Governor Mark Sanford and liberal hypocrisy

Amy...Clinton committed felonies, yes felonies, as our president all to cover up his affairs!

It's a corrupt and hypocritical neocon party.
As all the neocons do, the republican governor of South Carolina pretended to be so righteous. But it was all a lie. Nothing new to the republican party however. They are filled with hypocricy.
On a daily basis we see the neocons blaming everything on the open-minded liberals. Then, when the neocons are caught red-handed, their hypocrisy kicks in. Suddenly everything is the fault of the mainstream media. They can’t own up to their own faults. Instead, they state that they are “bottom line” type of people, while dancing around the issue like a kid hiding the fact that he broke a window.
The people who vote these candidates into office think it’s not their fault. They ignore the fact that their own judgement in these matters is the culprit. The problem is that they are programmed simply to bow down to anyone who the master leaders say is a conservative. Then, when the candidate talks the talk by blaming open-minded liberals, the followers line up like a bunch of rats behind the pied-piper.
The followers, who refuse to think about anything on their own and can’t come up with an idea beyond the master leadership, fill themselves with angst when they see that the unbiased and open-minded Democrats do not react in the same way. Because the neocon followers refuse to think for themselves, they fail to realize that the Democrats aren’t prone to knee-jerk reactions. When the neocon party members fall into this trap and feel compelled to go on the national media circuit and the followers reaction is typical. They react by blaming the media..

I'm a liberal, and my heart goes out to Gov Sanford and his wife and family. This must be heartbreaking for all involved. I will pray for a positive outcome for his marriage and the four young boys involved.

I hope this _private_ matter can be left to the family soon instead of having to read more about it in the media.

lake country progressive...you didn't argue the facts about all the liberals who did the same. Even your pal, Bill Clinton, committed adultery and lied to you after. Should we chalk it up to that convenient amnesia thing?

Spin spin spin the mans a hypocrite and should resign, not only that he left for a week, even his staff didn't know. What if their was an emergency? He's the governer for gods sakes.

Seems you can't even condemn the mans actions, but attack the left for his faults.

Do any libs really know what neocon means? Liberals to my site sure seem to throw it around a lot.
Here's a definition:
neo conservatism: Neoconservatism is a political philosophy which supports using American economic and military power to bring liberalism, democracy, and human rights to other countries.
The way the left likes to use "neocon" is akin to calling people violent traitors. Or, as Jonah Goldberg from the National Review says, neoconservative is really liberal code for "conservative Jews and others who are supporters of Israel."
And I do not know of anyone in the Republican or conservative movement who believes we are so "righteous." There is, however, a strong belief in what is right and what is wrong. The left likes to muddy the waters with that one, especially when the "wrong" is committed by their own party members. They are the true hypocrites, who scream bloody murder when a Republican politician does something bad, yet they look the other way when Democratic politicians do the same thing - or worse.

And Republican politicians cannot get away with blaming many things on liberals, (even though it is true that liberalism is at the bottom of many of our social ills - and with Obama at the helm it's getting worse). The media won't allow it. Yet, they have no problem allowing President Obama & Co. to continue to blame President Bush for everything under the sun. I'm surprised Bush & Cheney haven't been accused of causing the recent metro train crash in Washington, D.C.

Jacob Pickard: What are you talking about? I agree that Sanford should resign. And he will. What he did was wrong.
But the point of my blog is that a Republican will step down when in the wrong. And the media will smear the entire Republican party from the actions of one.
When a Democrat politician does the same thing, it is a "private" matter. Democrats do not step down (unless they are found guilty and go to prison...). And the media will not tie in the entire Democratic party with the actions of the guilty one.
Double standard and hypocrisy.

Amy - The media loves it when the mighty fall, be they actors screwed up on drugs or politicans having affairs, there's a cheap voeyeristic (sic) thrill that they and people get watching people in high places fall.

What makes Sanford even more tabloid is the way he went about it, dissapearing and having an affiar with a lady from Argentina. Not only that but he's been a "family value conservative" and a hypocrite for his vote on Bill Clinton who was impeached.

When the mighty fall, there is entertainment and money to be made by the media. It's really pretty simple.

Amy - Vitter has not stepped down, Larry Craig did not step down, Ensign did not step down and Mark sanford is not stepping down.

Them's the facts.

Amy…you are so right about the lies and the hypocrisy of our liberals and the bias liberal media.

