Sanford Faces 37 Ethics Charges

PoliticsNovember 2009 • Views: 2,034

Philandering creationist governor Mark Sanford has now been charged with 37 counts of violating South Carolina ethics laws.

The complaint follows a three-month investigation into Sanford’s use of taxpayer money.

Sanford is accused of using tax money to buy business-class airfare on domestic and international flights, flying on a state-owned aircraft to political gatherings or events “which involved no official business,” and spending campaign funds for personal use such as buying a ticket to attend President Obama’s inauguration in January.

South Carolina law requires state officials to buy the lowest fares available for flights, and bars the use of state aircraft for personal use.

Sanford’s office did not respond to requests for comment about the charges.

Jump to bottom

168 comments

Guanxi88 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:49:11am

Only 37 counts? I'd give him at least 40 counts for concocting a stupid cover-story, and another 10 for trying to patch things up in public, in addition to the other 37.

What a stooge.

Mich-again Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:49:20am

One more free ticket compliments of the taxpayers..coming up. A one way bus ticket out of town.

Mostly sane, most of the time. Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:49:26am

You mean you can't use taxpayer money to fund your adultery?

/What is this country coming to?

Cannadian Club Akbar Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:49:56am

Squirm. Heh.

Dark_Falcon Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:50:29am

re: #3 EmmmieG

You mean you can't use taxpayer money to fund your adultery?

/What is this country coming to?

This ain't France. Sanford doesn't get to act like Francoise Mitterand.

Mich-again Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:50:32am

You Big Dummy!

(Famous quote from another Sanford)

jaunte Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:52:24am

re: #1 Guanxi88
But credit him for inventing a new euphemism:
"Hiking the Appalachian Trail."

The Curmudgeon Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:52:54am

"Philandering creationist." That has a certain ring to it.

Bob Dillon Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:53:43am

The really sad part is that his actions are probably just the tip of the iceberg for many trough feeders nationwide. The most arrogant or plain stupid are usually the only ones that ever get busted.

Kragar Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:54:02am

re: #8 The Curmudgeon

"Philandering creationist." That has a certain ring to it.

Almost on par with accursed mountebank.

Kragar Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:54:37am

re: #6 Mich-again

You Big Dummy!

(Famous quote from another Sanford)

This is the big one! I'm coming to join ya, Elizabeth!

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:55:10am

Quick! Get him to sign the GOP 10 Commandments before he leaves. Have him take a good look at commandment 8 about upholding the Defense of Marriage Act and think about his philandering ways and trips to Buenos Aires. I guess Sanford's homophobic strategy of planting a gay smear on the Lt. Governor didn't take hold. The Moral Majority strikes out again.

Gearhead Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:55:28am

re: #3 EmmmieG

You mean you can't use taxpayer money to fund your adultery?

/What is this country coming to?

Mr. Spitzer, is that you?

nightlight Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:55:29am

How many ethic violations have Eliot Spitzer, Bill Clinton, and Edwards racked up? Anyone know?

All the corrupt politicians need to hang their heads in shame!

Mich-again Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:57:18am

re: #11 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

This is the big one! I'm coming to join ya, Elizabeth!

Esther, I'm gonna shove your face in dough and make gorilla cookies!

badger1970 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:57:47am

re: #3 EmmmieG

Only if you got a (R) and not a (D). At least Spitzer fell on his sword (kind of).

Guanxi88 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:58:44am

re: #7 jaunte

But credit him for inventing a new euphemism:
"Hiking the Appalachian Trail."

Poling the electorate, also a favorite, although hardly applicable here.

Guanxi88 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:59:05am

re: #16 badger1970

Only if you got a (R) and not a (D). At least Spitzer fell on his sword (kind of).

His sword is what tripped him up. Wrong sheath.

Guanxi88 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:59:30am

re: #18 Guanxi88

His sword is what tripped him up. Wrong sheath.

(Ask Cato)

Dark_Falcon Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:59:30am

re: #12 Gus 802

Quick! Get him to sign the GOP 10 Commandments before he leaves. Have him take a good look at commandment 8 about upholding the Defense of Marriage Act and think about his philandering ways and trips to Buenos Aires. I guess Sanford's homophobic strategy of planting a gay smear on the Lt. Governor didn't take hold. The Moral Majority strikes out again.

Actually, the GOP principles are quite good. Repost follows:

re: #631 Dark_Falcon

This one makes for interesting reading:

Republicans Move Towards Right-Wing Loyalty Oath

It's not as bad as it looks. Most of the positions advocated are reasonable, at least to me.

wrenchwench Tue, Nov 24, 2009 9:59:56am

Sadly, none of the charges relate to philandering or creationism. If he had used his own money, he would not be charged under these laws. But, there are more to come:

...After arguments are presented, the panel will determine if Sanford broke any state laws. The ethics case involves civil charges that are punishable by fines, and Sanford can appeal decisions up to the state Supreme Court.
...

Delleney said he thinks Monday's report will give new momentum to the impeachment push.

Still no consequences for the creationism, though.

lawhawk Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:00:07am

Many of Sanford's ethics violations have nothing to do with his sexcapades, but with his general absence of a moral or ethical base.

Despite the number of charges, he'll likely end up with a slap on the wrist.

And yet, that's more than many other politicians have gotten for a similar affront.

Guanxi88 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:00:37am

re: #21 wrenchwench

Sadly, none of the charges relate to philandering or creationism. If he had used his own money, he would not be charged under these laws. But, there are more to come:

Still no consequences for the creationism, though.

The punishment for being immoral is that you are immoral.

Sharmuta Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:00:52am

Sanford’s office did not respond to requests for comment about the charges.

Is anyone sure he's even in the office?

Kragar Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:02:19am

re: #15 Mich-again

Esther, I'm gonna shove your face in dough and make gorilla cookies!

Aunt Esther: Open this door fool!
Fred Sanford: I can't open the door!
Aunt Esther: Why not?
Fred Sanford: You too ugly!

wrenchwench Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:02:29am

re: #23 Guanxi88

The punishment for being immoral is that you are immoral.

