Commendably fair and balanced assessment of Mark Sanford

I think lying and cheating seem to be OK if you are a Republican . I would not vote for him, but my bet is a lot will.

As to the question, I really don't understand what is meant - should he be denied the chance to run again - no , Should he be elected - I hope not.

Well, it works for all the notorious lying and adulterous democrats so what's the problem?

__

I probably should be more specific.  By "get a second chance" I mean be elected to another political office in his state--not just allowed to run.

___

Let's see--that is about the 312th time your response has been of the "So's yer old man" genre.

Try hard to put up something that actually contributes to the discussion; you just might get lucky and do that some time.

I have never much cared about what goes on between a politician and their spouse. What goes on in a marriage is between the parties involved and no one else. If one is cheating then the other one can divorce and that is that. I was happy to see Sanfords wife not put up with his cheating and leave his sorry a s s. However, if she had chose to stay with him, no skin off my teeth..

When it comes to the blatant lies and sneaky behavior that put him out of touch with his office and aides that's another story. He turned off his phones and completely cut himself off from the office he was supposed to be serving. He was elected to do a job and he let his personal life get in the way of doing that job. Also I really can't stand a hypocrite.

some of the things Sanford said about others in politics caught cheating on their spouses.

While serving as a U.S. congressman, Sanford was incredibly critical of his colleagues’ marital misdeeds, including the affairs of former congressman Bob Livingston and President Bill Clinton:

“The bottom line, though, is I am sure there will be a lot of legalistic explanations pointing out that the president lied under oath. His situation was not under oath. The bottom line, though, is he still lied. He lied under a different oath, and that is the oath to his wife. So it’s got to be taken very, very seriously.” [Sanford on Livingston, CNN, 12/18/98]

“We ought to ask questions…rather than circle the wagons for one of our tribe.” [Sanford on how the GOP reacts to affairs, New York Post, 12/20/98]

“I think it would be much better for the country and for him personally (to resign). I come from the business side. If you had a chairman or president in the business world facing these allegations, he’d be gone.” [Sanford on Clinton, The Post and Courier, 9/12/98]

“The issue of lying is probably the biggest harm, if you will, to the system of Democratic government, representatives government, because it undermines trust. And if you undermine trust in our system, you undermine everything.” [Sanford on Clinton, CNN, 2/16/99]

Perhaps my favorite quote by the hypocritical Governor Sanford, is one where he parrots the Republican party's family-values mantra, is this:

Rep. Mark Sanford, R-S.C., said he would be "struggling" during Christmas over whether to support Livingston, even though the speaker-designate had not broken the law. "We as a party want to hold ourselves to high standards, period," Sanford said.

http://www.nwprogressive.org/w...or-mark-sanford.html

Jank, 

Just once, could you post something I disagree with. 

To me it's simple. When he put that ring on he took a vow. One that is really very simple to keep. 

How can I trust him to uphold the office he is "appointed" to? 

I know, I know......... I am holding him to a standard that not many of our congressmen can meet, but shouldn't we hold them to that standard? Is it asking too much to have our congressmen be honorable men? The men (and women) that we trust to govern our nation with integrity. 

Yeah, I know........I'm not holding my breath until that happens. 

------------------

This is about the 500th time you've posted about something republicans are doing that democrats also do, and if truth be known, do more often. So yes, you need to be reminded, "so's yer old man." I have to ask you, what's the difference?  My contribution, calling you on your hypocrisy. Maybe one day you could explain why you think it's so bad for one to do it, but fine for others. You never seem to have an answer for that.

As a former SC independent/conservative voter, anything negative the liberals have to say about this weasel can never be bad enough. But keep trying. I’m enjoying it. I’d rather vote for Barney Frank for POTUS than see MS hold a waste inspector’s job. Not that he wouldn’t immerse himself in it.

You Republicans need to back off and let the sharks do their thing.

Sanford, a notorious adulterer and liar, does have some commendable characteristics, as described in the article. 

He is a amateur  adulterer and liar compared to John Edwards!!!!!!

-------------------

Or ted kennedy or a thousand other present and past democrats that hold/held office.

Good characteristics...folks he walked off the job. At least Palin had the decency to resign.

So he’s no worse than Clinton, Edwards, Kennedy et al. Let his little head do his thinking for his big head. Folks we get all that.

But are you saying he gets a pass because?

Thank God/god I’m Independent.

--------------------

Pass? No, not if the voters don't want him. Is he any good? Yes, no? If he is good at his job then by all means put him back. Apparently being an adulterer and liar doesn't mean anything to voters in either party, they keep putting them back in office, even if they aren't worth a flip. Why should he get a pass? Why should all the rest of them get a pass?  

Try hard to put up something that actually contributes to the discussion; you just might get lucky and do that some time.

==============

Contendah, such as the time I was discussing the reverse mortgage scam, and instead of your "highly awaited enlightening input", your "contribution" was trashing one of the spokesmen-fred thompson?  So yes, I had to do a "so's yer old man" on you once more, and point out that the big old liberal obama supporter, henry winkler, was also their spokesman, and I see him hawking the plan a lot more than thompson. So maybe you should practice a bit of what you preach.

___

I don't keep count of how which celebrities are pitching which products.  I can assure you that Fred Thompson is by far the most prevalent of the paid pitchmen for reverse mortgages.  He is all over the place on that. I don't recall identifying reverse mortgages as a "scam." If used wisely, they can be helpful, but they can be a tricky business and anyone considering one needs to proceed fully informed! 

I called it a scam, and imo it is. I've seen it twice-three times maybe, in the last hour, on the andy griffith show, and it was henry winkler pushing it. 

http://whatreallyhappened.com/...on/6315/strange.html