Sanford's Telltale Heart Exposes GOP's Money/Honey Problem

When Governor Mark Sanford was merely thought to be clearing his mind on the Appalachian Trial on Naked Hiking Day and all the nanny-state fuss-budgets and media finger-pointers were freaking out, Joe Scarborough knew better: His pal Sanford was the real tax-hating, stimulus-refusing, rugged individual deal, a John Wayne 2.0 who'd stroll back into South Carolina's capital without a care in the world.

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Moment of Zen - Joe Scarborough Knows Mark Sanford
thedailyshow.com
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Jason Jones in Iran

Yeah! That's what I'm talking about, wrote RedState.com editor Erick Erickson who called it "refreshing that Mark Sanford is secure enough in himself and the people of South Carolina that he does not view himself as an indispensable man." Government can go take a hike.

So powerful is the myth of the diehard individualist against the state that even after Sanford's gripping press conference--in which he confessed to cheating on his wife, apologized for going AWOL, and emotionally fell apart--some of his fellow Ayn Rand men are trying to shrug off his affair by transferring blame to...Obama.

"The best way to put it--and it's working--he's trying to kill spirit," Rush Limbaugh said of the president. That's right, Obama drove Sanford into the arms of Maria Belen Chapur in Buenos Aires. "He had just tried to fight the stimulus money coming to South Carolina," Rush logicified. "He didn't want any part of it. He lost the battle and said, 'What the hell? The Federal government is taking over! I want to enjoy life!' One of the first things I thought."

Of course it's one of the first things Rush thought--the thrice- divorced, oxycondone addict clearly knows a thing or two about the urge to say the hell with it. But in Sanford's case, "it" is less Obama or the Federal government than the impossibly rigid fiscal and moral puritanism (enforced in no small part by Limbaugh's lash) that makes all those hardcore lone-wolves wanna bust the hell out.

Like many a sanctimonious sinner before him, Sanford's stands on gay marriage, abstinence-only education, and impeaching Bill Clinton for lying about sex have set him up to fall all the harder. But beneath the obvious hypocrisy of a family values Republican committing an offense-of-marriage act lies a deeper contradiction, one that must cleave the Republican soul. Whatever Sanford's--or John Ensign's, David Vitter's, or Larry Craig's--personal demons, their bad-boy adventures cut to the central irony of today's GOP: It's devoted to idea of private wealth and securing the rights of the individual against the tyranny of the majority, but its members themselves must adhere to an ever-narrowing set of acceptable thoughts.

Lest the religious "base" and the party's financiers witch-hunt them as RINOs, avowed conservatives must (and this is a partial list): deny global warming, vilify immigrants and Nancy Pelosi, praise Jesus and Ronald Reagan, and push for war, guns, torture, and excessive compensation for the oligarchy. They must, in effect, demand that society not be generous or feel human sympathy, not even for any of their own irregular yearnings. To fit through the smaller and smaller eye of the needle, all that laissez faire individuality must be severely trimmed.

And while it might seem intuitive that someone who is tight with money will be tight with his personal virtue, in fact nothing is farther from the truth, and the GOP's insistence on both at once is self-selecting a crew of outrageous hypocrites as party leaders. Even the most loyal Republican soldier may think he believes the whole litany of party rights and wrongs, but, whoopsy-daisy, there he is tapping his feet in public restrooms, asking prostitutes if they're good with diapers, bedding a campaign staffer who is his wife's best friend, or disabling his car's tracking device to flee to Argentina undetected.

For years, ever since he rode into the Gingrich congress in 1994, Mark Sanford didn't seem to be one of those extremists in secret distress, torn by the urges to both conform and transgress. In fact, he appeared to be the rare synthesis of those opposing fervors: an anti-government, culture-war populist who was comfortable alternating readings from the corporate and religious scripts. What with his Tea Party, Christian, and Wall Street bona fides (he of Goldman Sachs met his millionaire wife Jenny, of Lazard Freres, in the Hamptons), Sanford was nothing less than the 2012 presidential "holy grail," evangelical writer Warren Smith told The Daily Beast's Max Blumenthal. The governor, adds Tea Party macher Brendan Steinhauser, could have been the guy who finally "unites the different wings of the Republican Party. Economic conservatives, social conservatives, national security conservatives."