No wonder it's so popular.

SteveC Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:02:32am

re: #7 jaunte

But credit him for inventing a new euphemism:
"Hiking the Appalachian Trail."

He needs to blame whoever has the state cell phone contract. Gov. Sanford told the truth, he said he was chasing some foreign tail. The signal was breaking up and there was a lot of static, so the staff heard "Hiking the Appalachian Trail."

Lidane Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:03:35am

re: #16 badger1970

Only if you got a (R) and not a (D). At least Spitzer fell on his sword (kind of).

I don't think Edwards has much of a political future. Aside from the fact that he was on a losing presidential ticket, the anger and outrage his affair caused among Democrats last year is a pretty good indication that he's not exactly loved. It was a pretty despicable thing to cheat on your dying wife, and a lot of Dems did NOT take kindly to it at all.

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:04:20am

re: #20 Dark_Falcon

I disagree with it on principle. Not the specific lines but the idea of having 10 point plan which amounts to a purity test. If they want to constrain themselves in such a way that's their choice. It only legitimizes the litmus test that got the GOP in political trouble in the first place. I will not support a party that signs on to defending the Defense of Marriage Act.

SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:04:24am

re: #20 Dark_Falcon

I disagree with most of them, but they don't strike me as insane. I kind of wish they'd made them less personal--there was no need to mention Obama's name twice--but they seem, well sufficiently Republican.

Guanxi88 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:04:50am

re: #26 wrenchwench

No wonder it's so popular.

Eh, I dunno. Ethical failure is human failure; it diminishes your humanity, cripples and stunts the development of the soul. Same reason why ethical behavior is its own reward - it contributes to the development of the character, and the character builds the soul, adding to your humanity.

Creationism is its own punishment, though.

RogueOne Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:05:13am

re: #23 Guanxi88

The punishment for being immoral is that you are immoral.

Don't forget the syphillis

badger1970 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:05:28am

re: #28 Lidane

I forgot about the Breck boy.

Sharmuta Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:05:42am

State legislators already have filed an impeachment resolution against the governor for leaving the state this summer to visit his Argentine mistress without installing a proper chain of command or informing his staff. A special House subcommittee will meet in Columbia on Tuesday to formally consider the resolution for the first time.

Hope they kick him to the curb. This shouldn't be tolerated by the people from any public servant.

SteveC Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:05:45am

re: #22 lawhawk

Many of Sanford's ethics violations have nothing to do with his sexcapades, but with his general absence of a moral or ethical base.

Despite the number of charges, he'll likely end up with a slap on the wrist.

And yet, that's more than many other politicians have gotten for a similar affront.

The Republicans hate his guts, especially after he decried "pork" in the budget by bringing a couple of piglets into the state house (Both promptly shat on the floor!).

The Democrats don't like him because of contractual obligations. So if the legislature down here can get its act together, Sanford is not long for this politcal world.

borgcube Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:05:46am

Good riddance. Now if we could only get outraged at some of the real crooks, who steal far more from us than this guy. I can think of about 535 of them at first pass.

Cannadian Club Akbar Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:05:55am

re: #32 RogueOne

Don't forget the syphillis

Huh, so the stupid does actually burn.
///

Guanxi88 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:05:57am

re: #32 RogueOne

Don't forget the syphillis

Syphilis, like herpes, is just a dividend.

RogueOne Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:07:29am

re: #37 Cannadian Club Akbar

Huh, so the stupid does actually burn.
///

see? now that's funny! +11

Guanxi88 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:07:37am

re: #37 Cannadian Club Akbar

Huh, so the stupid does actually burn.
///

Itchy, in some manifestations.

Kragar Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:08:30am

re: #37 Cannadian Club Akbar

Huh, so the stupid does actually burn.
///

Someone needs to get their bore punched.

SteveC Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:08:47am

Actually, I couldn't fault him for upgrading plane tickets. I'm 5-10 and not very big and I have difficulty folding myself into those sardine cans they use for airline seating!

John Neverbend Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:08:53am

Memo to anti-science hystericals:

Trick: (i) A crafty or fraudulent device of a mean or base kind; an artifice to deceive or cheat; a stratagem, ruse, wile. (ii) A convention or specialized skill peculiar to a particular field of activity.

(i) can be applied to Mark Sanford.
(ii) can be applied to "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years..."

Dark_Falcon Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:09:37am

re: #29 Gus 802

I disagree with it on principle. Not the specific lines but the idea of having 10 point plan which amounts to a purity test. If they want to constrain themselves in such a way that's their choice. It only legitimizes the litmus test that got the GOP in political trouble in the first place. I will not support a party that signs on to defending the Defense of Marriage Act.

As I said on the previous thread, I don't want to use it as a purity test either, but it is a good statement of conservative principles. As for DoMA, I'd have to say that you can walk over that one, Gus. The party base supports it, so the party needs to support it.

Wozza Matter? Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:10:05am

what is Argentinian for "Woot!!!" ?

Sharmuta Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:10:46am

re: #45 wozzablog

what is Argentinian for "Woot!!!" ?

Woot Americano?

Mostly sane, most of the time. Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:10:55am

re: #42 SteveC

Actually, I couldn't fault him for upgrading plane tickets. I'm 5-10 and not very big and I have difficulty folding myself into those sardine cans they use for airline seating!

As long as he payed for the upgrades. (Apparently he was looking for an "upgrade" elsewhere, and now he will pay for it.)

SteveC Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:11:01am

re: #45 wozzablog

what is Argentinian for "Woot!!!" ?

El-woot-o?

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:11:09am

re: #29 Gus 802

I disagree with it on principle. Not the specific lines but the idea of having 10 point plan which amounts to a purity test. If they want to constrain themselves in such a way that's their choice. It only legitimizes the litmus test that got the GOP in political trouble in the first place. I will not support a party that signs on to defending the Defense of Marriage Act.

Additionally, the "chief sponsor" of this 10 point resolution is James Bopp, Jr. who has been chief counsel for Focus on the Family since 2004.

