MARK SANFORD WINS!!!

[SicEmBaylor]

I couldn't be more happy to see Sanford elected. Politically, he trends closer to my type of conservative and there are very very few of us. The more of that type we have in the GOP the better off the party will be....his personal failings aside.

In fact, his personal failings should be even more reason for the GOP to jettison the evangelical-right and cease their bizarre fixation on what people are doing in their bedrooms and with whom they are doing it. My only complaint with Sanford is that he used government property for long-distance booty calls. If he had flown commercial then I could not possibly care less about what he was doing or with whom he was doing it.

The more libertarian or paleoconservative Republicans in the House the better. The iron grip of neoconservatism on the national Republican Party is slowly loosening. The more libertarians or, even better, paleoconservatives we elect the better it will be for the long-term electoral viability of the Republican Party.

[diverdog]

I couldn't be more happy to see Sanford elected. Politically, he trends closer to my type of conservative and there are very very few of us. The more of that type we have in the GOP the better off the party will be....his personal failings aside.

In fact, his personal failings should be even more reason for the GOP to jettison the evangelical-right and cease their bizarre fixation on what people are doing in their bedrooms and with whom they are doing it. My only complaint with Sanford is that he used government property for long-distance booty calls. If he had flown commercial then I could not possibly care less about what he was doing or with whom he was doing it.

The more libertarian or paleoconservative Republicans in the House the better. The iron grip of neoconservatism on the national Republican Party is slowly loosening. The more libertarians or, even better, paleoconservatives we elect the better it will be for the long-term electoral viability of the Republican Party.

I read he is facing charges in court. Is that true?

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

As long as a politician is conservative economically, and lets the market decide where money should be invested, those are the keys to staying away from the socialism that so cripples economic activity.

Congrats to Mark. no doubt he will make democrats' and their Medias' heads spin.

[SicEmBaylor]

As long as a politician is conservative economically, and lets the market decide where money should be invested, those are the keys to staying away from the socialism that so cripples economic activity.

Congrats to Mark. no doubt he will make democrats' and their Medias' heads spin.

McCain was not a free-marketeer and neither was Romney and neither was Bush. Your argument there has no validity.

[SicEmBaylor]

I read he is facing charges in court. Is that true?
Just a hearing that alleged he violated his divorce agreement, but the issue was dropped.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

McCain was not a free-marketeer and neither was Romney and neither was Bush. Your argument there has no validity.How silly. One must compare each to the democrat running against them, as mathematically (for the umpteenth time) only the democrat or the republican has any reasonable chance of winning elections.

IOW, congratulations Mark! you beat the socialist(democrat)running against you.

[SicEmBaylor]

How silly. One must compare each to the democrat running against them, as mathematically (for the umpteenth time) only the democrat or the republican has any reasonable chance of winning elections.

IOW, congratulations Mark! you beat the socialist(democrat)running against you.
Ohhhh okay. Being marginally better (debatable) makes them totally worth supporting with all the fervor of a tent revival acolyte.

So you have a serial killer that has killed 5 people as opposed to 6 people; therefore, the guy who has only kille 5 is a real stand up citizen compared to the one who killed 6! Let's elect the guy who only killed 5!!!

[OU_Sooners75]

McCain was not a free-marketeer and neither was Romney and neither was Bush. Your argument there has no validity.

You have a lot of learning to do grasshopper!

[SicEmBaylor]

You have a lot of learning to do grasshopper!

Oh yeah? I would have said the same. You can't possibly argue otherwise without showing both your lack of understand and naivety. But please please tell me exactly how Bush, McCain, and Romney are advocates of the free-market.

All three, fundamentally, support the same philosophical belief in a top-down managed economy that every President has supported and expanded since Woodrow Wilson and the creation of the Federal reserve. There is no such thing as a "conservative" free-capitalistic economy in this country. There almost never was...

But please tell me what I need to learn.

[SicEmBaylor]

The next step for South Carolina will be finding a good primary opponent for Lindsey Graham. Removing that sack of **** both from McCain's *** and the United States Senate will be a major win for the Republic.

[diverdog]

Just a hearing that alleged he violated his divorce agreement, but the issue was dropped.

Thanks. I have not followed the race all that close.

[C&CDean]

Does this mean Lamont gets him a new pickup?

[MR2-Sooner86]

But please tell me what I need to learn.

