Speaking of Idiots …

By Loudoun Insider

Or shall I say, speaking of pork(ing)!

Unbelievable.  The reign of the GOP as the party of “family values” has officially come to an end.


Comments

  • Cato the Elder says:

    Hogwash. All Sanford and Ensign did was temporarily change their positions. Several times within an hour, in fact.

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    Cato, you are cracking me up.

    Bleeder, Is “schtuping” really a word??

  • Dan says:

    Loudoun Lady,

    Hell, I am Irish and even I recognize the word “schtuping”. Oy vey!

  • Dan says:

    What? Nobody in Loudoun speaks yiddish?

  • Loudoun Lady says:

    Just googled it, it has 2 p’s – schtupping!

    The example in the urban dictionary is: “Shelley didn’t know that her husband was schtupping the next-door neighbour.” How appropriate for the conversation.

    I shall use this word hence forth……

  • Wolverine says:

    So, it’s o.k. to have a political party which avoids a public stance on “family values” and has some members who “schtup” a woman other than their wife but not o.k. to have a party which does advocate “family values” and has some members who “schtup” a woman other than their wife? Glory to the former party! Shame on the latter party! Sounds a bit like an Alice in Wonderland society.

    Maybe we should be telling ALL these politicians of whatever party to schlep their way out of our lives so we can start this thing over with a clean slate. But, no, America has become a mighty strange place. You hear that, John Edwards? You’re back in the game, boy!

  • Rtwng Extrmst says:

    Sanford obviously has problems. Ones that I think he should resign from office for. Had he simply had an affair and admitted it, that might be enough to forgive, but this guy obviously knew what he was doing and was unable to stop himself. He was AOL as Governor, and apparently used taxpayer funds to pay for his actions. The family values movement is not about being “holier than thou”, nor is it tied up in the ability of any one person to live up to a specific code. People are frail, and they make mistakes. What gets me angry at people like Bill Clinton and Sanford is their desire to “get away with it” by lying and hiding their actions. The movement will go on (and should), because without it we would have no morality in government, and things would be much worse than they are now.

  • Rtwng Extrmst says:

    Sorry, “AOL” should be “AWOL”

  • edmundburkenator says:

    Wolverine: Government should not be legislating family values. I thought you wanted less government? You are a Republican, no?

    So get out of bedrooms, marriages, school prayers, the whole lot.

    I’m wondering: should GOVERNMENTS

  • edmundburkenator says:

    … sorry, hit return.

    be moral or the people that SERVE in the government? Our laws have a moral foundation, but are at times in contradiction with some freedoms. These lines are difficult at times.

  • Ryan says:

    IBOB, would you define “loving porn” as being faithful to your wife? Above, you said that you where a faithful husband, and would never think of cheating, but isn’t that’s what you think about when you view porn? Your own hypocrisy is as bad as Sanford. You just aren’t the gov. of a state and maybe haven’t acted on your thoughts.

    NJSM, you are a disgusting, angry, liberal.

  • Ryan says:

    By the way, the “loving porn” line is something you said a while back when we were debating separate dorms for gays, I think.

  • I Bleed Obama Blue says:

    I do not recall stating that I “love porn”, unless it was in jest. Regardless…

    Pornography has nothing to do with monogamy. I like to watch Major League Baseball, I might fantasize about playing first base, but that doesn’t make me a player. Similarly, watching porn, fantasizing about what’s on the screen, does not make one an adulterer.

  • Ed Myers says:

    Edmund: Morality is a religious term. Individuals can act in a way that makes them think the government is more moral based on their religious framework. However in the public square it is best if we speak of and evaluate government based on how well it provides life, liberty and prosperity for all the people. That’s the religiously pluralistic approach favored by our Constitution.

  • Not John S. Mosby says:

    Ryan,

    I’m sure your idea of porn is looking at Sarah Palin’s mug all day – it’s probably your wallpaper and screen saver – but a spade is a spade in the case of Republicans, twice in less than two weeks, a major sex scandal has cropped up. Pure hypocracy. I don’t have a major problem with a man in power to fool around, it’s fairly standard. If a man has a few bucks or a bit of power, there’s at least a few women somewhere who’ll sleep with him in hopes of getting some money and maybe a little power for herself. That’s a basic instinct, both for men (chasing ass) and women (chasing men’s money and power).

    But, if you’re going to do it, you better not literally preach to others not to do it.

  • Wolverine says:

    That famous former Democratic President Jimmy Carter would disagree with IBOB on #63. Did Carter not once tell Playboy that he was also guilty of this “sin” because, while not an actual player, he had lusted after other women in his heart?

  • Wolverine says:

    Nah, Burkenator. Not Republican. Just a cranky old conservative independent who gets disgusted with the double standards in our modern political world. On this issue I am a two-way man. John Edwards? Kick his sorry ass out. Gov. Sanford? Kick his sorry ass out. The only real argument this pair has is that our political bodies are still replete with people who have committed the same or similar misdeeds, and those people are still there.

    I would guess that, on balance, my own personal opinion is: If your own wife can’t trust you, why should I? We can debate morals and the role of government up the ying yang here. But the bottom line is really your personal integrity with regard to someone who has been asked to trust you, whether that someone may be a spouse or a constituent.

  • Not John S. Mosby says:

    As a point, John Edwards wasn’t an office holder when he had his affair. What possessed him to run for President after he did have the affair, who knows? If he had been nominated, the chances of it not coming out would have been about zero percent, and he would have tanked the election. That’s what pissed off most Dems, more so than the actual affair. And I’m sure that what pisses off most Republicans isn’t that Sanford had an affair, it’s the case of the crazies he developed after his wife busted him and the newspapers were about to publish his emails to the mistress. There are a lot of things he could have done, all bad but not as bad as basically going shit nuts for a week.

  • Rtwng Extrmst says:

    Well put Not JSM.

  • Alton Foley says:

    Bleeder said, “gun control means registration, background checks, purchase limits, etc. Virtually everything in our society is regulated, and for good reason. I don’t see why guns should be any different. I am against unfettered gun ownership, particularly of handguns.”

    I think you answered pretty well what I mean by total and complete gun control.

    Now that we have put aside that red herring, if you do not follow your leader’s complete, enthusiastic support for partial birth abortion, does that make you a hypocrite?

    Of course it does not.

    If your party has no moral standards, it’s easy to live up to that.

    A party that does have high moral standards will always have members, even leaders, who fail.

    As for myself, I prefer to have a higher target to shoot for, even if it means I may miss occasionally, rather than an “anything goes” code to live by.

  • Come on people says:

    It’s the hypocrisy of these two men that resonates with people. It’s galling.

    Republicans should be making it clear they don’t think this behavior is all okay. The applause that Ensign received by his fellow Republicans was clearly the wrong message to send. And, as for South Carolina – it should be the Republicans who kick him out. He used state funds to fly down there and then he went awol. He should be toast – and toasted by his fellow Republicans. Your credibility is at stake.

  • Wolverine says:

    And, while we’re at it, we ought to get rid of those hypocritical “Friends of Angelo.”

  • AFF says:

    What astonishes me the most is the wingnuts who seem to believe that only republicans care about politicians screwing around on their wives.

    I’ll use little LL’s #28 as an example. She wrote-

    ” As long as republicans care more about families, as long as we think that fathers matter, and should be a part of every family, we are the party of family values, regardless of politicians who stray from their families.”

    As long as the GOP faithful implies that they have the corner on “family values” they will be held to a higher standard- a standard they very obviously cannot attain, which will cost them votes. If they keep pitching to the LL’s of the world they’ll lose the votes that are actually in play.

Leave Comment