Sign on all you wish but your signing onto a document inspired by the theocratic wing of the Republican Party.

Kragar Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:11:19am

re: #48 SteveC

El-woot-o?

Beat me to it.

Dark_Falcon Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:11:31am

re: #42 SteveC

Actually, I couldn't fault him for upgrading plane tickets. I'm 5-10 and not very big and I have difficulty folding myself into those sardine cans they use for airline seating!

At 6'4", I always have to fly Economy Plus. Otherwise my knees hurt for hours after landing.

SteveC Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:12:11am

re: #47 EmmmieG

As long as he payed for the upgrades. (Apparently he was looking for an "upgrade" elsewhere, and now he will pay for it.)

Oh yeah, he paid - with some of my tax dollars. And now it looks like he's gonna pay again.

spinmore Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:13:04am

re: #43 John Neverbend

Memo to anti-science hystericals:

Trick: (i) A crafty or fraudulent device of a mean or base kind; an artifice to deceive or cheat; a stratagem, ruse, wile. (ii) A convention or specialized skill peculiar to a particular field of activity.

(i) can be applied to Mark Sanford.
(ii) can be applied to "I've just completed Mike's Nature trick of adding in the real temps to each series for the last 20 years..."

Defend the narrative at all costs (good job ; / you're a trooper)

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:13:29am

re: #44 Dark_Falcon

As I said on the previous thread, I don't want to use it as a purity test either, but it is a good statement of conservative principles. As for DoMA, I'd have to say that you can walk over that one, Gus. The party base supports it, so the party needs to support it.

Fine. Then they should be honest with themselves and add another line.

11. We will firmly support the teaching of Intelligent Design in our public schools.

Especially since James Dobson is hovering all of this.

Sharmuta Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:14:07am

If the special subcommittee decides to move forward with impeachment, the resolution will be passed onto the Judiciary Committee, which will then vote on whether to bring it to the floor of the legislature when lawmakers return to the state capital of Columbia in January.
For Sanford to be forcibly removed from office, two-thirds of the South Carolina House and and two-thirds of the state Senate must vote to impeach him.

Might be hard to hit those numbers.

RogueOne Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:15:21am

re: #55 Sharmuta

Might be hard to hit those numbers.

You might be right. I'm still confused as to what his stated reasons for not resigning. He has to know he should go, doesn't he/

Cannadian Club Akbar Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:16:40am

re: #55 Sharmuta

Might be hard to hit those numbers.

Do you think his ex/soon-to-be ex might lobby against him? Just asking.

John Neverbend Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:17:30am

re: #53 spinmore

Defend the narrative at all costs (good job ; / you're a trooper)

Defending science "R" Us.

Dark_Falcon Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:18:22am

re: #54 Gus 802

Especially since James Dobson is hovering all of this.

Why are you bringing that in? A list like that could be used to marginalize the ID loons by saying that ID is not part of the platform. The party must have principles, and the list as written would be a good umbrella statement for next year.

Vicious Babushka Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:18:32am

re: #51 Dark_Falcon

At 6'4", I always have to fly Economy Plus. Otherwise my knees hurt for hours after landing.

Tall people scare me.

Sharmuta Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:20:01am

OT Kitteh Update:

Stinky Bastard Kitteh did not pee in my purse. Like a good boy, he waited for a litter box. He also quite literally attacked his bowl of food, leaving about half on the floor in his mad rush to shove his face into nom-noms. He then had a nice drink of water, curled up in his foster mothers lap, and is currently sleeping.

Dark_Falcon Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:20:10am

re: #60 Alouette

Tall people scare me.

OOGA BOOGA!

spinmore Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:20:13am

re: #58 John Neverbend

Defending science "R" Us.

Sorry, but that was *sarc*

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:20:29am

re: #59 Dark_Falcon

Why are you bringing that in? A list like that could be used to marginalize the ID loons by saying that ID is not part of the platform. The party must have principles, and the list as written would be a good umbrella statement for next year.

I don't like it. They sign onto to that purity test and I'm not going to vote for a GOP candidate.

John Neverbend Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:21:31am

re: #63 spinmore

Sorry, but that was *sarc*

I know, but I'm being serious today.

Dark_Falcon Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:21:55am

re: #64 Gus 802

I don't like it. They sign onto to that purity test and I'm not going to vote for a GOP candidate.

We'll miss you. I think it's workable, and it might help bring the divides in the party by focusing on those issues and ignoring the rest.

spinmore Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:22:08am

re: #65 John Neverbend

gotcha

jaunte Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:22:10am

re: #60 Alouette

Tall people scare me.

Ai iz in yr raftrs, hitting my forhed.

John Neverbend Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:23:26am

re: #67 spinmore

gotcha

I'm sorry, but I'm rather tired today, so I'm not sure on which side of the "science nontroversy" you're standing. Could you please enlighten me.

Girth Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:23:35am

re: #49 Gus 802

Additionally, the "chief sponsor" of this 10 point resolution is James Bopp, Jr. who has been chief counsel for Focus on the Family since 2004.

Sign on all you wish but your signing onto a document inspired by the theocratic wing of the Republican Party.

The same genius who was pushing the resolution to rename the Democratic Party the Democrat Socialist Party.

[Link: www.politico.com...]

Lidane Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:24:24am

re: #64 Gus 802

I don't like it. They sign onto to that purity test and I'm not going to vote for a GOP candidate.

I wouldn't vote for any candidate of any party who signed that kind of purity pledge. Democratic, Republican, Libertarian, whatever. I don't much care.

IMO, if your entire world view can be summed up by 10 bullet point statements like that, then I don't trust you to do the job. I prefer my candidates have a brain between their ears, not a list of talking points and dog whistle phrases. =P

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:24:24am

re: #66 Dark_Falcon

We'll miss you. I think it's workable, and it might help bring the divides in the party by focusing on those issues and ignoring the rest.

If an individual candidate wants to run on all or some of those principles that's fine. There can be many of those and in fact it could even make up the majority. I am going to stand firm and say that this purity test is a bad idea because in the end it will box in all candidates for national election. Thus they will all be seen as one homogeneous group with no variety in between.

