Gov. Sanford press conf....

[gator]

Now that was reality TV. The guy messed up for sure, but I like that he owned it.....big time. Got to give him props for being so open about it.

[zilla]

Yeah right he really owned it. Lied to his staff, lied to the people of South Carolina, and lied to his wife and kids. Sign of a standup guy right there. Glad after all this time he decided to finally tell the truth, but only because he was caught in the Atlanta airport.

The real question is, who is next? My money is on Sean Hannity.

[Mike Furley]

I'm sorry, but I have a hard time trying to give any props at all to a guy who behaved as galactically stupid as this guy did.

I try not to be judgmental about the marital infidelity part, but its the whole "whereabouts unknown on Father's Day weekend" and what I suppose was his arrogant belief in thinking he could keep this thing private that I have a hard time getting past.

You simply can't be a conservative Republican seeking national prominence and expect the skeletons in your closet won't become public knowledge. My conspiracy theory leanings suspect this was exposed when it was to move public scrutiny away from the Democrats railroading Card Check and Cap & Tax through this Friday. Nicely done.

[The Michigan Man]

Yeah right he really owned it. Lied to his staff, lied to the people of South Carolina, and lied to his wife and kids. Sign of a standup guy right there. Glad after all this time he decided to finally tell the truth, but only because he was caught in the Atlanta airport.

The real question is, who is next? My money is on Sean Hannity.

I must have missed it, what political office was Hannity elected to? Or do you just dislike him so you randomly, inexplicably shoehorned him into a discussion where the mention of him is illogical and pointless?

[Mich97c]

I have no sympathy for a cheater. It's not that hard to not cheat on your wife yet these high ranking officals cannot keep it in their pants. The only reason he came clean with this is because he got caught.

[zilla]

I must have missed it, what political office was Hannity elected to? Or do you just dislike him so you randomly, inexplicably shoehorned him into a discussion where the mention of him is illogical and pointless?


Hannity is just another "family values" d-bag that runs his mouth but in real life I am sure he is nothing but a hypocrite. Similiar to you I am sure.

[The Michigan Man]

Hannity is just another "family values" d-bag that runs his mouth but in real life I am sure he is nothing but a hypocrite. Similiar to you I am sure.

So you like drawing conclusions on matters when you have a complete lack of evidence? You just call people hypocrites because you don't like their political view and speculate that they must be immoral because of their party affiliation? That isn’t a way to build credibility.

You are obvious, predictable, and lazy. Hopefully your life in the "real world" is guided by logic and common sense, not on the emotional and childlike whims that guide your nonsensical posts in this forum.

[zilla]

Take a look at how many of your friends on the right have been caught cheating on their partners. One after another, and that includes Bill O'Reily having to payoff his admin to not play the tapes. All talked "family values" and all were caught in a lie. So is it a stretch to say Hannity is next? Hell no.

Now on to the people on this website. Most are pro bombing the crap out of every single country that says anything bad about the U.S. but 99% of them have never done their part, shut their mouth, and actually put on a uniform.

Mike Furley is a perfect example as well. He wants to tell people in Africa to follow the church teachings but has not done the same.

[The Michigan Man]

Take a look at how many of your friends on the right have been caught cheating on their partners. One after another, and that includes Bill O'Reily having to payoff his admin to not play the tapes. All talked "family values" and all were caught in a lie. So is it a stretch to say Hannity is next? Hell no.

Now on to the people on this website. Most are pro bombing the crap out of every single country that says anything bad about the U.S. but 99% of them have never done their part, shut their mouth, and actually put on a uniform.

Mike Furley is a perfect example as well. He wants to tell people in Africa to follow the church teachings but has not done the same.

The only think that O'Reilly and Hannity have in common (besides the Irish names) is that they are conservative TV personalities. Painting with a broad brush is lazy. The left is littered with leaders who have preached morality and then got caught with their pants down as well.

Also, I am a military vet - however, I don't think that makes me uniquely qualified to discuss world military events. All American citizens have the right to freely speak about anything they wish, that is a right that the US military protects. Always fear people who are quick to censor others, it is not a very evolved philosophy.

[zilla]

MM Wrote:

"as you liberals have never met a tyrant that you weren't enamored with."


Would you like to continue with the painting with a broad brush and being lazy comments? You have dozens of posts I can pull up showing your skill at it.

[The Michigan Man]

MM Wrote:

"as you liberals have never met a tyrant that you weren't enamored with."


Would you like to continue with the painting with a broad brush and being lazy comments? You have dozens of posts I can pull up showing your skill at it.

There is a distinction between generalizing about a political group based upon the behavior of its members and singling out a specific person and (without any evidence) assuming that that person has low moral character simply because of his / her political affiliation.

[zilla]

There is a distinction between generalizing about a political group based upon the behavior of its members and singling out a specific person and (without any evidence) assuming that that person has low moral character simply because of his / her political affiliation.

generalizing = painting with a broad brush = lazy.