When John Edwards was found having an affair, the establishment media waited until the opening night of the Olympics to cover it. A time when every MSM outlet said no one would pay attention to politics. An LA Times editor told his bloggers (similar to the Milw JS telling us what not to say) to not mention the brewing Edwards scandal. No bias there I see!

Look how long it took so many newspapers to report the DNA findings of Clinton’s little stain on Monica’s blue dress.

When Obama had a challenge from Sara Palin, he sent his attack machine to try and find an affair with her. The same way Obama won his IL senate seat.

Did the establishment media unseal the divorce records of John Kerry, Joe Lieberman, or Ted Kennedy just to make sure they lose an election like they did to Jack Ryan? But when it came to having Howard Dean open sealed gubernatorial records? Nope! Even Dean said, he would “prefer to end the campaign than to let the world see everything.”

Yup, no bias, lying MSM in this country. You betchya, hey.

Amy, I see they still don't stick to the topic of your blog or the plainly related facts. An excellent blog!!! Just more re-direction from truth on the left side. Thanks.

"a Republican will step down when in the wrong"

Did Jessica McSleepsaround step down from her position as professor of journalism? Perhaps she's a non'family values' Republican?

ajohnson911...good call!

jmark...did Clinton, Kennedy, Edwards, Dean, etc, etc, etc???

jim: Clinton, Kennedy, etc, are not Republicans. What don't you understand about this assertion: "a Republican will step down when in the wrong".

I don't think Jessica McBride is a Republican politician, and that is clearly what my blog is referencing.

As for Vitter - accused in the DC. madam prostitution case, he is indeed still in office. However, he was never formally charged with anything, since his activities occurred in 1999 and didn't come to light until 2007. The statute of limitations had expired. Vitter did admit wrongdoing and apologized to his family.

Larry Craig allegedly touched a man's foot with his own in a bathroom stall. This was considered "lewd behavior." When this incident first came out, Craig initially said he would step down, then thought otherwise, deciding that he wasn't guilty of anything. He wanted to change his plea, but wasn't allowed to. Afterwards, he chose not to seek re-election and served out the remaining months left for his term. His political career ended in 2008.

The Ensign case is pretty recent. Already Ensign has resigned his post as head of hte GOP Policy Committee - a very high position in Republican ranks.

Likewise, Sanford's affair just came to light a few days ago. While it is true he hasn't stepped down right this very instant, I don't think it is unreasonable to say he may in the near future. In any case, he was once considered as a VP candidate for President by John McCain. I think he was also considering a run at the Presidency in 2012. Those hopes have been ended. Sanfords political career is dead.

The point still remains - the consequences for bad and/or illegal behavior by Republicans is still a much bigger issue for Republicans, with more severe consequences than for Democrats. And Democrats really don't seem to care too much when one of their own does something wrong. As long as they remain in power, that's what matters. What is right or wrong is irrelevant.
Why, in most cases, they even defend the liars, adulterers, and murderers in their own party. Bill Clinton and Teddy Kennedy are perfect examples.

Bill O'Reilly still has quite a following and he didn't "step down". He's still on TV and the republican following is just as strong as ever. I guess those family values aren't all that they're cracked up to be.

Or is the argument is that it's "family values" to tune into these low-lifes as long as the don't hold office?

"The point still remains - the consequences for bad and/or illegal behavior by Republicans is still a much bigger issue for Republicans, with more severe consequences than for Democrats."

You're nuts. Bill Clinton was impeached for far less than outing a CIA agent. Nobody batted an eye when the criminal Bush Regime started a false war and outed an agent.

I knew you would dodge the McBride question. It shouldn't matter whether you're a politician or a professor, moral standards should apply equally. If McBride were a democrat the rightwingers would be going on about how this is just another case of a liberal professor debasing our institutions of higher learning. Obviously conservative professors are held to a lower standard. Of course, if you don't believe in the concept of fairness and equality, you would have a tiered system of morality.

Bill O'Reilly is not a Republican politician. O'Reilly doesn't even consider himself a republican or conservative. He calls himself a traditionalist. I don't know what he has to do with the blog topic of how Republican politicians are treated vs. Democratic politicians are addressed when bad or illegal behaviors surface.

To continue, though Jessica McBride is not a Republican politician, I do believe she should step down from her position as a professor at a local university. And I doI think she will either leave on her own, or the powers that be will force her out. Whatever the case, she is not the topic of my blog. (Interesting, tho, while pointing out McBride's adultery, no mention of Milwaukee Police Chief, Ed Flynn. It takes two to tango...)

