Gov. Mark Sanford of South Carolina, considered to be one the nation's most conservative GOPer's in elective office today, announces he's been cheating on his wife with a woman from Argentina. What is up with these guys?
Yep, down goes another one of the GOP's "rising stars" and so much for a 2012 bid to run for President.
I'd be interested to see what Sanford's stance is on marriage rights.
D'OHHH!!
People who really are ethical and scandal-free generally don't go around marketing themselves as being ethical and scandal-free.
LOL!!!
Sanford is one of these clowns that loves to "TEACH PEOPLE A LESSON" about "HOW THE WORLD REALLY WORKS".
And he does this?
Hope he gets taught a few lessons of his own. Man, I just can't feel any sympathy for these holier than thou moral majority asses that can't eat their own dog food.
What's with them?
My guess is a combination of profound sexual repression coupled with a fear and shame based childhood, laced with lots of dogma presented as truth, instead of mere faith. They literally CAN'T think this stuff through because the layers of shit they've consumed and accepted has polluted their minds to the point of being near useless.
In the end, they live this bizzare third person kind of life, where they block out all those "tendencies", remaking their own personal self-image out of what's left for an illusion of conformity and purity that has no basis in fact.
When caught, they just cry quietly somewhere.
LOL!!! That might just be the post of the year.
What goes around , comes around.
Seems as if the universe sets up temptations and challenges for those who disdain the very same temptations and challenges with regard to others.
What goes around , comes around.
This pardadox knows no political restrictions, as in the case of Al Gore. His infamous thesis and resultant Nobel Prize regarding Global Warming versus his old family home in Tennessee that is a monumental example of energy wasting at its very worst along with his fuelish Jet and multiple SUVs and so forth.
May they who cast the first stones be without Sin.
Mark Sanford has four boys, what a freakin' shame. This hypocrite also voted President Clinton when he was a member of the House Of Representatives in 1998.
>>May they who cast the first stones be without Sin
John 8...Jesus went across to Mount Olives, but he was soon back in the Temple again. Swarms of people came to him. He sat down and taught them. The religion scholars and Pharisees led in a woman who had been caught in an act of adultery. They stood her in plain sight of everyone and said, "Teacher, this woman was caught red-handed in the act of adultery. Moses, in the Law, gives orders to stone such persons. What do you say?" They were trying to trap him into saying something incriminating so they could bring charges against him. Jesus bent down and wrote with his finger in the dirt. They kept at him, badgering him. He straightened up and said, "The sinless one among you, go first: Throw the stone." Bending down again, he wrote some more in the dirt. Hearing that, they walked away, one after another, beginning with the oldest. The woman was left alone. Jesus stood up and spoke to her. "Woman, where are they? Does no one condemn you?" "No one, Master." "Neither do I," said Jesus. "Go on your way. From now on, don't sin." (Message Version)
"As a congressman, Sanford voted in favor of three of four articles of impeachment against President Bill Clinton, citing the need for “moral legitimacy.”"
Will Sanford have the moral legitimacy to resign? Or will he be impeached? It's no secret that the SC legislature is not a big fan of Sanford.
"May they who cast the first stones be without Sin"
Tell that to the conservative GOPer’s who use nearly every opportunity to impugn those who don’t follow their “family values” mantra but can’t seem to live up to it themselves. Remember Newt Gingrich during the Clinton Impeachment? I don’t have to tell you how many times Gingrich has failed as a husband and father. It’s hard to feel any compassion for a politician who loves quoting from the Bible but keeps his mistresses telephone numbers hidden away in his wallet – behind the faded pictures of his wife and kids. What do they leave in their wake; angry and humiliated wives, distraught children, and friends scratching their heads. Not to mention making a mockery of their faith. They are truly disgusting.
Ken said: "His infamous thesis and resultant Nobel Prize"
Infamous? Care to explain?
May they who cast the first stones be without Sin
Right on cue...
Where is Deane????
And so the circle jerk is complete.
I see the regular cast of assholes are here.
Sanford is one of these clowns that loves to "TEACH PEOPLE A LESSON" about "HOW THE WORLD REALLY WORKS".
I think that in an ironic way, he succeeded in teaching a lesson about "how the world really works": he demonstrated that the biggest loudmouths are the ones most likely to be full of BS.