Should we continue?

[The Michigan Man]

generalizing = painting with a broad brush = lazy.

Should we continue?

(Quit asking me "should we continue", because the answer will always be "yes".)

Is it lazy to say that all humans have two arms, even though there is a very small, statistically insignificant population of humans that have one arm or no arms?

If one can only speak from a position of absolute, 100% certainty, than there is nothing that can be spoken of.

[gator]

Hey, I have my own particular prejudices against cheaters (besides it being a SIN) since my parents broke up over similar circumstances. I really dislike cheaters. I'm simply trying to make two points:

1. Did you see the drama in that press conference yesterday? Man, I haven't seen any show on TV that matched that sucker. If TV programming was that good, I would watch more of it.

2. Comparitively speaking, let's look at how this guy handled it vs Bill Clinton or any other politician (or celebrity personality) that's been caught with his pants down around his ankles. It's still deny, deny, deny.....then maybe some admission but say as little as possible. What this guy did yesterday was a whole new level of "transparency" for a politician. Heck, baseball players can't even admit they took steroids when everyone already knows they did. Most people who commit adultery only have to answer to their families and they can't admit their wrongdoing so openly; believe me I know from personal experience. This guy came out, admitted he made some monumental mistakes, didn't make excusses, and he seems willing to take the consequences. This guy's staff kept trying to get him out of that press conference, and that guy stood there taking additional questions. When someone makes a mistake, all anyone can really ask is that they own up to it. IMO, this guy did that. Does that make his behavior any less slezy? No, but those are some very personal issues between him and his family. Further, something tells me anyone here throwing stones at this guy probably has their own skeletons in the closet. How many of us would go on national TV and admit such poor judgement and dispicable personal behaviour.

P.S. Zilla, your comments are so typical. I could understand a comment where you just think the guy is scum, and that press conference doesn't change anything in your eyes. In typical fashion, you have to bring in the "how many of your friends on the right" comment. Liberals always try to make hay by holding conservatives to a higher moral standard, and then publicly execute them when they fail. And don't even bring in Clinton on this point; his impeachment wasn't about his affair but for lying to Congress. You know, lying about his affair (actually a list of them that were with staff members) even after it had been discovered. Complete admission is what this guy did that differs from Clinton, O'Reilly, and others. Just because conservatives are generally religious and believe in moral absolutes, it doesn't mean they are perfect. In fact, the first and most fundamental admission in being a Christian is that we are of the flesh and, by nature, are sinful beings.

"I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by Me." John 14:6.

Meaning that man is inherently sinful, and cannot be saved except through Christ. It is not about being perfect because no one can do that. It is our love of Christ that compels us to follow His commandments to the best of our ability. The funny thing is that God's commandments, as Sanford hinted to yesterday, are there to preserve us and bring true happiness to our lives, not tyranntical restrictions that many on the left see them to be. When we do fall short, however, we are supposed to
1) admit our sins
2) ask the forgiveness of others
3) repent
4) and recommit ourselves.

This guy has performed steps 1 and 2 to the extreme. I believe these are the most difficult steps to take. Time will tell if he rounds the bases on this thing, but I suspect that he is sincere.

[osusteve]

The reality is that it was republicans who first brought "family values" into politics and embraced far right vealots like Phyllis Schlaffly, Jerry Fallwell, and James Dobson. These people have no business being in the political arena. Personally, I wish churches would pay taxes like the rest of us.

The fact that Sanford or any other politician has an extramerital affair is of no concern to me. It would not influence my vote one way or the other if I had to choose between one guy who had had a previous affair (or divorce) and another guy who was believed to be clean. The only thing that is troublesome about the Sanford situation is that he left the country for 5+ days and nobody knew where he was or how to reach him. Hell, what if a massive hurricane was bearing down on South Carolina and the Governor was no where to be found? Ultimately, that will probably cost him his job.

[zilla]

"Liberals always try to make hay by holding conservatives to a higher moral standard"


You better believe it. When you run on a platform of "family values" and we are the party of morals, you can be sure the liberals are going pounce on everyone of you that lives the life of "do as I say, not as I do".

[gator]

The reality is that it was republicans who first brought "family values" into politics and embraced far right vealots like Phyllis Schlaffly, Jerry Fallwell, and James Dobson. These people have no business being in the political arena. Personally, I wish churches would pay taxes like the rest of us.

The fact that Sanford or any other politician has an extramerital affair is of no concern to me. It would not influence my vote one way or the other if I had to choose between one guy who had had a previous affair (or divorce) and another guy who was believed to be clean. The only thing that is troublesome about the Sanford situation is that he left the country for 5+ days and nobody knew where he was or how to reach him. Hell, what if a massive hurricane was bearing down on South Carolina and the Governor was no where to be found? Ultimately, that will probably cost him his job.