SteveC Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:24:45am

re: #56 RogueOne

You might be right. I'm still confused as to what his stated reasons for not resigning. He has to know he should go, doesn't he/

We've got the craziest, stupidest government known to man down here. The Governor's in charge, but almost the entire cabinet are elected positions - they don't answer to him and don't follow his policies half the time. We ELECT whomever is in charge of the State National Guard. There's no well defined line of succession, and usually the Governor can't reach down and say "You're fired!" because he's not the boss of that civil servant - the head of the department is.

It's a mess!

idioma Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:24:57am

This is why we can't have nice things.

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:25:16am

re: #70 Girth

The same genius who was pushing the resolution to rename the Democratic Party the Democrat Socialist Party.

[Link: www.politico.com...]

Nice find. I wonder how far off he is from the nirthers.

Killgore Trout Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:26:07am

re: #61 Sharmuta

OT Kitteh Update:

Stinky Bastard Kitteh did not pee in my purse. Like a good boy, he waited for a litter box. He also quite literally attacked his bowl of food, leaving about half on the floor in his mad rush to shove his face into nom-noms. He then had a nice drink of water, curled up in his foster mothers lap, and is currently sleeping.

New love is nice, eh?

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:26:30am

re: #71 Lidane

I wouldn't vote for any candidate of any party who signed that kind of purity pledge. Democratic, Republican, Libertarian, whatever. I don't much care.

IMO, if your entire world view can be summed up by 10 bullet point statements like that, then I don't trust you to do the job. I prefer my candidates have a brain between their ears, not a list of talking points and dog whistle phrases. =P

Exactly. It boxes them in.

SteveC Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:26:35am

re: #57 Cannadian Club Akbar

Do you think his ex/soon-to-be ex might lobby against him? Just asking.

She went back to the family home and is staying there. Yesterday was the first time in nearly 3 months that she has been to the Governor's mansion (for an annual event, never went inside.)

Jenny Sanford is rich, and she had $$$ before she married Mark. And it looks like she's decided to get that stone out of her shoe.

Cineaste Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:27:12am

While I have no sympathy for this schmuck and he definitely broke the rules, I do think that a prohibition on a governor flying business class is silly. He's the chief exec of the state and, frankly, I'm ok with him not having to fly SouthWest. We have this need to see our politicians live some spartan life so they will feel "connected" which is just absurd. That, however, is a policy issue.

spinmore Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:27:41am

re: #69 John Neverbend

I'm sorry, but I'm rather tired today, so I'm not sure on which side of the "science nontroversy" you're standing. Could you please enlighten me.

Sure. I'm on the side that's not buying the whole fraudulent hoax called 'Global Warming' . . . or are we calling it 'Climate Change' (?)

Guanxi88 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:29:44am

re: #79 Cineaste

While I have no sympathy for this schmuck and he definitely broke the rules, I do think that a prohibition on a governor flying business class is silly. He's the chief exec of the state and, frankly, I'm ok with him not having to fly SouthWest. We have this need to see our politicians live some spartan life so they will feel "connected" which is just absurd. That, however, is a policy issue.

Rarely agree with you, but you're dead-on with this one. It's like when the Obama inauguration was going on - folk shooting off their mouths about the expense and all the rest of it.

For Pete's sake - it's a state occasion - this isn't a high school prom, people, this is an important ritual in the life of the greatest nation in human history.

Same for leaders traveling - they should go in comfort, safety, and security. Cost is a secondary factor.

Cineaste Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:29:46am

re: #80 spinmore

Sure. I'm on the side that's not buying the whole fraudulent hoax called 'Global Warming' . . . or are we calling it 'Climate Change' (?)

care to offer any concrete evidence that "global warming" doesn't exist? Causes aside, the globe is warming buddy.

J.S. Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:30:04am

re: #64 Gus 802

(I think whoever proposed the "loyalty oath" is sorely lacking in an understanding of how this term has been used and misused throughout history...(and, no, it's not good -- it conjures up all sorts of negative thoughts. It's a bad idea, imo.)

SteveC Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:31:37am

re: #79 Cineaste

While I have no sympathy for this schmuck and he definitely broke the rules, I do think that a prohibition on a governor flying business class is silly.

The state airplane is for official state business only, and a couple of the violations stem from personal use of the plane. I've always wondered why the policy isn't XXX hours/miles per year allowed, and anything over that you reimburse or fly commercial?

Dark_Falcon Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:31:48am

re: #77 Gus 802

Exactly. It boxes them in.

But at the same time, it might also be used to boxed the ID and Nirther loons out.

Cineaste Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:31:52am

re: #81 Guanxi88

Rarely agree with you, but you're dead-on with this one. It's like when the Obama inauguration was going on - folk shooting off their mouths about the expense and all the rest of it.

For Pete's sake - it's a state occasion - this isn't a high school prom, people, this is an important ritual in the life of the greatest nation in human history.

Same for leaders traveling - they should go in comfort, safety, and security. Cost is a secondary factor.

Absolutely - I love that when the President (any president) goes to some event that the side against him starts complaining about the expense. When Obama came to New York for that date with Michelle people were losing their minds. It's the freakin' President people. When he travels, it costs money. But it's not like if he stayed at home the secret service would all take the night off!

ps: I'm glad we find common ground when we can Guanxi, we disagree a lot but I like you!

BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:32:02am

re: #71 Lidane

I wouldn't vote for any candidate of any party who signed that kind of purity pledge. Democratic, Republican, Libertarian, whatever. I don't much care.

IMO, if your entire world view can be summed up by 10 bullet point statements like that, then I don't trust you to do the job. I prefer my candidates have a brain between their ears, not a list of talking points and dog whistle phrases. =P

re: #72 Gus 802

If an individual candidate wants to run on all or some of those principles that's fine. There can be many of those and in fact it could even make up the majority. I am going to stand firm and say that this purity test is a bad idea because in the end it will box in all candidates for national election. Thus they will all be seen as one homogeneous group with no variety in between.