Ron Paul was wrong.
Austrian economics is wrong.
Keynesian economics is right.
Central economic planning from the Federal Reserve is correct.
Fiat money is good.
Competitive currencies or currencies backed by gold, precious metals or other items are bad.
Bailouts and economic interventionism by the government is good for the economy.

Don't you know anything SicEm!?

[OU_Sooners75]

Oh yeah? I would have said the same. You can't possibly argue otherwise without showing both your lack of understand and naivety. But please please tell me exactly how Bush, McCain, and Romney are advocates of the free-market.

All three, fundamentally, support the same philosophical belief in a top-down managed economy that every President has supported and expanded since Woodrow Wilson and the creation of the Federal reserve. There is no such thing as a "conservative" free-capitalistic economy in this country. There almost never was...

But please tell me what I need to learn.

You need to learn when to shut the **** up for one.

And two, I actually like the Mark Sanford guy.

You take politics way to serious...you will end up being old and gray before your time.

[olevetonahill]

Please. Are Yall really arguing this shat?

[SanJoaquinSooner]

Sic em:
My only complaint with Sanford is that he used government property for long-distance booty calls

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-SHHIkaKueoQ/UWbRGVDrYRI/AAAAAAAAGS8/jcoIE6Yixvg/s1600/MARK-SANFORD-MARIA-BELEN-CHAPUR.jpg

Sanford is a likeable dude ... reminds me of Gary Hart in this pic with his babe. She was hot in her prime and still looks good. And I agree he should be forgiven for his sins. He did pay a fine so amnesty is appropriate. Forgive and forget.







Sic em:
McCain was not a free-marketeer and neither was Romney and neither was Bush. Your argument there has no validity.

Sic em, really, give it up. Free markets mean free movement of capital. McCain has a 100% rating on free trade issues from CATO Institute, the standard bearer of free market capitalism.

[sappstuf]

Busch outraised Sanford by a 5-1 margin and still lost by 9 points...

Apparently money isn't everything.

[okie52]

Busch outraised Sanford by a 5-1 margin and still lost by 9 points...

Apparently money isn't everything.

I wonder if Colbert will have any jokes about his sister's *** being kicked.

I certainly laughed.

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Just a hearing that alleged he violated his divorce agreement, but the issue was dropped.

I am sure a political ploy, until Colbert's mug shot was flashed all over the place for her epic violation of a court order in a divorce proceedings. Glad Colbert spent lots of money and lost...

Sanford was shrewd, debating cut outs of Pelosi out in the street and pegging Colbert to Pelosi...Whoever ran Colbert's campaign to suck up to rich donors and not go out into the public should never be able to consult in political campaigns ever again...

[badger]

My only complaint with Sanford is that he used government property for long-distance booty calls.

I'd say that in this era of harsh economic times, the demands from both sides to cut government waste and focus resources where they are needed most, that this is a very, very large complaint. Forget the moral grounds, he was stealing taxpayer dollars and deserved the hefty fine he got for it.


Glad Colbert spent lots of money and lost...

I'd say this was a DNC loss more than a Colbert loss. I know that it seemed like a huge window of opportunity for DNC to gain a highly red district seat that it hadn't held in what, 30 years or so? But, local voters hate the hell out of outsider influence, especially red districts. If they wanted this seat, they should have connected with a localized message, not a nationalized message.


Please. Are Yall really arguing this shat?

Agree. It's one seat of hundreds in Congress that results in no net change in red/blue demographics. If you wanna revel in this victory, then please let me invite you to the next Obama "JOBS SAVED! JOBS SAVED!" rally. You know, when you don't create a new job, you just don't eliminate an old one :D

[SicEmBaylor]

I'd say that in this era of harsh economic times, the demands from both sides to cut government waste and focus resources where they are needed most, that this is a very, very large complaint. Forget the moral grounds, he was stealing taxpayer dollars and deserved the hefty fine he got for it.
I don't have to worry about Sanford and fiscal issues. Sanford was one of the most fiscally disciplined governors in the country when he was in office, and there is no doubt in my mind that he'll be a vote for fiscal constraint when he reaches the House. A lot of people don't really understand Mark Sanford.


I'd say this was a DNC loss more than a Colbert loss. I know that it seemed like a huge window of opportunity for DNC to gain a highly red district seat that it hadn't held in what, 30 years or so? But, local voters hate the hell out of outsider influence, especially red districts. If they wanted this seat, they should have connected with a localized message, not a nationalized message.