I agree that the fact republicans stand for family values is exactly the reason they get crucified for it by lefties when they mess up. I personally like family values, and I wish that everyone that stands for them lived up to them. I'm a realist though in that I understand people faulter. I believe in the ten commandments, but I break one every now and then. It's one thing to faulter on family values, and another to support policies that are an outright assault on them. When those that hold certain moral absolutes faulter on their beliefs, I think their following actions are very important. If this guy breaks it off with the other woman, and seriously recommits to his family (if his wife will have him back); I could cut him some slack.

As far as his public responsibilities, he should be held completely accountable to those he represents. I am not making any excuses for him there. He could have and should have left someone in charge regardless of where he was going. Of course, I'm not a voter in SC, so it's not up to me. IMO, I think the people of that state should be able to determine his fate - maybe some kind of referendum vote where his name is still on the ballot, or simply a yes or no on his continuence in office. If they put him back in, he could finish his term; if not he should resign immediately.

[gator]

"Liberals always try to make hay by holding conservatives to a higher moral standard"


You better believe it. When you run on a platform of "family values" and we are the party of morals, you can be sure the liberals are going pounce on everyone of you that lives the life of "do as I say, not as I do".

Whoa there, Nelly. You can certainly turn that sword of "do as I say, not as I do" on some of your own there. The party of "the rich should pay there fair share of taxes, transparency, and get rid of the lobbyist" -

Timothy Geithner, appointed Treasury secretary, hit with major tax evasion problems.

Nancy Killefer, who was to be appointed Obama’s “performance czar,” withdraws after it’s revealed she didn’t pay taxes on domestic help for over a year.

Tom Daschle, HHS nominee, withdraws over serious tax evasion problems and not before several questions about his role as a high-paid influence peddler have been raised.

Hillary Clinton is appointed Secretary of State despite concerns there’s still no real transparency about her husband’s foundation accepting large donations from international donors and foreign governments.

Geithner appoints as chief of staff Mark Patterson, a former Goldman Sachs lobbyist, who will be overseeing the Treasury’s $700 billion TARP program. Goldman has already received $10 billion of that money

Obama appoints an acting Secretary of Labor, because his nominee Hilda Solis used to be the treasurer of American Rights at Work. The ARW is a labor lobbying group and Solis’ position as treasurer there calls into question — again — Obama’s commitment to reducing the influence of lobbyists.

The administration waived its lobbying rules for William Lynn, who lobbied for a defense contractor as recently as last year, to serve as deputy Defense secretary.

[michAGAIN]

Breaking news: The Buckeye mascot has been found in a torrid relationship with a Macadamia nut in Australia.

[rickyleach]

gov sanford should be proud of himself , he just made the hall of shhhame for public figures, what a assshole..

[chriswebber]

Had he.....

lied under oath about it, he'd be accepted and given props for getting a BJ in the oval office.

hooked up with a male intern, he would have been a congressman

covered up the death of a girl ...

yet, he still lied to the people of sc and should resign. but the people that should be calling for his resignation shouldn't be any politicians.... Untill Clinton, Frank, and Kennedy are ran out of office. Both parties suck.

[Mike Furley]

Mike Furley is a perfect example as well. He wants to tell people in Africa to follow the church teachings but has not done the same.

Nice drive-by snipe at me, moron. You missed my point completely on that thread, though I'm not surprised as most liberals can't follow a philosophical argument past the first statement.

The original jackass who started the thread impugned all Catholics as evil because the Pope argued HIV/AIDS needed to be combatted by means other than those that went against Church doctrine.

The whole point of my response was in pointing out what exactly the Church doctrine entailed as well as explaining both the duty and the right of free expression for the Pope to articulate it....while acknowledging the Pope has no legal controlling authority over how the disease is actually combatted.

How you, I, the Pope, or anybody else acts is entirely irrelevant in articulating a point of view, you fascist prick. If I say murder is wrong, and then commit murder, does murder cease being wrong?? Grow up.

[rickyleach]

c/webber .well atleast we agree on the things that are really important, good post..

[Mich97c]

This asshole just admitted to having a slew of other affairs. What a f-ing douche bag.

[gator]

This asshole just admitted to having a slew of other affairs. What a f-ing douche bag.

Yeah, it's not looking good. This guy's career is toast. I initially thought this guy was just owning up and taking his lumps, a first for American politics. Now, I'm starting to think he is mentally derranged. If he's not, I hope he can straighten out his life and stop being a first rate scumbag.

[Wolvrin704]

Yeah, it's not looking good. This guy's career is toast. I initially thought this guy was just owning up and taking his lumps, a first for American politics. Now, I'm starting to think he is mentally derranged. If he's not, I hope he can straighten out his life and stop being a first rate scumbag.

As a Republican leaning voter I would hope that this guy owns up and resigns or he gets kicked out of office. We don't need guys like this in leadership of the party, its time to start cleaning house. If we want to be the party f morality then its time to do something about it and it starts in party primaries.