Totally agree. It'll be subject to mockery like the Glorious Loyalty Oath crusade in Catch 22. I'm not surprised it's the same guy who wanted a resolution to force the democratic party to rename itself. He ought to have sponsered a resolution for the GOP to rename itself "Your Crazy Racist Uncle"*-- because pretty soon that's all that will be left in it, the way they're going.

*obligatory dysfunctional family joke, in honour of thanksgiving

John Neverbend Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:32:04am

re: #80 spinmore

Sure. I'm on the side that's not buying the whole fraudulent hoax called 'Global Warming' . . . or are we calling it 'Climate Change' (?)

And I'm on the side of understanding what the word "trick" means in the context of the e-mails. In that context, it does not connote something fraudulent, as I think Charles has already pointed out.

J.S. Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:32:18am

re: #61 Sharmuta

ahhh...so when are you going to post some pictures?

Ben Hur Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:32:36am

re: #86 Cineaste

Obama came to New York for that date with Michelle people were losing their minds.

That was something else completely, IMHO.

Cineaste Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:33:34am

re: #84 SteveC

The state airplane is for official state business only, and a couple of the violations stem from personal use of the plane. I've always wondered why the policy isn't XXX hours/miles per year allowed, and anything over that you reimburse or fly commercial?

Let me clarify - I am fine with any of that on state or immediate family business. Using a private jet to meet your lover does not qualify. However if he's going to a meeting of governors, or to DC to lobby for something the state needs, the notion of him having to sit in seat 38G is silly.

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:33:55am

re: #85 Dark_Falcon

But at the same time, it might also be used to boxed the ID and Nirther loons out.

Internally it won't make a difference. Whoever will run as GOP candidate is going to tell everyone they agree with all 10 points. Externally or publicly they will all be seen as the "10 Point Party." It's too simplistic.

J.S. Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:35:04am

re: #92 Gus 802

yeah, uh-huh...so what happens when one of those little "points" isn't followed? Then what? Expulstion from the Party?

Kragar Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:36:21am

re: #93 J.S.

yeah, uh-huh...so what happens when one of those little "points" isn't followed? Then what? Expulstion from the Party?

Stocks and Pillories in the public square.

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:36:51am

re: #93 J.S.

yeah, uh-huh...so what happens when one of those little "points" isn't followed? Then what? Expulstion from the Party?

A lot of genuflecting ensues. Sort of like what happened with Arlen Spector and now with Susan Snowe from time to time.

spinmore Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:36:59am

re: #88 John Neverbend

And I'm on the side of understanding what the word "trick" means in the context of the e-mails. In that context, it does not connote something fraudulent, as I think Charles has already pointed out.

I think you're being very selective in 'cherry picking' the emails and looking for something to 'hang your hat' on

Guanxi88 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:37:02am

re: #94 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Stocks and Pillories in the public square.

Dunking stool.

Sharmuta Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:37:15am

re: #76 Killgore Trout

New love is nice, eh?

He's very sweet and mild mannered for a boy kitteh. I don't want to get too attached to him, because he can't stay, but I'll take good care of him while he's with me.

wrenchwench Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:37:32am

re: #93 J.S.

yeah, uh-huh...so what happens when one of those little "points" isn't followed? Then what? Expulstion from the Party?

Both parties already have platforms and neither of them have any way to make candidates adhere to them.

100

Sharmuta Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:38:30am

re: #89 J.S.

ahhh...so when are you going to post some pictures?

After he has a bath, which I'm not ready to tackle yet.

101

borgcube Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:38:47am

re: #79 Cineaste

While I have no sympathy for this schmuck and he definitely broke the rules, I do think that a prohibition on a governor flying business class is silly. He's the chief exec of the state and, frankly, I'm ok with him not having to fly SouthWest. We have this need to see our politicians live some spartan life so they will feel "connected" which is just absurd. That, however, is a policy issue.

Exactly. We'll spend oodles of time and energy over the fact that he misused taxpayer money by not using Kayak to get a cheaper flight, but as Congress spends us into oblivion *legally* we'll all just sit back and take it.

We can absorb and process a government official padding his travel expenses for a few hundred or a few thousand dollars here and there and get really really angry. When you start talking hundreds of billions or a few trillion here or there, it just doesn't register because the numbers are so staggering. And the political class knows it.

102

sattv4u2 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:38:48am

re: #98 Sharmuta

He's very sweet and mild mannered for a boy kitteh. I don't want to get too attached to him, because he can't stay, but I'll take good care of him while he's with me.

Took in a stray, did ya?

Both our dogs are ex-abandoned we picked up from a shelter

103

BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:39:29am

re: #94 Kragar (Proud to be Kafir)

Stocks and Pillories in the public square.

Why not? That's the wingnut anti-abortion plan for abortion: have them in the public square.
Will the stocks and pillories be federally funded?/

104

SteveC Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:39:37am

re: #93 J.S.

yeah, uh-huh...so what happens when one of those little "points" isn't followed? Then what? Expulstion from the Party?

You don't wanna know

105

John Neverbend Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:39:51am

re: #96 spinmore

I think you're being very selective in 'cherry picking' the emails and looking for something to 'hang your hat' on

Not at all. I'm simply saying that the articles that I read (and I think there was a video as well) implied that the word "trick", as used in the context of the mathematical computation performed, was an act of outright deception. That is a mistaken view.

106

sattv4u2 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:40:13am

re: #93 J.S.

yeah, uh-huh...so what happens when one of those little "points" isn't followed? Then what? Expulstion from the Party?

It stated that the party may hold off support (i.e. funds)

107

Cathypop Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:40:15am

re: #98 Sharmuta

He's very sweet and mild mannered for a boy kitteh. I don't want to get too attached to him, because he can't stay, but I'll take good care of him while he's with me.

That's what we all say about a stray cat or dog.

108

Sharmuta Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:40:53am

re: #92 Gus 802

I don't know about a loyalty oath, but when republicans pledged to work on the points presented on the Contract with America, it worked. Is blind loyalty now trumping an agenda?

