June 25, 2009

"I love your tan lines." — Satan

If conservatives were really serious about protecting marriage, they'd demand that adultery laws be enforced and they'd make no-fault divorce illegal. But they're not, because those are sins that they and their colleagues commit. So instead, we get a bunch of conservative adulterers and serial monogamists lecturing America about the sanctity of marriage.
Quite so. And on Fathers' Day, with four adolescent sons at home, by another woman. The said woman being his wife, who had foregone her own career to further the man's political ambitions. Thanks, buddy.

Of course, the worst aspect of this latest conservative Republican tour de farce is the fact that SC Gov. Sanford fed his staff the "Appalachian Trail" line. No adult believes this chap had some leisurely intention but to go a-schtuppin' right under the nose of Our Lady of Bonaria.

In any democracy other than America or Iran, Mark Sanford would have resigned yesterday. Is this not what lieutenant governors are for?

Best of all is the cancellation of a morality lecture Gov. Sanford was scheduled to deliver at the Family Research Council's "Values Voter Summit" in September:
But I think the Bible says, “Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father that’s in heaven.“ Hopefully, by the way in which you act.
Uh huh. Spare us the sermon, thou deceitful hypocrite.

9 comments:

Tom said...

In any democracy other than America or Iran, Mark Sanford would have resigned yesterday. Is this not what lieutenant governors are for?

And Vice Presidents. You can thank President Clinton for this one refusing to resign.

Clutch said...

In any democracy other than America or Iran, Mark Sanford would have resigned yesterday.

I doubt it very much. In many other democracies, this would hardly be an issue. Who cares if he has an affair; and if he does, is anyone surprised that he doesn't tell the truth about where he is, while penetration is taking place? In France, Italy, or Spain, I suspect that this would just make him a bit more popular (among male voters, at least).

No, the weird part isn't the affair nor the hiding it, but the fanatical self-righteous sexual hypocrisy that contextualizes it. That's the part you'd hardly find in any other liberal democracy. But it's there whether Sanford cheats or not.

Best of all is the cancellation of a morality lecture Gov. Sanford was scheduled to deliver at the Family Research Council's "Values Voter Summit" in September

The entertaining thing isn't so much the cancellation of Sanford as the continued presence of the professionally semi-clad Carrie Prejean and the professionally mendacious Ben Stein on the "Values Voter" speaker list.

illusory tenant said...

Back in 1998, according to the Post and Courier, he said of Clinton, “Very damaging stuff. This one’s pretty cut and dried.” Calling the overall situation messy, he added: “I think it would be much better for the country and for him personally [to resign]." -- LA Times

Anonymous said...

I dunno, I'm kinda with Edroso and Nancy on this one: "Nothing in his constricted morality prepared him for this."

Unlike the Ensign/Vitter fratboy breed of GOP horndogs, who see the 'winger moral code as just another campaign accessory and political bludgeon, Sanford appears to have actually bought into it. Then he saw the little starbursts ricocheting around the room, probably for the first time in his life.

Tom said...

IT: I've read some of the transcripts related to Sanford's take on the Clinton issue. IIRC, Sanford was more distressed because Clinton lied to the media about the affair, rather than the affair itself.

illusory tenant said...

Like I said, the worst of it is he lied to his staff. And I don't believe for a minute he'd even entertained the idea of riding any Appalachian Trail. He's just telling himself that now.

Anonymous said...

I knew I was onto something.

illusory tenant said...

Haha.

grumps said...

Too late. They've moved on to a place where Family Values only count when they're expedient.

http://www.foxpolitics.net/politics.iml?mdl=issues.mdl&issue_id=32510&Category=1