Bill Clinton was impeached for lying under oath. That is still considered a biggie in the courts. And no one "outed" a CIA agent. Valerie Plame was already known to be a CIA operative before her name ever popped out. Yet another sad attempt by libs to somehow "get" Bush and Cheney and the Bush Administration.

I get it, so if a Republican only half-steps down, that is completely stepping down.

Well, makes sense Sanford is still governener. Vitter is still in, and Ensign is still in as well.

Is Spizter still governer of New York?

Good job on that one AMY. Makes perfect sense

Oxymoron: "Valerie Plame was already known to be a CIA operative before her name ever popped out."

Are the politicians true-blue republicans? These are true representatives of the republican party?

Or are you claiming they aren't and in that case, you're complaint about the media is hogwash.

Which is it? Is the republican party filled with reprehensible people or are you just spouting a bunch of crap?

I am apathetic regarding Ensign, or Sanford. They screwed up, they apologized, move on.

Thank you, Victor!

And, I never liked McBride anyway!

The point is--a double standard exists that benefits democrats.

And, conservative professors held to a lower standard? That's laughable and possibly the stupidist thing ever written in a blog!!

What about Newt Gingrich, who handed his wife divorce papers on Mother's Day (while she was in the hospital, no less), and who was having an AFFAIR (meaning full on sexual relations!) with a staffer. And what about Rudy Giuliani, hanging out with his younger mistress? As I recall, neither stepping down.
Conveniently forgetting these, hm?

"The point is--a double standard exists that benefits democrats."

So the neocons are admitting that Sanford's hypocrisy and lies are what characterizes their party?

Republican politicians and Democratic politicians all have slimeballs within their ranks. Sometimes it seems like politicians allow power to go to their heads, or elsewhere...
For whatever case, a hypocrite like Mark Sanford should and will be held accountable.
Yet, are Democratic politicians ever called hypocrites for promoting "family values?" Do they even promote family values? Exactly what values DO liberal politicians promote? What are they noted for, except that "anything goes." When you don't believe in "right" or "wrong" and wish to blur the lines between the two, maybe nothing is considered "wrong" to Democrats (unless a Republican does something, of course!).
I'd rather belong to a party where there is good. And when there is bad - it is pointed out. It is not accepted. It is addressed. It isn't championed or supported for whatever misguided reasons the left seems to react with when one of their numbers "falls from grace."

And are there any other conservative professors besides Jessica McBride out there? I bet you'd be hard pressed to find any! What a hoot.

The Master Leaders of the neocon party has the allegiance quite confused. The followers don’t understand it. They can’t explain it. No word has come from the top as of yet on how to deal with it. But it’s there.

On one hand, the party line teaches that the “mainstream” media is biased against them. Every negative story in the news is about their party.

On the other hand, we have some people that are guilty of disgraceful deeds in the media. These stories are true. Even the guilty parties have been shown on television confessing their inexcusable actions.

The problem is that the neocons, through the paranoia instilled by the Master Leaders, have insisted they are being maligned by a slanted media because of the stories. But the Master Leadership has supported the sinners as party leaders. So now the followers have nothing to fall back on. They can’t take the position that the evildoers are not representative of their party, because then they couldn’t claim media bias. In addition they can’t claim media bias without admission that the evildoers are representative of their party.

They are stuck. Without Master Leadership advice, they have no predetermined reaction. So they will deny it or ignore it.

I heard Amy's argument on Charlie Skyes radio show yesterday at 11am on my way to wake. Skyes would not allow the discussion to be about the conservatives much exhaulted family values. Callers were to take that off the board, and instead concentrate how the liberals are the real hypocrites.

Red herring.

It's a wonderful thing to watch the pack all move in the same direction, when one of them squawks a talking point first, they all echo each other on cue.

"He was caught using crack cocaine and spent time in prison."

If spending time in prison is nothing, I wonder what happens when your punishment is actually something?

I find it more refreshing when a poltician (both left and right) do not wear his/her "family values via religion" as a campaign tool on their sleeves and don't commit adultry.

But, When a poltician, usually christian conservatives, wear their "family values" on their sleeve, using this to get elected, it becomes part of their platform, they use their "character" as a tool, and then commit adultry. I find this "Do as I say, not as I do" hypocrisy even worse than some other kinds. Like Ted Haggard gay bashing, but being gay himself.

Be they Eliot Spizter (D) or Sanford (R); have a major double standard and deserve all the ridicule they get for being world class hypocrites.

Rush Limbaugh blames Sanford's infidelity on who else? Obama.