109

Girth Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:41:06am

re: #99 wrenchwench

Both parties already have platforms and neither of them have any way to make candidates adhere to them.

That's the point of the resolution.

"The resolution would prohibit RNC money from flowing to any candidate who disagrees with more than two itemized planks of the GOP platform -- playing off Reagan's maxim that anyone who agreed with him 80% of the time is not 20% an enemy."

[Link: hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com...]

110

sattv4u2 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:41:09am

re: #107 Cathypop

That's what we all say about a stray cat or dog.

Or new beau!
/

111

Dark_Falcon Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:41:20am

re: #108 Sharmuta

I don't know about a loyalty oath, but when republicans pledged to work on the points presented on the Contract with America, it worked. Is blind loyalty now trumping an agenda?

Hopefully not.

112

badger1970 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:41:34am

re: #92 Gus 802

That's the trick- How to get a party platform without including the kitchen sink but avoiding being stuffed in the box? Generalization is the key; anything that gets too specific can be seen as an inflexible debate point.

Unfortunately, it comes down to compromised positions- there's no ideal candidate that fits all wants.

For example, for me it was RWR based upon his strong national defense and sound fiscal policies. For the state level, it's hard for me to support Perry or Hutchenson (hell at this point, I may just for for Kinky/)

113

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:41:34am

re: #70 Girth

The same genius who was pushing the resolution to rename the Democratic Party the Democrat Socialist Party.

[Link: www.politico.com...]

Some other searches for James Bopp Jr.

James Bopp Jr. + Terri Schiavo

James Bopp Jr. + Proposition 8

114

Dark_Falcon Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:42:15am

re: #109 Girth

That's the point of the resolution.

"The resolution would prohibit RNC money from flowing to any candidate who disagrees with more than two itemized planks of the GOP platform -- playing off Reagan's maxim that anyone who agreed with him 80% of the time is not 20% an enemy."

[Link: hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com...]

I though it was 7 out of ten were required. Which seems like a good number.

115

Sharmuta Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:43:17am

re: #102 sattv4u2

Took in a stray, did ya?

Both our dogs are ex-abandoned we picked up from a shelter

I found a little kitten in the cold, wet gutter this morning and couldn't leave him there. He smells like the gutter, so I named him Stinky. Then he didn't like riding in my purse to the store to buy him food, and he got a shot in with a claw... so he was renamed Stinky Bastard.

116

wrenchwench Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:43:41am

re: #109 Girth

That's the point of the resolution.

"The resolution would prohibit RNC money from flowing to any candidate who disagrees with more than two itemized planks of the GOP platform -- playing off Reagan's maxim that anyone who agreed with him 80% of the time is not 20% an enemy."

[Link: hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com...]

Thanks, I did not realize that. Now I know they're crazy. Platforms should not be dictated from the national level. The right wing is taking the party down.

117

spinmore Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:44:17am

re: #105 John Neverbend
If (that) in and of itself were the 'smoking gun' I might agree that emails were misunderstood or misinterpreted; the 'trick' references are just a small part of a much bigger 'story'

118

J.S. Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:44:25am

re: #106 sattv4u2

And what happens if the politician says, "Eh, so what?" (or alternatively, what if circumstances change, and the politician has a legitimate reason for not adhering to one of these "points"?) It's simply too inflexible and really unnecessary.

119

sattv4u2 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:44:51am

re: #114 Dark_Falcon

I though it was 7 out of ten were required. Which seems like a good number.

The wording was clumsy.

something in the order that if you DISAGREE with 3 (or more)((meaning you only agree with 7 or less)) you'll be looked at unkindly

120

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:45:04am

re: #108 Sharmuta

I don't know about a loyalty oath, but when republicans pledged to work on the points presented on the Contract with America, it worked. Is blind loyalty now trumping an agenda?

I would say the Contract with America was better thought out and was far more comprehensive. Consider this from Wiki:

The Contract's actual text was a list of actions the Republicans promised to take if they were in the majority following the election. During the construction of the Contract, Gingrich insisted on "60% issues"[citation needed], intending for the Contract to avoid promises on controversial and divisive matters like abortion and school prayer. Reagan biographer Lou Cannon would characterize the Contract as having taken more than half of its text from Ronald Reagan's 1985 State of the Union Address.

121

J.S. Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:46:10am

re: #119 sattv4u2

Oh, no! You see? Already the in-fighting begins! (it's a recipe for diaster...)

122

sattv4u2 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:46:24am

re: #118 J.S.

And what happens if the politician says, "Eh, so what?" (or alternatively, what if circumstances change, and the politician has a legitimate reason for not adhering to one of these "points"?) It's simply too inflexible and really unnecessary.

As I stated, there s a "threat" of non support ($$) I would imagine if a candidate was in a battle with a dem and the party thought (s)he had a real shot at winning the seat the "threat" would disappear

123

Dark_Falcon Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:46:48am

Here's the full proposed resolution:

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Republican National Committee identifies ten (10) key public policy positions for the 2010 election cycle, which the Republican National Committee expects its public officials and candidates to support:

(1) We support smaller government, smaller national debt, lower deficits and lower taxes by opposing bills like Obama's "stimulus" bill;

(2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare;

(3) We support market-based energy reforms by opposing cap and trade legislation;

(4) We support workers' right to secret ballot by opposing card check;

(5) We support legal immigration and assimilation into American society by opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants;

(6) We support victory in Iraq and Afghanistan by supporting military-recommended troop surges;

(7) We support containment of Iran and North Korea, particularly effective action to eliminate their nuclear weapons threat;

(8) We support retention of the Defense of Marriage Act;

(9) We support protecting the lives of vulnerable persons by opposing health care rationing and denial of health care and government funding of abortion; and

(10) We support the right to keep and bear arms by opposing government restrictions on gun ownership; and be further

RESOLVED, that a candidate who disagrees with three or more of the above stated public policy position of the Republican National Committee, as identified by the voting record, public statements and/or signed questionnaire of the candidate, shall not be eligible for financial support and endorsement by the Republican National Committee; and be further

RESOLVED, that upon the approval of this resolution the Republican National Committee shall deliver a copy of this resolution to each of Republican members of Congress, all Republican candidates for Congress, as they become known, and to each Republican state and territorial party office.