Maybe, but throughout his political career, Sanford has displayed an odd absolutism, a rigidity that allowed for zero exceptions to the rules.

Though Sanford's been getting kudos lately for evincing love for both wife and mistress, in 2000, he cast the sole vote in Congress against reauthorizing the Violence Against Women Act.

In December, 1998, when Bob Livingston, Newt Gingrich's proposed successor as Speaker of the House, admitted to adultery, Sanford helped show him the door. Although Livingston hadn't broken the law (or even lied in a deposition, as Clinton had earlier that year), Sanford took a stern view worthy of an old Pharoah, telling CNN, "The bottom line...is he still lied. He lied under a different oath, and that is the oath to his wife." (As Sanford said in last week's press conference before admitting his affair, "I'm a bottom-line kind of guy.")

And the governor's ultimately failed fatwa against accepting stimulus money to rebuild South Carolina's devastated schools did not seem grafted on. He may have hoped it'd boost his presidential profile, but his stinginess is authentic. "If he found an index card in the garbage and saw that only one side of it had been used," said Will Folks, his former spokesman, "he would explain to the staffer, `This is how campaigns are lost.'"

When you've buried both your heart and your wallet under the same telltale floorboards, after a while maybe you just have to transgress. Repression itself can be a turn-on: denying sexual energy, like denying stim funds, can produce a build-up that's got to find a release. (No, no, don't give me money, withhold it, yes, yes, yes, withhold it!) No wonder Sanford felt the need to ease the torque in his head by digging holes on his estate--deep, hydraulically excavated holes, something he rhapsodized about to Maria, without adding the detail that, according to The American Conservative magazine, he paid some $300,000 to an African-American family whose eight-year-old daughter died after apparently falling into what has been variously described as a "pit" or a "retaining pond" on his property.

Democrats, as Fox News reminds us every day, have their share of sex scandals, and while they do suffer the consequences (Gary Hart, John Edwards, Clinton), their falls from grace lack the Goppers' full-fledged bingo! That may be because, as then-Representative Mark Sanford said of Clinton's apparent Teflon in 1998: "In politics you can get away with anything as long as it's what's expected. If people expect you to be a rascal, you can be a rascal."

And if Democrats are expected to be rascals, it's in part because conservatives have been painting them as wanton libertines about money and sex for ages--and by doing so, whoopsy-daisy, Republicans have painted themselves into one very tight corner. Sanford's biggest sin of all was exposing just how phony the Republican coalition between bankers and religious folks really is. The Holy Grail brings life only to the knight whose heart is true.

Comments (61)

1. great post, leslie!

   funny and on target.

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 1:44pm

2. Right on, oligarchs unite, what have you got to lose ... give 'em all the finger, dripping with contempt et al.

   Just don't you fret, GOPers, you've got a re-re-registered GOP multibillionaire white knight coming to rescue your fortunes in '12 ... out to buy the GOP presidential nomination with as little difficulty as he's now buying himself an illegal 3rd term as NYC mayor.

   He's your messiah, to at least the tune of $2 billion. He likes your kind, he's said so often enough.

   As for the rest of us, he's summed us up succinctly: "You're a disgrace."

   You're gonna love Mike B.

   Posted by sloper at 06/30/2009 @ 2:32pm

3. Can we please stay out of peoples' romantic lives.

   Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 2:36pm

4. Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 2:36pm | ignore this person | warn this person

   nope...

   Posted by ibbleblibble at 06/30/2009 @ 2:40pm

5. Ms Savan,

   if ever "doesn't have a clue" fit someone, your post demands that statement be attached.

   Regarding Limbaugh, like most leftists you seem either unaware or incapable of understanding his humor. that you took it seriously reflects on your own inadequacies.

   As to your view of conservatives, you seem to buy every stereotype that the left perpetuates.

   But perhaps I'm being overly critical. It is possible that your posts merely reflect that you suffer from savant syndrome or some other mental condition that prevents you from any substantive cognitive capacity.

   Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 2:41pm

6. Great post. Well researched and insightful.

   While I personally could care less about the personal lives of politicians. If one throws stones at someone for an indiscretion, they should expect no less when they themselves are in the same situation.