I don't like the nihilism that seems to be promoted when high profile public figures like this screw up. In other words, I get the impression that some folks witness Sanford's infidelity, or Limbaugh's prescription drug addiction, and draw the conclusion that these public figures failed because the personal standards that they had claimed to uphold were too high for any normal person to live up to. Thus, the attitudes follow that it is likely that a person, during the course of his (or her) life will cheat on a partner or repeatedly misuse prescription medications, and that it is not that big a deal if these things happen because they are likely to happen.
I think that there are people out there who really do believe that it is important to be faithful to a spouse or partner (or alternately, to minimize one's impact on the environment). If these people really believe in these convictions, the best thing that they can do, to plagiarize an old Nike slogan, is to "Just Do It."
OK. But the hypocrisy of this doesn't bother you too, Liberal Agenda?
Cute name, by the way. Not as adorable as Chickenjuggler - but still funny. ( It was meant to be kind of funny, right? )
While I am a fan of justice or exposing stuff like this, I have a slightly different take on this than I used to; An excess of Republican " scandals " like this does not make me happy one bit. Maybe it's the Democrat in me that wants to find a way to show some grace ( something that Republicans would normally call " weak " or " lacking backbone " if I was applying it to any other situation other than a personal scandal ). The bottom line for me is that I would rather the truth be known that it being hidden. People that go out of their way to stake their claim - UNJUSTLY - on morality, only to have it shown that they are doing it too, deserve a little something extra in response. Sanford is getting his due now.
But come on, nothing beats Clinton getting a blow job in the oval office. Not yet, at least. Not even Al Gore's cited thing. Whatever that was about. And frankly, I do not want Clinton's scandal topped. Let's just leave that bar where it is - please.
“I don't like the nihilism that seems to be promoted when high profile public figures like this screw up”.
The GOP have themselves to blame. They place a premium on virtuousness and are not afraid to eviscerate their opposition when they fall short. People screw up and make mistakes. But when you sell yourself and your political party as being morally superiority to your opposition but cannot live up to the hype, you deserve a healthy dose of humility.
"I see the regular cast of assholes are here."
Since Republicans are assholes, I'm wondering:
Trixter, are you gonna put up with that?
Oh probably not.
Welcome "liberal agenda" to PDXRadio 
I hope you enjoy your stay as much as I think I will!
"I see the regular cast of assholes are here."
Yes they are. All of them.
""I see the regular cast of assholes are here."
Since Republicans are assholes, I'm wondering:
Trixter, are you gonna put up with that?"
I would have expected better than that from Andy.
The South Carolina newspaper knew about the affair but keep it under wraps. 
Wow, I see how this board REALLY works.
I make a meaningless thread (much like this one) and put up some snotty tags and it gets pulled.
I guess it's a one way street around here.
Oh well, that progressives for ya!
…a meaningless thread (much like this one)…
If I were a Republican, I would probably feel the same way. It hasn’t been a good two weeks for the GOP. A top tier GOP governor with very public presidential ambitions announces that he has been cheating on his wife and will resign as head of the Republican Governor’s Association. This comes on the heels of another GOP’er with presidential ambitions announces last week that he too cheated on his wife with a family friend and would resign as his leadership position in the US Senate Republican caucus. To a Republican, it might seem meaningless – and with good reason.
If I were a Republican, I would be flat out pissed off. The party embraced both the ultra wealthy and the 23 percenters, then went and pissed off all the moderates!
Talk about your big ass doughnut hole!
Wait! I was a Republican. Dammit! I was pissed off.
Feel totally better now. You Republicans should try it. If we can get some real movement, I'll bet the 23 percenters eat the wealthy. Obama can socialize probate, and we all live good for a few years!
What do you say?
1...2...3...
Everybody bow to the Democrats.
They walk on water.
They are perfect.
They are above humans.
All hail the Democtats.....
NOT.
Well, I can't blame you for that Skybill.
I was dead serious about Republicans being pissed off. They are seeing a "do as I say and not as I do" total meltdown every few weeks on average. It's absolutely nuts, and we've been seeing it at a pretty good clip for a while now. If somebody compiled a list, I'll bet it's easily 3 to one for corruption and scandals.
Just who the hell took over what was a decent party?
You gotta ask, if because it's so damn ugly right now.
And I'm dead serious about bringing in the 23 percenters too. They are damn good for votes. Loyal as hell too. Why? Nobody else would take them, that's why!
The impact on the Republican party has been profound and we are watching it play out right now. It's all their own doing too.