"This is almost like, 'I don't give a da mn, the country's going to H ell in a handbasket, I just want out of here,'" said Limbaugh. "He had just tried to fight the stimulus money coming to South Carolina. He didn't want any part of it. He lost the battle. He said, 'What the H ell. I mean, I'm -- the federal government's taking over -- what the H ell, I want to enjoy life.'"

"The point is," he added, "there are a lot of people whose spirit is just -- they're fed up, saying to H ell with it, I don't even want to fight this anymore, I just want to get away from it."

Bush and Cheney lie, cherry pick evidence, out CIA agents, torture for evidence to war on Iraq, and these republican zombies ignore all of that, and blame all those failures on someone else - usually Clinton.

True to form, Obama is to blame.

True to form, libs have no sense of humor. Rush Limbaugh was speaking tongue-in-cheek about Obama causing Sanford to have an affair. It was a joke - something many libs seem incapable of understanding.

Amy: You surprised me. I thought you would defend McBride to the hilt. Kudos.
It does take two to tango, I wouldn't have a problem if the chief resigned.

"And, I never liked McBride anyway!"

And the award for the I-am-the-center-of-the-universe-and-all-that-matters-is-relative-to-my-likes-and-dislikes award goes to......AAAAAAAAAAAAA JOHNSON NINER ONE ONE!

The republican party has chosen to take up the banner of morality on a wide range of issues. It's one of the defining elements of the party. So, when moral failings of republican officials come to light, the fallout is predictably and deservedly worse than it is for democrats.

So, why is this a problem for conservatives? It's called owning your responsibilities. You wanna be on the moral high-ground? Great. Now live up to it. By way of analogy, if it one day it came to light that a democrat was taking bribes to ignore illegal dumping of toxics, they would and should face harsher criticism than a republican. Why? Because the democrats have made environmentalism part of their platform. It's something they stand for.

Don't want to take heat for moral failings? Then don't make moral crusading part of your platform... or, be without sin. Course, that's the problem with taking the high moral ground isn't it? Vexing. Because people inevitably make mistakes. So, I reckon the republicans will always be fighting the hypocrisy label.

Is moral crusading really part of the Republican platform?
Or could it be that many conservatives and Republicans just value: religion, the family, hard work, independence, personal responsibility, etc.?
What are the Democratic values? I don't think "environmentalism" is a human quality. Republicans and conservatives look at the individual and what the individual can achieve. A "cause" is not a value.
And when a Republican politician turns out to be a hypocrite, they pay the price - as they should.
Democrats usually do not. The same strong values or upstanding behavior doesn't seem to apply. Why is that?

Yeah, I know, whenever a liberal calls you out for your reasoning and no matter how fallacious the argument was, blame it on humor.

The joke is on you. Humor or not, the process of blame someone else -- a liberal that you hate and despise -- is exactly the same.

Rinse, repeat, but please please please, don't pay attention to our family values when we say we are all so about the family!

If you use your "Family Values" as part of your campaign, while your poltical oppenent does not, shouldn't the one who "flaunts it" be held to a higher standard?

Rating the Greatest GOP sex scandals of the Past 20 Years:
http://www.alternet.org/politics/140933/rating_the_greatest_gop_sex_scandals_of_the_past_20_years/?page=1

"I don't think "environmentalism" is a human quality."

It scares the hell out of me when you make comments like this.
Environmentalism may not be a human quality, but it is most certainly a humane quality. If we don't protect our natural resources, those individuals you speak of, our children, grandchildren, etc, won't have a fighting chance. You knuckleheads on the right have demonized that which is required for the sustainability of life, the conservation of our natural resources. Nothing CONSERVATIVE about that.

So are Republican and conservative values one in the same?

Environmentalism is not a human value. It is a cause. I don't mean to scare anyone with those words, but they are true.
I think most people believe in doing their part to protect our environment. We all recycle. We try not to litter. We have the strongest anti-pollution laws of any country. I don't think being environmentally aware is a Democrat or Republican "value."
What I don't agree with is when something unfounded, like global warming, is shoved down our throats. Shoved down our throats in order to promote an agenda. An agenda that includes telling us what we can/cannot do regarding what we drive, what gas we use, what light bulbs we must buy. In addition, what new "fees" or taxes will be raised to address a made-up crisis of the week like global warming.

One of President Bush's final acts before leaving office was to designate thousands of square miles of the Pacific Ocean as protected marine areas. Anyone remember that?

Anyhow, environmentalism is not the topic of my blog.