   As to anti's point about limbaugh being taken too seriously again. Right, anything that Rush says that sounds crazy must be just a joke right? That is why I don't take him seriously EVER. He is an over weight, deaf, drug addicted, hypocritical clown. He is about as relevant to reality as Mickey Mouse and anyone who actually listens to him seriously must have a serious mental deficiency. Right Anti?

   Posted by Extraneous at 06/30/2009 @ 2:52pm

7. Right Anti?

   Posted by Extraneous at 06/30/2009 @ 2:52pm

   I didn't hear the comments in question because I seldom listen to Rush; however when I do, I almost always enjoy his ranting because he is a very good entertainer and he loves parody. I would assume just by the words she posted that this was just another one of Rush's humorous parodies on liberal thinking. It certainly has all of the appearances of being just that.

   Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 3:03pm

8. I didn't hear the comments in question because I seldom listen to Rush; however when I do, I almost always enjoy his ranting because he is a very good entertainer and he loves parody. I would assume just by the words she posted that this was just another one of Rush's humorous parodies on liberal thinking. It certainly has all of the appearances of being just that.

   Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 3:03pm

   Wait wait wait, you consider Rush to be a good entertainer but you take issue with George Carlin. They are the same type of entertainer with different focuses. Why one and not the other?

   Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 5:54pm

9. Regarding Limbaugh, like most leftists you seem either unaware or incapable of understanding his humor. that you took it seriously reflects on your own inadequacies. Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 2:41pm

   The left has long regarded Limbaugh as a joke; it is the right that takes him serious...

   Posted by Balrog at 06/30/2009 @ 5:59pm

10. Is there not one publication in this country that has the principle to NOT obsessive discuss the sexual lives of our politicians unless criminal acts were involved?

    Posted by theo51 at 06/30/2009 @ 6:11pm

11. Actually, I understand Limbaugh's humor. I just don't find it funny, and frankly, it does little to make me rethink the world and challenge sources of power. That's the difference between a comedian and a teller of jokes, and Limbaugh is the latter.

    I wonder how many Nazis said Jews were incapable of understanding Hitler's humor.

    Posted by onthehelm at 06/30/2009 @ 7:09pm

12. Wait wait wait, you consider Rush to be a good entertainer but you take issue with George Carlin. They are the same type of entertainer with different focuses. Why one and not the other?

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 5:54pm

    Because I find nothing funny about foul mouthed atheism.

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 7:10pm

13. Because I find nothing funny about foul mouthed atheism.

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 7:10pm

    But you find foul mouthed bigotry funny? I don't understand.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 7:26pm

14. I ain't gonna say it, lol

    I wonder how many Nazis said Jews were incapable of understanding Hitler's humor. Posted by onthehelm at 06/30/2009 @ 7:09pm

    "he is a very good entertainer and he loves parody"

    Springtime for Hitler.... was my first thought. It seemed funny for about a second

    Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 06/30/2009 @ 7:44pm

15. Like so many in the neocon pantheon, Rush was among those who somehow "missed their chance" to serve.

    Anyway, when Rush had his draft physical, they found a minor rectal disorder (seriously) and exempted him.

    The moral of the story?

    Even Rush wasn't a perfect asshole.

    :)

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 06/30/2009 @ 8:22pm

16. And, yes, I will acknowledge, that sometimes in his show's early days, and I mean early days, even Rush could be funny at times. Wasn't quite so doctrinaire, it seems to me.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 06/30/2009 @ 8:24pm

17. (Con party's) devoted to idea of private wealth and securing the rights of the individual against the tyranny of the majority, but its members themselves must adhere to an ever-narrowing set of acceptable thoughts.

    posted by Leslie Savan on 06/30/2009 @ 1:33pm

    Nice --------

    No comment on this central point from most of the "Righties". Anti-logic Larry is decidedly silent on whether Sanford's behavior should be considered relevant to the - duh - little sideline here, whether he should stay in power.

    I for one fully support his effort to remain in office!

    Posted by winyahn at 06/30/2009 @ 9:04pm

18. Good to see Leslie Savan taking a stand for "faimilies without values"! I guess that is what she is standing for? Surely she isn't just standing for malicious gossip which leftist so despise about Demoncrats and their figureheads!

