance. And to do that, she’ll have to take positions less appealing to core supporters. I think she has the skill set to do that. I don’t think she has the courage to try it yet. Time will tell.
DCSCA (9d1bb3) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:49 pmOh, you meant your 10:42 comment. I know my friend, but DCSCA’s beyond annoying now. Although if your comment had been meant for me, I would have been flattered since it would have had an entirely different meaning. 😉
Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:50 pmNo, no, Stashiu3. I am the condescending one, remember?
It’s just a game, as you say.
Back to the topic at hand. I don’t know quite how to deal with the crop of deceitful politicians on both sides of the aisle. It’s a truly bipartisan problem. Maybe term limits would help.
I think if a politician simply said that their private life was their business, and no one else’s, that would be one thing. But I think most politicians know better. Personally, I think that if a person will lie and cheat regarding their marriage, I cannot trust them with affairs (!) of state.
Yeah, that sounds all Victorian. But we don’t think that people who take bribes should be in public office, right?
Where to draw the line?
Sanford went beyond the pale not just with his family, but with his job. Had he said he was going on vacation, and informed his next in succession, that would be another thing.
Clearly, the guy has issues to deal with more important than being governor. Sad stuff.
Eric Blair (acade1) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:52 pmP.S. #109: that made me laugh! True enough!
Eric Blair (acade1) — 6/26/2009 @ 10:54 pmI’m all for a politician who says, “None of your business, next question.” If the question is intrusive, unimportant, or a gotcha-type, most people will see that and be fine with the answer. If the politician is just avoiding an answer to a valid question, people will see that as well and vote/act accordingly.
Of course, substituting for “None of your business” would be fine with me. I kind of like “Bite me, next question.” Or something even stronger. YMMV 😉
Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 6/26/2009 @ 11:00 pmI never liked Dukakis much, but remember that awful question the press guy asked him when he was running for President? Would he oppose the death penalty, even if someone murdered his own wife?
He answered consistently with his beliefs, and looked very bad on television.
What Dukakis should have said is “How dare you ask such a rude and thoughtless question, designed solely to be controversial? Have you no shame? What is wrong with you folks in the press?”
Although “bite me” is more succinct.
Anyway, I don’t know if he would have won the election, but he would have done much better. I think most Americans have long been tired of the MSM.
Eric Blair (acade1) — 6/26/2009 @ 11:05 pmLetting himself do that photo-op with the tank helmet was almost as bad… but yeah, I think most people would appreciate a little contempt for what has been passing for journalism.
Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 6/26/2009 @ 11:12 pmI mean, the incredible conceit of some journalist quizzing a politician—without being willing to be quizzed her or himself—is something that many folks think is pretty outrageous.
I like to see politicians quizzed. But I think that journalists and pundits who hold forth should also be quizzed.
And yes, the Dukakis photo op was a bad idea. Like John Kerry in the cleanroom suit or windsurfing.
Eric Blair (acade1) — 6/26/2009 @ 11:15 pmQuizzing them is fine and legitimate questions should be answered or pols should pay the price at election time. I’ve just never understood how being a public figure automatically means someone gives up their privacy. If Angelina Jolie or Madonna don’t want to talk about something, they shouldn’t have to worry that someone is going to hack their email, tap their phone, or harass them on the street. Same goes for politicians, lottery winners, or sports figures. They should be allowed to retain as much privacy as they like and suffer any consequences if they’re too under-exposed for a fickle public. The press is far too intrusive.
Stashiu3 (ed6467) — 6/26/2009 @ 11:21 pmAgreed. After all, some Presidents have argued that their children should be off limits. And we see how well that worked out. Some members of the press are vultures.
When I wrote about “quizzing,” I meant on political issues, not their personal lives.
Unless the press doesn’t mind the same thing being done to them….
Eric Blair (acade1) — 6/26/2009 @ 11:35 pmMerriam wrote:
You know, I used to think that the Democratic meme that President Clinton was impeached over sex was just a diversionary tactic, to make it seem like a little thing, when he was impeached for perjury, obstruction of justice and the failure, as our chief law enforcement officer, to obey the law. I used to think that they really did know and understand this, but simply needed a political argument to defend his scummy butt.