Let's get back to the nitty gritty. How Republican politicians find little solace from their fellow members when they do something wrong. Against our values. Mark Sanford is hearing loud and clear from the GOP and others (like former presidential candidate Fred Thompson) how he should resign. I think it's only a matter of time before he is gone.
When, pray tell, does a Democratic politican who does exactly the same thing, or worse, ever hear from fellow Dems that they should resign? That they represent the whole party? That what they have done is a reflection on the entire Democratic party and its supporters. Very rarely, if ever. And that is the hypocrisy.

It just goes to show what motivates America..when a politician votes one way or the other only a few will ever know what that vote was, but if they get caught getting some on the side everyone knows. I could not find a definition for "neoconservative" but hopefully compounding the definitions of the two should make sense,"neo" means new and "conservative" means opposed to change,desiring the preservation of the existing order of things.

"Neocon" seems to be thrown around alot by libs who comment on my blog, with little thought to what the word really means.

Here's a great definition from Jonah Goldberg of the National Review On-line:

"After all, for years, mainstream media liberalism and other outposts of paranoid Bush hatred have portrayed neoconservatives - usually code for conservative Jews and other supporters of Israel - as a pernicious cabal. "They have penetrated the culture of nearly every level from the halls of academia to the halls of the Pentagon," observed The New York Times. (Chris) Matthews routinely used the word "neocon" as if it were code for traitor.

In reality, neoconservatism is defined as such: "Neoconservatism is a political philosophy that emerged in the United States of America, and which supports using American economic and military power to bring liberalism, democracy, and human rights to other countries.

Conservative is also defined as "moderate" and "cautious", in addition to being more prone to support existing ways.

In summary, I see nothing wrong with supporting many of the ideals that conservatives promote: the family, integrity, honesty, etc. What are the exact values of liberalism, besides an "anything goes" philosophy, except when it comes to anything conservatives and/or Republicans believe in. In pushing forth an "anything goes" agenda, liberals tend to frown upon whatever is normal in favor of what is abnormal. Whatever is right is actually wrong. Liberalism is actually a very distorted view of reality, and will be the downfall of our country if allowed to influence the foundations, rules, and beliefs America was based upon.




Neoconservatism is a political philosophy that emerged in the United States of America, and which supports using American economic and military power to bring liberalism, democracy, and human rights to other countries.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204120604574252223853818460.html
A good Wall Street Journal article addressing some of the claims in this blog, while dismantling other claims, such that ALL Republicans step down after being faced with charges of infidelity. And I'll say it again: Newt, Newt, Newt. A man many conservatives want to be our next President.

And news flash:
Sanford isn't going to step down.
Because, another news flash: other than his family members, who cares?
-(written by a center-left political junky who would say the same thing about any scandal.)

Politicsnews: Actually, I have never said in my blog or posts that ALL Republicans step down. I have said that when caught in bad or illegal behavior, A Republican will step down. I have also stated that bad and/or illegal behavior does usually result in the end of a career for a Republican politician. Of course is a very small handful of exceptions. But in the majority of cases, the consequences for Republican politicians are much more dire than for Democrats. And I was just wondering why that is. Why aren't Democrats who shame themselves or commit illegal acts held up as examples of what is wrong with the entire Democratic Party, the way that Republican politicians somehow always represent their entire party? and Republicans everywhere?

Lake county progressive: What's so "progressive" about the hate-filled, ignorant spiel you posted?

1.) Every single human being is a hypocrite! Yes! Even you, the "almighty, wonderful, witty, free-thinking and oh so intelligent" liberal.

2.) Please don't pretend that liberals are not known for blame-shifting. Blame-shifting is a very human emotion. And yes! Even liberals are prone to it. Strike two for the "progressive."

3.) A majority of the so-called "open-minded and unbiased" liberals that I've run into are nothing but hate-filled, ignorant, close-minded people who can't think beyond their own party's agenda. You're just another one of those people.

4.) I'm a free-thinking individual. I'd appreciate it if you would not accuse me of being "programmed to simply bow down to anyone who the master leaders say is a conservative." Then again, I suppose that in order for you to do that you'd have to first get over your ignorance and your hatred for all things conservative. Something tells me it'll be a cold day in hell before you'll do that.

5.) Look to JBColorado as an example. Far as I can tell, HE is a truly open-minded and progressive liberal. You? You're a wannabe. And I'm sure you're an embarrassment to the rational, free-thinking liberals I know are out there.

Coulda sworn you said Sanford would resign...
How's that going, btw?