    Posted by BigPasture at 06/30/2009 @ 10:22pm

19. McCain-Cheney-Sanford-Palin are weeping:

    "Iraqis celebrated the withdrawal of American troops from the country's cities and towns, in Baghdad on Tuesday."

    Posted by winyahn at 06/30/2009 @ 10:40pm

20. Can we please stay out of peoples' romantic lives.

    Posted by syfriendly at 06/30/2009 @ 2:36pm

    Well, although an Argentine sex excursion is legal.... It is not legal to have the trip arranged by the S.C. Dept. of Commerce and paid for by the taxpayers.

    Now that's what I call stimulus money.

    Posted by koroviev at 07/01/2009 @ 05:23am

21. Well, although an Argentine sex excursion is legal.... It is not legal to have the trip arranged by the S.C. Dept. of Commerce and paid for by the taxpayers.

    Now that's what I call stimulus money.

    Posted by koroviev at 07/01/2009 @ 05:23am

    Heh

    Posted by Balrog at 07/01/2009 @ 07:41am

22. "Though Sanford's been getting kudos lately for evincing love for both wife and mistress..."

    Who is bestowing "kudos" on Sanford for the love?

    "Maria is my soulmate...but I guess I'll try to patch it up with my wife (who by implication is NOT my soulmate)". I'm not seeing too much love for Mrs. Sanford in this. Public torture, more like--nothing like being advertised as "serviceable".

    What a weasel. Right there with John Edwards, IMO.

    Clinton and Spitzer never babbled about the other women being their soulmates--they were strictly lechers. I think it's got to be far more devastating to hear your husband wax rhapsodic about being in love with the other woman than to hear he was just going for non-romantic sex.

    But should it matter to the voters of SC? If he spent state money/time (did he take vacation days?), definitely. Being unreachable for several days, yes. Being a skank of dubious moral character, maybe.

    Posted by VEH at 07/01/2009 @ 09:17am

23. As a good liberal, I would prefer politicians who mix sex with public duty do so with a populist bend. Barney Frank is an excellent example. He obviously liked what he got from Fannie Mae so much that he decided to pass it along to the rest of the country.

    Posted by RAGGEDSTEP at 07/01/2009 @ 10:32am

24. Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 2:41pm

    Always love when Larry lectures others on "stereotypes of the Right"....and then engaged in HIS stereotype of the Left!

    And naturally, never sees his hypocrisy.

    ROFL

    Posted by Mask at 07/01/2009 @ 11:05am

25. But you find foul mouthed bigotry funny? I don't understand.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 7:26pm

    No I don't...I don't hear any from Rush when I have had the chance to listen. I've heard him parody those who make their living in the "racism industry" like Jesse Jackson and Sharpton.

    But I also heard him this week defend Jackson and Sharpton regarding Michael Jackson.

    BTW I've never heard anything foul mouthed out of Rush, nor have I heard of anyone complaining about the use of foul language from him. Can you cite anything?

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/01/2009 @ 11:33am

26. Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 2:41pm

    Always love when Larry lectures others on "stereotypes of the Right"....and then engaged in HIS stereotype of the Left!

    And naturally, never sees his hypocrisy.

    ROFL

    Posted by Mask at 07/01/2009 @ 11:05am

    And I did nothing of the kind. You are once again guilty of a leap of logic.

    It is a fact that most of the complaints about Limbaugh comments as seen nightly on Olbermann and others on MSNBC take place because they try and make his parodies out to instead be serious comments. The same holds true for yourself whom I've seen more than once recently engaging in similar constructs.

    So rather than painting a stereotype, I was noting the documented fact.

    Just to remind you and any who may not have read the post you reference.

    <if ever "doesn't have a clue" fit someone, your post demands that statement be attached.

    Regarding Limbaugh, like most leftists you seem either unaware or incapable of understanding his humor. that you took it seriously reflects on your own inadequacies.

    As to your view of conservatives, you seem to buy every stereotype that the left perpetuates.

    But perhaps I'm being overly critical. It is possible that your posts merely reflect that you suffer from savant syndrome or some other mental condition that prevents you from any substantive cognitive capacity.