124

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:46:58am

re: #112 badger1970

That's the trick- How to get a party platform without including the kitchen sink but avoiding being stuffed in the box? Generalization is the key; anything that gets too specific can be seen as an inflexible debate point.

Unfortunately, it comes down to compromised positions- there's no ideal candidate that fits all wants.

For example, for me it was RWR based upon his strong national defense and sound fiscal policies. For the state level, it's hard for me to support Perry or Hutchenson (hell at this point, I may just for for Kinky/)

How many times has Kinky Friedman run for governor?

He is rather entertaining to listen to.

125

John Neverbend Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:47:04am

re: #117 spinmore

If (that) in and of itself were the 'smoking gun' I might agree that emails were misunderstood or misinterpreted; the 'trick' references are just a small part of a much bigger 'story'

Perhaps they are part of something larger, but it doesn't change my opinion that the word "trick" has been taken out of context, and that's all that I was saying in the earlier thread. The connotation of "deception" would be better applied to the antics of Mark Sanford.

As an ex-scientist, I can confirm that I used to use the word all the time in connection with solving difficult problems in an apparently easy way. In fact, it even gets into literature. Read Conan Doyle's "How Watson learned the trick." He's not talking about an act of deception.

126

badger1970 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:47:38am

re: #122 sattv4u2

You mean abandoning principle for victory? I never heard of such a thing ///

127

SanFranciscoZionist Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:47:40am

re: #85 Dark_Falcon

But at the same time, it might also be used to boxed the ID and Nirther loons out.

Possibly. What on that list do they not like?

128

Guanxi88 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:47:58am

re: #124 Gus 802

How many times has Kinky Friedman run for governor?

He is rather entertaining to listen to.

Kinkster gets my vote.

129

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:48:06am

re: #123 Dark_Falcon

They're nuts:

RESOLVED, that a candidate who disagrees with three or more of the above stated public policy position of the Republican National Committee, as identified by the voting record, public statements and/or signed questionnaire of the candidate, shall not be eligible for financial support and endorsement by the Republican National Committee; and be further

130

Sharmuta Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:48:31am

re: #120 Gus 802

I would say that's in large part due to the fact that while he may be a personal; asshole, Newt Gingrich is a brilliant strategist. He should be at the RNC working on leadership development and formulating national strategies. Newt knew that the divisive issues would leave many in the cold, while focusing on fiscal matters would bring in the moderates. He was correct, and it's what the party needs to do as a whole. Walk away from these hot button issues and stick with what works- Goldwater conservatism.

131

Mad Al-Jaffee Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:48:41am

re: #124 Gus 802

How many times has Kinky Friedman run for governor?

He is rather entertaining to listen to.

His books are fun to read too.

132

spinmore Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:49:08am

re: #125 John Neverbend
Copy-That
Point taken.
Thanks

133

Girth Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:49:10am

re: #120 Gus 802

The Contract was a positive legislative agenda. If we are elected we will enact these things...

This list is largely negative (we oppose these things), and those that aren't are vague and have no real ideas behind them: (2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare.

That's great, so what's your plan exactly?

134

wrenchwench Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:49:15am

re: #123 Dark_Falcon

From that:

RESOLVED, that a candidate who disagrees with three or more of the above stated public policy position of the Republican National Committee, as identified by the voting record, public statements and/or signed questionnaire of the candidate, shall not be eligible for financial support and endorsement by the Republican National Committee; and be further

I don't think the national party can tell the state parties to do. If the state party is not financially dependent on national funds, this will have no effect.

135

Guanxi88 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:49:19am

re: #131 Mad Al-Jaffee

His books are fun to read too.

A cross between P.G. Wodehouse and Chandler/Hammett. What's not to love?

136

J.S. Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:49:32am

re: #126 badger1970

And doesn't that really defeat the whole notion of a "loyalty oath?"

137

John Neverbend Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:49:37am

re: #132 spinmore

Copy-That
Point taken.
Thanks

And for my next trick...

138

spinmore Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:50:16am

re: #137 John Neverbend
lol

139

Dark_Falcon Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:51:02am

re: #127 SanFranciscoZionist

Possibly. What on that list do they not like?

The idea is to keep them from use their issues as litmus tests. If the party adopts a uniform standard, you could use that to smack down crazies.

140

badger1970 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:51:13am

re: #124 Gus 802

The epitome of "Keep Austin Weird".

re: #123 Dark_Falcon

No problems for me except for naming the stimulus package as Obama's baby and the DofM act.

141

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:51:39am

re: #130 Sharmuta

I would say that's in large part due to the fact that while he may be a personal; asshole, Newt Gingrich is a brilliant strategist. He should be at the RNC working on leadership development and formulating national strategies. Newt knew that the divisive issues would leave many in the cold, while focusing on fiscal matters would bring in the moderates. He was correct, and it's what the party needs to do as a whole. Walk away from these hot button issues and stick with what works- Goldwater conservatism.

Looking at this litmus test I will say one thing. They would have wanted Governor Huntsman black listed and withdrawn all RNC funding. I would imagine the latter day Goldwater would have been ostracized. As much as there is to criticize about Newt Gingrich he at least represented a far more stable version of Republicanism.

142

Mad Al-Jaffee Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:51:51am

re: #135 Guanxi88

A cross between P.G. Wodehouse and Chandler/Hammett. What's not to love?

His books always make me want to drink espresso and Jameson (not mixed) and smoke cigars.

143

badger1970 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:52:28am

re: #136 J.S.

And doesn't that really defeat the whole notion of a "loyalty oath?"

That it does. That it does.

144

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:52:37am

re: #133 Girth

The Contract was a positive legislative agenda. If we are elected we will enact these things...

This list is largely negative (we oppose these things), and those that aren't are vague and have no real ideas behind them: (2) We support market-based health care reform and oppose Obama-style government run healthcare.