It was also a NRCC (National Republican Congressional Committee) loss. The party refused to give him a single dime in support of winning his office and gave him absolutely no other help as far as volunteers, media, etc. Sanford won his campaign purely through grassroots efforts (largely former Ron Paul volunteers). This is going to put him at odds with the leadership when he gets to the House. I hope he tells the GOP to go f'k themselves the first time they need or want something from him.


Agree. It's one seat of hundreds in Congress that results in no net change in red/blue demographics. If you wanna revel in this victory, then please let me invite you to the next Obama "JOBS SAVED! JOBS SAVED!" rally. You know, when you don't create a new job, you just don't eliminate an old one :D
This is a short way of saying the seat remained Republican. We all know that. I'm not celebrating because the seat remained Republican -- I'm not celebrating because the seat flipped (it didn't). I couldn't give a flying **** if some useless conventional-style Republican had been elected. You misunderstand the basis of my excitement -- I'm excited about he's another RLC-style Republican who won the seat which actually is a net-gain as far as libertarian-leaning Republicans are concerned. THAT is why I'm excited.

[badger]

I know we have an offseason truce on fighting SicEm, but there seems to be some contradiction in your argument. Here's where I see it:


This is going to put him at odds with the leadership when he gets to the House.

At the fed level, connections are very important for committee selection, leadership opportunities, getting your ideas heard and your bills passed, you name it. Telling "the GOP to go f'k themselves" is not going to get him or his "libertarian-leaning" ides heard.

Thus, once again, it's good for his supporters and those that were adamant that another Republican or Democrat not get the seat, but in the grand scope of things, I'm not sure he's going to effectively be able to represent South Carolinans (Carolinians? How bout I just call em Palmetto Aggies) nor "libertarian-leaning" folks.

PS: There was a bash-aTm party on football forum this morning and you weren't there. :(

[SicEmBaylor]

I know we have an offseason truce on fighting SicEm, but there seems to be some contradiction in your argument. Here's where I see it:



At the fed level, connections are very important for committee selection, leadership opportunities, getting your ideas heard and your bills passed, you name it. Telling "the GOP to go f'k themselves" is not going to get him or his "libertarian-leaning" ides heard.

Thus, once again, it's good for his supporters and those that were adamant that another Republican or Democrat not get the seat, but in the grand scope of things, I'm not sure he's going to effectively be able to represent South Carolinans (Carolinians? How bout I just call em Palmetto Aggies) nor "libertarian-leaning" folks.

PS: There was a bash-aTm party on football forum this morning and you weren't there. :(

Connections aren't what matter as far as committee assignments go. What matters is toeing the leadership's line. You can have all the connections in the world, but if you stray outside the reservation then you're going to find yourself on a committee no more important than selecting what dessert to serve in the House dining hall.

A perfect example is Justin Amash who was stripped of his budget committee assignment. Now, Amash is one of the most fiscally disciplined and fiscally conservative members of the entire US House of Representatives and, yet, the Speaker's office stripped him of his assignment. Why? Because he's a libertarian-Republican who wouldn't toe the leadership's line when it came to budget issues. There are many many many circumstances in which the leadership expects the conference to support legislation that are full of pork and revenue increases. Amash refused to support those measures which put him at odds with the leadership which ultimately cost him his position on the budget committee.

So, do I want Sanford to support the leadership and toe the line just to get those committee assignments? Hell no. Boehner is a piece of ****. McCarthy isn't quite as bad as far as lip-service goes, but I don't trust the guy. In any case, the leadership is what needs to change not Sanford.

[FaninAma]

Sanford was a badly flawed candidate. His election is direct proof of how unpopular Obama is in over half of the country. This was a referendum on Obama.....nothing more, nothing less.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

...So, do I want Sanford to support the leadership and toe the line just to get those committee assignments? Hell no... ...In any case, the leadership is what needs to change not Sanford.Of course. your treatment of this suggests you realize the improvement MUST come from within the republican party. That it ABSOLUTELY IS HOPELESS within the democrats, and that a 3rd party vote, while usually sincere, is actually beneficial to the democrats.(except in the rare case where the 3rd partyite is perceived to be to the left of the democrats, such as Nader running in 2000)

[SicEmBaylor]

Of course. your treatment of this suggests you realize the improvement MUST come from within the republican party. That it ABSOLUTELY IS HOPELESS within the democrats, and that a 3rd party vote, while usually sincere, is actually beneficial to the democrats.(except in the rare case where the 3rd partyite is perceived to be to the left of the democrats, such as Nader running in 2000)

I have had more success, literally, arguing at brick walls. To prepare for debate tournaments in HS and college, I used to argue in front of the mirror or wall. Those efforts were more fruitful than arguing with you.