    Posted by antisocialist at 06/30/2009 @ 2:41pm>

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/01/2009 @ 11:38am

27. Larry, you are a hypocrite of the First Order. We all know it, in your extreme arrogance you refuse to see it.

    Just listened to Fresh Air. I had misplaced my memory of The Family, right wing nutjobs that think they are Chosen by God to bring us supply side economics. Ensign and Sanford belong to this group. The most likely reason Sanford has not stepped down is because he feels Chosen by God to lead, and no sex scandal is going to get in Her way, dammit!! He probably actually does think of himself as King David. The Family is ACTUALLY a cabal, but of course not one Larry seems concerned about even though they walk among the highest and mightiest in the world and have far more influence than say...a janitorial union or pink shirted grannies. Guess which Larry has more fear of?

    I wonder Larry, can you cite me some communist/leftist/marxist groups that use tax exempt status to give under market cost housing to congressmen? I know how much you hate dictators and those that support them, how about some comments on Gods choice of an Indonesian strongman to exercise Her will?

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/01/2009 @ 2:16pm

28. Posted by crabwalk at 07/01/2009 @ 2:16pm

    You really can be full of yourself most of the time.

    1. I don't believe that "supply side economics is chosen by G-d".

    2. I think that Sanford should resign. I didn't think so initially, but the more he speaks, I am convinced of it.

    3. I've never heard of the "Family".

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/01/2009 @ 2:31pm

29. "And the governor's ultimately failed fatwa against accepting stimulus money to rebuild South Carolina's devastated schools did not seem grafted on. He may have hoped it'd boost his presidential profile, but his stinginess is authentic."

    This is documentary about the school system there in South Carolina.

    http://www.corridorofshame.com/

    Posted by eniobob at 07/01/2009 @ 3:06pm

30. Posted by barry25 at 06/29/2009 @ 6:25pm |

    did I say you believed Voodoo economics is GOds chosen Path?

    No.

    I said The Family believes it.

    If you have never heard of them, I suggest you delve into your xtian cults as deep as you delve into all things leftist. They are far more powerful than most of the leftists that you have such a phobia of.

    I just heard about the book today so have not had a chance to read up, I suggest you go out and get a copy. I am willing to bet you will find some of your heroes mentioned.

    The Family: The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power by Jeff Sharlet

    From Publishers Weekly

    Checking in on a friend's brother at Ivenwald, a Washington-based fundamentalist group living communally in Arlington, Va., religion and journalism scholar Sharlet finds a sect whose members refer to Manhattan's Ground Zero as "the ruins of secularism"; intrigued, Sharlet accepts on a whim an invitation to stay at Ivenwald. He's shocked to find himself in the stronghold of a widespread "invisible" network, organized into cells much like Ivenwald, and populated by elite, politically ambitious fundamentalists; Sharlet is present when a leader tells a dozen men living there, "You guys are here to learn how to rule the world."

    the Family's international reach ("almost impossible to overstate") has "forged relationships between the U.S. government and some of the most oppressive regimes in the world."

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/01/2009 @ 5:46pm

31. I've never heard of the "Family".

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/01/2009 @ 2:31pm

    Therefore, it doesn't exist...and if it did, it just disappeared in cloud of dismissive arrogance.

    *Poof*

    Gone.

    Next?

    Posted by Balrog at 07/01/2009 @ 5:47pm

32. Seems Hillary is a part of this as well. Shocking as gambling in Casablanca.

    From Sharlet's website:

    "The Family is about the other half of American fundamentalist power--not its angry masses, but its sophisticated elites. Sharlet follows the story back to Abraham Vereide, an immigrant preacher who in 1935 organized a small group of businessmen sympathetic to European fascism, fusing the Far Right with his own polite but authoritarian faith. From that core, Vereide built an international network of fundamentalists who spoke the language of establishment power, a "family" that thrives to this day. In public, they host prayer breakfasts; in private they preach a gospel of "biblical capitalism," military might, and American empire. Citing Hitler, Lenin, and Mao, the Family's leader declares, "We work with power where we can, build new power where we can't."

    ----

    "I was once an insider's insider within fundamentalism. Unequivocally: Sharlet knows what he's talking about. He writes: ‘Our refusal to recognize the theocratic strand running throughout American history is as self-deceiving as fundamentalism's insistence that the United States was created a Christian nation.' Those who want to be un-deceived (and wildly entertained) must read this disturbing tour de force." --Frank Schaeffer, author of Crazy For God: How I Grew Up As One Of The Elect, Helped Found The Religious Right, And Lived To Take All (Or Almost All) Of It Back

    ----

    Seems Hillary is a part of this as well. Shocking as gambling in Casablanca.