Sorry man. There is just not a nice way to talk about that, and it's there in the news every few weeks!
It's totally not about the Democrats being perfect, above human, walking on water or anything else. It's simply the Republican party being absolutely horrible.
And that's not individual Republicans. It's the party representatives that are a mess.
"May they who cast the first stones be without Sin"
Interesting side note.
This story does not appear in the earliest manuscripts of the Gospel of John.
Many Biblical scholars believe it was added by a scribe sometime in the 3rd Century BC.
"""I see the regular cast of assholes are here."
Since Republicans are assholes, I'm wondering:
Trixter, are you gonna put up with that?"
I would have expected better than that from Andy."
Most of the time I just stay out of it. 
Republicans are both irritating and contemptible. That
is the definition of asshole, other than anus.
Some are primarily irritating and others mostly contemptible.
A few are both. The same can be said for Democrats, or liberals
or conservatives. It does seem that recently though, the conservative
Republican politicians are owning the title.
Dodger says:
Wow, I see how this board REALLY works.
I make a meaningless thread (much like this one) and put up some snotty tags and it gets pulled.
I guess it's a one way street around here.
You posted a new topic with absolutely no text and a bunch of tags. Pulling the topic had nothing to do with its content. It was pulled because you didn't post any content besides the topic title and a bunch of tags to unduly influence the word cloud on the front page.
I have never edited or eliminated posts in this forum for political content, be it left, right, center, or upside down. On the other hand, outrageously slanderous and libelous content is not permitted and will get pulled. I don't think that's a one-way street. If you got something to say, say it. Don't try to prankishly sway the system.
Dan: it's your board, but please understand my motive. I am sick of the foul language spewing from the keyboards of the rats who frequent this place.
Yes, I can go away, but is that really accomplishing anything?
I'd like a refund on my Paypal donations then please.
Turds, assholes, etc? Those are necessary to make points?
Again as I have stated before, this shows the ignorance of those who use such language.
Have a nice day, I mean really.
>> I am sick of the foul language
I concur...the profanities and personal attacts here are the worst of any web site I surf daily. Ok, First Ammendment I know...but we can all say our points more intellently. Then you say just go away...well I've been in broadcasting for more than 35 years in Oregon...a lifer...
intellently=intelligently
"the worst of any web site I surf daily"
Really?
Either you limit your surfing in quantity or limit your web sites to heavily regulated ones where overbearing admins are too ham-fisted to use any key other than the "delete."
This site is tame in comparison to many hard left/right leaning political ones. I honestly think you might have been working all those 35 years within the corporate cocoon. One m in amendment BTW. If you expect the language on the internet to equal that of around the dinner table with kids present, fuggedaboutit. Not only that, but the words that you might deem too colorful for use on this board often (not always, but frequently) reflect the magnitude of feeling that can not be expressed using mundane language.
For example, here are two statements that according to several dictionaries at my disposal mean the same thing:
Nixon was an asshole.
Nixon was an irritating and contemptible person.
Whereas you might be offended by the first, I doubt you are by the second. But they mean the same thing.
Even the TV and radio medium, which with you should be familiar with after all these years, do not censor the word "ass" when used in place of the more offensive sounding "asshole." Neither the root word or the compound version are one of the famous Carlin "7 words" which if I may remind you were decided by a slim margin in the F.C.C. v. Pacifica Foundation, in which the justices affirmed 5-4 the government's power to regulate indecent material on the public airwaves. Also let me remind you that part of that decision stated that these words as used in the routine were indecent, but not obscene.
Of course, in the instant discussion of dodger's vacuous post, there was no body of information. No text, no link, no nothing. Frankly, dodger's argument is without merit.
Dodger, congrats on posting a thread that got yanked.
Now I've heard almost everything, Limbaugh blames Obama for the Mark Sanford affair. 
Civility is always a good thing, but--Dodger--if you are truly personally offended by the content of this board, why do you voluntarily subject yourself to it?