But apparently I was wrong. Governor Sanford is a Republican, being criticized by conservatives for abandoning his job, and there are still people who can’t see that this isn’t trying to dump him because of adultery. The Governor of South Carolina up and disappears for five days, and yes, he disappeared for five days because of sex, but the criticism is over his failure to do his job. It would be no different if he disappeared for five days because he was passed out drunk.
Is that really so difficult to understand?
The Dana who is shaking his head in disbelief (3e4784) — 6/27/2009 @ 5:14 amJuan misses the point:
Yup, she sure was; I don’t imagine that there are any governors who never travel out-of-state. But the difference is that Governor Palin and 48 other governors notified their state governments that they’d be out of state, and had the proper state government machinery in place and running when they left. If Mrs Palin was needed, her location was known and all of the necessary commu8nication equipment was available.
That’s the part Governor Sanford omitted.
The Dana who is shaking his head in disbelief (3e4784) — 6/27/2009 @ 5:21 amExactly, Plus the fact that were was a food and fuel crisis, was a strong reason why she didn’t attend CPAC this year. Brilliant wisdom like this ‘cap and trade’ bill, ‘inflating tires’ as the key energy policy, watching the ‘debate’ or Iranian protesters, being shot down in thestreets,
narciso (996c34) — 6/27/2009 @ 6:43 amsurrendering our missile defense capacity, taking over auto companies, we need much less of that.
“The Governor of South Carolina up and disappears for five days, and yes, he disappeared for five days because of sex, but the criticism is over his failure to do his job. It would be no different if he disappeared for five days because he was passed out drunk. Is that really so difficult to understand?”
And this is how you lose the argument, The Dana Who Refuses To Get His Hands Dirty. About 97.35% of the public aren’t really concerned with the practical aspects of Gov. Sanford’s actions. They’re only concerned about two things:
1. With whom did he do his side action.
2. Whether or not the GOP and fellow conservative travellers will stand behind him.
People see through your intellecutal smokescreen. They KNOW you want Gov. Sanford sent away because they KNOW folks like you don’t like bad press.
Brad S (5709e3) — 6/27/2009 @ 7:03 amAnd they KNOW you are a douchenozzle, Brad. They KNOW it. Because you like to argue with positions not held, or attribute positions and motivations to people that they have not held / do not hold. That, and you are just a jerk. It is who you are.
JD (42a8c3) — 6/27/2009 @ 7:32 am“People see through your intellecutal smokescreen.”
Brad S. – The strawmen you have raised about Sanford and Palin are burning brightly. Where do you you get your material?
daleyrocks (718861) — 6/27/2009 @ 8:37 amReally, JD, is calling me a “douchenozzle” all you have? I would love to see the sales job that proves that a majority of folks polled supposedly care about the job duty aspects of Gov. Sanford’s affair.
But then, you’d just rather call me “mendoucheous,” than actually have to address that point.
Brad S (5709e3) — 6/27/2009 @ 8:42 amI’d be willing to bet dollars to donuts that Governor Rod was out of his office for more than 5 days in a row more than once. The guy just stayed home. He never went to Springfield except for a photo op, and he barely ever went to the State of Illinois building in Chicago.
carlitos (84409d) — 6/27/2009 @ 9:13 am“I’d be willing to bet dollars to donuts that Governor Rod was out of his office for more than 5 days in a row more than once.”
carlitos – You might be right, but we know he was in very regular touch with Obama’s people.
daleyrocks (718861) — 6/27/2009 @ 9:29 amBrad S – When you start arguing with actual people and the actual positions held by the actual people, maybe responses to you would warrant more intellectual rigor than calling you a douchenozzle. Until such point in time, you will be responded to with all due respect.
JD (b1f7fc) — 6/27/2009 @ 10:41 amFrom my perspective, the issue is quite simple. Rightly or wrongly, he has lost a substantial number of people who are willing to support him, place confidence in him, and trust him. A leader needs as many people believing in him or her as possible.
As for resignation, http://www.tinyurl.com/n3vlg3
Reggie Greene / The Logistician (66904c) — 7/9/2009 @ 9:19 pm