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/01/2009 @ 6:04pm

33. From the pages of our favorite blog supplier and leftist cabal provocateurs:

    Hillary's Nasty Pastorate

    "During the 1960s the Family forged relationships between the U.S. government and some of the most anti-Communist (and dictatorial) elements within Africa's postcolonial leadership. The Brazilian dictator General Costa e Silva, with Family support, was overseeing regular fellowship groups for Latin American leaders, while, in Indonesia, General Suharto (whose tally of several hundred thousand "Communists" killed marks him as one of the century's most murderous dictators) was presiding over a group of fifty Indonesian legislators. During the Reagan Administration the Family helped build friendships between the U.S. government and men such as Salvadoran general Carlos Eugenios Vides Casanova, convicted by a Florida jury of the torture of thousands, and Honduran general Gustavo Alvarez Martinez, himself an evangelical minister, who was linked to both the CIA and death squads before his own demise. "--http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080331/ehrenreich

    -----

    Posted by Balrog at 07/01/2009 @ 5:47pm

    giggle.

    I've missed you Balrog.

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/01/2009 @ 6:08pm

34. So rather than painting a stereotype, I was noting the documented fact.---Posted by antisocialist at 07/01/2009 @ 11:38am

    Translation? "Nuh-huh. MY stereotypes are TRUE...yours are false!"

    LOL

    Posted by Mask at 07/01/2009 @ 7:22pm

35. "Therefore, it doesn't exist...and if it did, it just disappeared in cloud of dismissive arrogance...."---Posted by Balrog at 07/01/2009 @ 5:47pm

    Bugblatter Beast of Traal Logic.

    Easiest way to defeat Larry/antisoc...put a towel on your head.

    Posted by Mask at 07/01/2009 @ 7:24pm

36. "Therefore, it doesn't exist...and if it did, it just disappeared in cloud of dismissive arrogance...."---Posted by Balrog at 07/01/2009 @ 5:47pm

    Bugblatter Beast of Traal Logic.

    Easiest way to defeat Larry/antisoc...put a towel on your head.

    Posted by Mask at 07/01/2009 @ 7:24pm

    Idiotic...I've said before that I'm not a Fundamentalist and this group appears to be a small elitist political group near Washington.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/01/2009 @ 7:54pm

37. Re: Balrog

    On again, off again, Gandalf the Wizard's mom Shuddered to ponder her progeny's fate: Devoured by lava pest-managing balrogs! The creatures had scarcely been mentioned of late.

    Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 07/01/2009 @ 9:12pm

38. BTW I've never heard anything foul mouthed out of Rush, nor have I heard of anyone complaining about the use of foul language from him. Can you cite anything?

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/01/2009 @ 11:33a

    I don't consider just foul language to be foul mouthed. And consider his rabid dislike of liberals to be bigoted.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/01/2009 @ 9:25pm

39. Now that's what I call stimulus money.

    Posted by koroviev at 07/01/2009 @ 05:23am

    Heh

    Posted by Balrog at 07/01/2009 @ 07:41am

    Indeed.

    Governor "extramarital-roll-in-the-hay-family-values-let's-impeach-Clinton" Mark Sanford's recent behavior du jour, including, undoubtedly, the obligatory 3 am race around some broad's Buenos Aires pad, in that vain, race-against-the-clock attempt to evade her old man as well as find his shorts, is hardly what the good taxpayers of the Little Red State of SC had in mind.

    Posted by schnellerheinz at 07/01/2009 @ 9:42pm

40. Clinton and Spitzer never babbled about the other women being their soulmates--they were strictly lechers.

    Posted by VEH at 07/01/2009

    At least Spitzer was patriotic enough to buy American.

    Posted by koroviev at 07/01/2009 @ 11:07pm

41. "Idiotic...I've said before that I'm not a Fundamentalist and this group appears to be a small elitist political group near Washington."-----Posted by antisocialist at 07/01/2009 @ 7:54pm

    Uh, Larry, don't YOU cite several "small elitist groups" as the ones who have guarenteed your status as a "prophet of God" (Pakistani Evangelicals, Businessman's Assembly)???