If you are engaging in a conversation with somebody and that person's language is irritating in some way, I think that it is legitimate to say, in a tactful way, that the language is off-putting to you. If that person has some level of genuine human decency and he or she is interested in having a conversation, then he or she will comply with your request. Below is an example of such an incident. If you are offended by rough language, please cover the lines of text between the asterisks with your hand and skip to the end of this post:
***
In high school, I was aware that many television stations refrained from using the phrase "God-damned" on the air. I assumed that this was out of sensitivity towards older Christians and the children of Christian families. I didn't think that other high school students would find the phrase objectionable, and consequently, I used the phrase "God-damned" quite frequently in conversation to add emphasis or to indicate that something was so contemptible that even the supposedly pro-forgiveness deity of the Christians would curse it. One day, I was talking to my friend Ed, and he stopped me with the request, "I don't care if you say damn, but please don't say God-damned." The phrase was objectionable to his Christian faith, and he made a legitimate request. I thus complied.
***
In contrast, if you are trying to clean up this message board just for the sake of cleaning it up, I think that many people perceive that as hokey, rather than heroic.
"We don't need another Hero!"
That is not my intention. My intention is to show how silly you are.
Well, I am offended by that. What are we going to do about that?
Well YOU could leave?
Go juggle some chickens, at least in Salem we can juggle them in our own yards now!
Seems fair.
Oh, but the Internet is such a BIG place!
Rather than be selfish and ask everyone here to conform, why not go and visit a place where you will feel right at home?
http://www.fanpop.com/spots/the-little-mermaid
Dodger. I'm not asking you to go away. Not everyone uses proper decorum of language. The right words tell as much as the wrong. Broadway, you can edit your posts within one hour simply by clicking "edit" at the bottom of your post.
Go juggle some chickens, at least in Salem we can juggle them in our own yards now!
Can we come down to Salem to juggle some chickens with you? That sounds like it could be fun! I promise that I'll keep the language in good taste. I won't cuss if I drop a chicken or if I get pecked.
Dodger, You can stay on the other side you know. I know you've taken me to task once for leaning political on the radio side, however, its perplexing when you come on this side only to engage in drive-by-posting -- just blasting all of us with nonsense then go away. What's the purpose?
It is odd that the first person in a long time to bring up "foul language" is a drive-by-poster such as yourself! As far as I know, Broadway never brought this up until you did. The point is: the people on this side aren't troubled by it. If Broadway is troubled, he should have brought it up himself earlier then we'd likely discuss it. As far as I can tell, Broadway hasn't let it hinder the posting of his opinions.
If the language needs cleaning up, the request needs to come from a poster with at least a tiny bit of respect.
>>If Broadway is troubled, he should have brought it up himself earlier
I have brought it up but not recently...
>>Broadway hasn't let it hinder the posting of his opinions
I consider the author and just skip over but it's rude, troubling, and not necessary...but I still respect and appreciate all who post.
>>the request needs to come from a poster with at least a tiny bit of respect.
I have a tiny,tiny,tiny bit...don't I ?
Thanks Dan for notice of the edit feature.
"I have a tiny,tiny,tiny bit...don't I ?"
Yes, you're welcome to start a foul langauge thread if there's something you want to say on the matter. I will say that I've noticed changes in the language used by esteemed members of this forum only after years of being hosed by a former president of this country. Now that he's sagebrush, I suspect the bar might creep upwards over the next year or so.
:D"I see the regular cast of assholes are here."
Since Republicans are assholes, I'm wondering:
Trixter, are you gonna put up with that?
I could throw out some cuss words and piss and moan but I like to just sit back and watch the FAMILY VALUES party IMPLODE... The last bunch of jackholes have been enough to make Uncle Ronnie roll over in his grave. That makes me smile big!
More than likely he's been knocked off the front page by MJ and FF passing away.
With tomorrow's autopsy still to come, and the tributes and accolades running rampant, it's clear that a mere Republican adulterer won't get much coverage unless his lying about his own whereabouts gets legs.
About the time the media coverage of MJ shifts from tributes and eulogies to exploitation and tabloid phenomenon, Sanford might become news again. Not to mention waiting around for toxicology reports to tell us what is probably the obvious.
What a sad week this has been.
It seems to me that the "foul language" used in here is, 99.9% of the time, not directed at a particular person posting, or anyone else, but used to emphasize a point, as Andy alluded to above. In fact, I would venture to guess that a lot of people that DO use said language often tone it down in here out of respect to people like Broadway, who don't like it. (Myself included definitely). To start new threads without any text to them, just to "prove a point" is rather sophomoric in nature.
"What a sad week this has been."
Yes Andy, indeed. Wow is all that comes to mind.
These folks will use the Bible to rationalize anything that serves their purpose. 
Sanford: King David Didn't Resign, So Why Should I?
This topic has been closed to new replies.