That's great, so what's your plan exactly?

Good point. Essentially it is a platform of "No?"

145

Dark_Falcon Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:52:39am

re: #134 wrenchwench

From that:

I don't think the national party can tell the state parties to do. If the state party is not financially dependent on national funds, this will have no effect.

The RNC provides a notable part of the funding. Withholding it could knock out some candidates.

146

Cineaste Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:52:48am

re: #123 Dark_Falcon

Here's the full proposed resolution:

You know, there's a thing in the advertising world that says when you have to define what you are by showing how your different than your competitor then you haven't got a message. I'm surprised that Obama's name appears at all in this document, let alone more than once. As I recall, the contract with America set out a positive list of proposals - this is just a list of things they won't do. It really underlines the "party of no" idea. They use the word 'support' a bunch but in fact, the word 'oppose' appears a half-dozen times.

147

spinmore Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:53:13am

I want to know if Clinton's cigars were purchased with tax-payers money.

148

Guanxi88 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:53:21am

re: #142 Mad Al-Jaffee

His books always make me want to drink espresso and Jameson (not mixed) and smoke cigars.

Fine sports, and by no means a trivial endorsement.

149

sattv4u2 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:53:21am

re: #115 Sharmuta

Good for you!

150

Gus Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:53:50am

Purge-a-Palooza --->

151

Sharmuta Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:53:53am

re: #141 Gus 802

Fiscal conservatives were shown the door when Newt was given the boot. Our time has finally come again, and the party wants to pass out purity piss tests to appease the theo-cons. Madness.

152

Mad Al-Jaffee Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:54:15am

re: #147 spinmore

I want to know if Clinton's cigars were purchased with tax-payers money.

And what about his personal humidor?

153

sattv4u2 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:54:23am

BBIAB

154

wrenchwench Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:54:37am

re: #145 Dark_Falcon

The RNC provides a notable part of the funding. Withholding it could knock out some candidates.

And leave what? A candidate the state party finds unelectable? Another Dem win?

155

Guanxi88 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:54:40am

re: #152 Mad Al-Jaffee

And what about his personal humidor?

Thought she was a volunteer?

156

spinmore Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:54:56am

re: #152 Mad Al-Jaffee

And what about his personal humidor?

Yea . . that too! : )

157

BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:54:58am

OT: 9 Year Old Girl Finds 100 Million Yr Old Dinosaur Tailbone In Maryland

On Saturday, just the second time the newly named Dinosaur Park south of Laurel was open to the public, fourth-grader Gabrielle Block stumbled on a tailbone from a carnivore thought to be more than 100 million years old. It was the first significant find on the site since the 7.5 acre park held its initial public session earlier this month.
Gabrielle, who came to the park from her Annandale home with her parents and 7-year-old sister, hadn’t found anything more unusual than rocks and pieces of trees in just under an hour at the park — the vast majority of people don’t, park manager Donald Creveling said.

‘Usually it takes a well-trained and practiced eye to be able to pick out the fossils from the rest of the clay,’ Creveling said. ‘But perhaps she was helped because she doesn’t have a biased eye.’ “

158

cliffster Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:56:10am

What a jackass. I hope he goes to prison. I wonder when Harry Reid's ethics charges will come, for using taxpayer money to bribe senators into voting on his health care reform bill?

159

Mad Al-Jaffee Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:56:35am

re: #157 iceweasel

That's my home town.

160

badger1970 Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:57:00am

re: #151 Sharmuta

Agreed. Anything theo-con related doesn't belong on a platform. I never thought I ever say this but the religious right is scary. I prefer them to break off, form their own group and stop polluting the GOP.

161

Cato the Elder Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:57:38am

Special people deserve special treatment. Why shouldn't he charge the folks of his state with nookie flights to South America?

162

Dark_Falcon Tue, Nov 24, 2009 10:59:41am

re: #157 iceweasel

OT: 9 Year Old Girl Finds 100 Million Yr Old Dinosaur Tailbone In Maryland

Very cool. Opening up fossil hunting a great to stimulate interest in science. It looks like the fossil was from a raptor. I'd have liked to find the slashing claw from one of those. It would be a great necklace.

163

Soundboard Fez Tue, Nov 24, 2009 11:01:22am

re: #27 SteveC

He needs to blame whoever has the state cell phone contract. Gov. Sanford told the truth, he said he was chasing some foreign tail. The signal was breaking up and there was a lot of static, so the staff heard "Hiking the Appalachian Trail."

"Argentinian tail" to be precise. It's all a simple misunderstanding.

164

BARACK THE VOTE Tue, Nov 24, 2009 11:03:50am

re: #163 Soundboard Fez

"Argentinian tail" to be precise. It's all a simple misunderstanding.

Yes, but he gave us fodder for many "Appalachian Fail" jokes, so there's that.

165

marklark Tue, Nov 24, 2009 11:29:06am

"Creationism is its own punishment"??

166

Dr. Shalit Tue, Nov 24, 2009 5:35:39pm

FWIW -
The resignation of Gov. Sanford would certainly clear the air. His case is "Lewinksy Plus" - think even Lucianne Goldberg would agree. We are all human and imperfect, as am I, as is the Governor of SC.
As always, the offense is less than the (attempted) cover up. Gov. Sanford, for whatever reason, is trying to hold on. Back in my Basketball days, we would say - "He is Stinking Up the Gym." That is all.

-S-

167

acacia Tue, Nov 24, 2009 5:45:06pm

re: #166 Dr. Shalit

Looks like most of the charges had nothing to do with either the philandering or the attempted cover up. He simply used either tax payer or campaign money inappropriately. Not good. Not limited to either R or D. Nothing to do with creationism.

168

prairiefire Tue, Nov 24, 2009 6:03:13pm

Spy Mode Auto

This article has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Sanford Faces 37 Ethics Charges

► LGF Headlines

► Top 10 Comments

► Bottom Comments

► Recent Comments

► Tools/Info

► Tag Cloud