    BTW, Google up "Bugblatter Beast"...heheh

    Posted by Mask at 07/02/2009 @ 06:02am

42. I've said before that I'm not a Fundamentalist and this group appears to be a small elitist political group near Washington.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/01/2009 @ 7:54pm''

    they may be small, but their reach is very large. I would think that you, a Believer of the First Order and someone in touch with Christian and Israeli power groups (as YOU have claimed) would know about such a group as The Family.

    It just shows us all your hypocrisy again. You know ALL about union links to communist groups back into the 30's, can cite Margaret Sanger quotes, ...but somehow The Family has escaped your attention? Especially when this group supports dictators around the world that take peoples FREEDOMS and killed tens of thousands of communists . Dead commies Larry! How did you miss that?

    Big gaping hole in your worldview.

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/02/2009 @ 06:25am

43. But you find foul mouthed bigotry funny? I don't understand.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 06/30/2009 @ 7:26pm

    No I don't...I don't hear any from Rush when I have had the chance to listen. --------

    On the August 23 broadcast of his nationally syndicated radio program, Rush Limbaugh suggested that the competition in a new season of CBS' reality TV program Survivor, in which contestants are reportedly divided into competing "tribes" by ethnicity, "is not going to be fair if there's a lot of water events." In support of this assertion, he cited a March 2 HealthDay article reporting that "young blacks -- especially males -- are much more likely to drown in pools than whites."

    Limbaugh stated that "the white tribe would be the best swimmers" based on the performance of white athletes at "the Olympics."

    In support of his assertion that his comments were "not ... racist," Limbaugh cited a March 2 HealthDay article reporting that "young blacks -- especially males -- are much more likely to drown in pools than whites." But the study on which the HealthDay article was based did not address the swimming abilities of African-Americans in general. HealthDay reported that "[r]esearchers don't know why black kids are at higher risk of drowning," that "[m]ost of the black [drowning] victims ... drowned in public pools," and that "[t]he study didn't examine whether the victims had taken swimming lessons or whether the pools were supervised by lifeguards." Additionally, the article noted that according to the study, "people from poorer families were more likely to drown" -- "regardless of race," and that one author of the study suggested "[f]uture research" will be done to "examine whether swimming instruction reduces the risk of drowning."

    MEDIAMATTERS

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/02/2009 @ 06:32am

44. Larry, why do you think Rush resigned from ESPN?

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/02/2009 @ 06:39am

45. Posted by koroviev at 07/01/2009 @ 11:07pm

    Ba Doom!

    Good one.

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/02/2009 @ 06:45am

46. I don't consider just foul language to be foul mouthed. And consider his rabid dislike of liberals to be bigoted.

    Posted by Cccomfo1 at 07/01/2009 @ 9:25pm

    Well, I do. My father who was an atheist taught us that people used foul language either because of a lack of civility or because they lacked communication skills.

    I continue to agree with that premise.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/02/2009 @ 09:12am

47. Uh, Larry, don't YOU cite several "small elitist groups" as the ones who have guarenteed your status as a "prophet of God" (Pakistani Evangelicals, Businessman's Assembly)???

    BTW, Google up "Bugblatter Beast"...heheh

    Posted by Mask at 07/02/2009 @ 06:02am

    None of the groups I cite are elitist. They don't have restrictions or limitations on membership; none of them consider themselves socially or intellectually superior to others;

    And some are not small: the Full Gospel Businessmens Fellowship has several million businessmen and ministers in membership around the world and has no elitist reputation.

    The International Church of the Foursquare Gospel is one of the largest Pentecostal Denominations in the world with several million members-again no way they can be considered elitist.

    You're just trying to create an issue where there is none.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/02/2009 @ 09:41am

48. Larry, why do you think Rush resigned from ESPN?

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/02/2009 @ 06:39am

    Leftist media distorting his remarks.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/02/2009 @ 09:42am

49. Sensitivity to language is a typical leftist trait.

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/02/2009 @ 09:46am

50. Leftist media distorting his remarks.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/02/2009 @ 09:42am

    Of course.

    Silly me.

    Same with Jimmy The Greek, right? It's just a matter of "not understanding their humor".

    Like hanging a noose in someones locker. They just don't "get it".

    It's all in good fun. Till someone gets their eye poked out.

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/02/2009 @ 09:52am

51. How is it that someone as knowlegdeable in the areas of loss of freedom and dictators as you, Larry, missed The Family?

    Especially when they are the founders of the National Day of Prayer and they offer housing and counseling to conservative Christian congressmen?

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/02/2009 @ 09:57am

52. How is it that someone as knowlegdeable in the areas of loss of freedom and dictators as you, Larry, missed The Family?

    Especially when they are the founders of the National Day of Prayer and they offer housing and counseling to conservative Christian congressmen?

    Posted by crabwalk at 07/02/2009 @ 09:57am

    Gee, maybe because:

    1. I'm not perfect

    2. I don't follow who Congressmen meet with for housing and counseling

    3. their focus is different than mine in ministry

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/02/2009 @ 11:29am

53. I slice my finger on a sharp aluminum panel at work and the blood starts to flow. "Oh, fudge!" cry I in controlled irritation at my carelessness.

    Carlin was a master of English and, like others, explored the English language and perhaps the ranges/shades of the associations brought up by words a bit like Lenny Bruce. There is a huge conceptual divide between " * off and die!" and the basic meaning of, well you get the picture.

    Bruce's Dirty Toilet analogy is perhaps the clearest. He had me nearly weeping for that poor toilet....

    Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 07/02/2009 @ 12:29pm

54. antisocialist-You are one of the worst offenders when it comes to stereotyping and you are just as foul mouthed as George Carlin was.There is no difference between your using big words to put down the author and calling the author a fucking idiot.Your goal is to hurt the author's, and others feelings, and it is your goal of hurting others that makes what you say foul and not the particular words that you use.

    Posted by i'm nobody at 07/02/2009 @ 1:02pm

55. Carlin was a master of English and, like others, explored the English language and perhaps the ranges/shades of the associations brought up by words a bit like Lenny Bruce. There is a huge conceptual divide between " * off and die!" and the basic meaning of, well you get the picture.

    Bruce's Dirty Toilet analogy is perhaps the clearest. He had me nearly weeping for that poor toilet....

    Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 07/02/2009 @ 12:29pm

    LOL-

    Carlin was just a rude, crude, offensive atheist who made money by being offensive.

    Posted by antisocialist at 07/02/2009 @ 1:18pm

56. Carlin was just a rude, crude, offensive atheist who made money by being offensive. Posted by antisocialist at 07/02/2009 @ 1:18pm

    So does Rush, dude

    Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 07/02/2009 @ 6:22pm

57. I received a mystery box from a cousin recently. It contained three books belonging to my father (d. 1959). One was a really nice King James bible, which I have been wanting for years, or at least a book of children's bible stories to help me understand literary themes and references in western literature. I am reading Genesis, and you know what? It sounds to me... familiar... I've heard this somewhere before... like.. GEORGE CARLIN talking to a longhouse filled with Native Americans on a cold winter's eve.... And if you ignore the separation of the first and second chapters (so different after the first verse in theme and tone - different writers?) and take the seventh day of creation as a punch line ("WHEW!!!! - That Was Not Easy!") it reads to me as a loving address to people assumed to have the power to question, think, and wonder. Ibn Arabi (Spanish 12th (?) century Sufi) was such a writer. Great essay on monotheism.

    Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 07/02/2009 @ 6:39pm

58. 1- Why would people pay to watch someone you describe as having NO talent?

    "a rude, crude, offensive atheist"? Posted by antisocialist at 07/02/2009 @ 1:18pm

    2- Is it just coincidental that he thought Bush/Cheney, and dittoheads, to be idiots - and could support his case with hilarious, factual evidence?

    You don't mention anything about his politics either.

    Posted by winyahn at 07/02/2009 @ 6:45pm

59. And I find that the man who translated and printed the first English Bible, Thomas Moore, was burnt at the stake for having the temerity to allow readers to actually read these texts for themselves. Talk about free speech issues.

    Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 07/02/2009 @ 7:07pm

60. Posted by antisocialist at 07/02/2009 times a gazillion

    I just re-upped for 47 (issues)

    How bout you, bud

    Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 07/02/2009 @ 8:02pm

61. And I would venture to add that even Rush pays his agent

    Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 07/03/2009 @ 09:10am