I absolutely reject everything you just said. If you actually paid and understood 1/1000 of what I've said over the years then you would have understood where I come from ages ago, but for whatever reason I simply can't get **** to penetrate your incredibly thick skull.

I have ALWAYS said that I will only support candidates that truly believe in and support the principles of individual liberty and limited government. If a candidate does not move the ball forward toward the goal line of liberty then I will not support that candidate. If I can support a Republican who believes in limited-government and individual liberty then I will, and do, support that Republican. If a Libertarian or other 3rd party option support individual liberty and limited government and their Republican opponent does not then I will NOT vote Republican. It's as simple as that. I support whatever candidates makes a measurable effort to actually increase liberty and decrease government. Rarely is that option a Republican. Republicans are as comfortable with growing government as Demcocrats are which is why I typically must look for a 3rd party choice.

Now, it was my long held belief that the GOP on the Federal level was beyond saving. It probably still is; however, if the GOP were to reject those pro-government/anti-liberty elements and embrace something more akin to the philosophy of Ron Paul and/or Pat Buchanan then I would say they may be worth saving. But I'm not going to hold my breath.

I don't give a damned whether the Republican Party dies or not. I tend to think it should die so that a party that actually believes in the Constitution, limited-government, and individual liberty can take its place.

[badger]

Sanford was a badly flawed candidate. His election is direct proof of how unpopular Obama is in over half of the country. This was a referendum on Obama.....nothing more, nothing less.

Not saying I agree with you, but Obama's popularity and political sway are undoubtedly low in some areas. Will be interesting to see how the midterms turn out in the Senate/House. We might see a repeat of W's second term midterm.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Aha the logic of 3rd party voting...trumps the fundamental truths of mathematics, don't it? haha

as olevet said, are you guys STILL arguing that point? Well, I'm not.

[badger]

Aha the logic of 3rd party voting...trumps the fundamental truths of mathematics, don't it? haha

It's why voter choose the lesser of TWO evils, rather than the better candidate overall. Sure, we love Ralph Nader for president since he's recycling his rally confetti, but if we vote for him, W. might win, and that would be even worse than Al Gore winning over Nader! :P

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

It's why voter choose the lesser of TWO evils, rather than the better candidate overall. Sure, we love Ralph Nader for president since he's recycling his rally confetti, but if we vote for him, W. might win, and that would be even worse than Al Gore winning over Nader! :PWHAT did you have for lunch, dear?

[SicEmBaylor]

Aha the logic of 3rd party voting...trumps the fundamental truths of mathematics, don't it? haha

as olevet said, are you guys STILL arguing that point? Well, I'm not.

You've never really argued anything. You just post bumper-sticker slogans and empty platitudes followed, often, by bizarre statements that appear to be attempts at humor. We'll continue to argue but you can definitely stop doing whatever it is that you think you do.

[SicEmBaylor]

It's why voter choose the lesser of TWO evils, rather than the better candidate overall. Sure, we love Ralph Nader for president since he's recycling his rally confetti, but if we vote for him, W. might win, and that would be even worse than Al Gore winning over Nader! :P

This thinking is exactly what perpetuates the cycle of ****ty elected officials in both parties that are utterly destroying our country. The zero-sum game of ensuring your side "wins" regardless of how ****ty and destructive that elected official may be. Politicians and political parties understand only one thing and there is only one way to get them to understand -- electoral loss. Only major losses at the ballot box will make a political party shift course but one election cycle won't do it....it takes major losses over a series of electoral cycles. This is the reason why we're seeing an internal shift in the GOP away from neoconservatism and toward libertarianism. The neoconservative wing of the party is responsible for its electoral loss and the party has started shifting away.

Electoral success at the ballot box would have done nothing to improve the country.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

You've never really argued anything. You just post bumper-sticker slogans and empty platitudes followed, often, by bizarre statements that appear to be attempts at humor. We'll continue to argue but you can definitely stop doing whatever it is that you think you do.Well, if math principles don't count for Shiite, and 1/2 vote for a democrat means nothing to you, then i suppose what you said is sensible to you.

[SicEmBaylor]

Well, if math principles don't count for Shiite, and 1/2 vote for a democrat means nothing to you, then i suppose what you said is sensible to you.

I didn't know what the hell "math principle" you're talking about unless you're talking about the insane and destructive strategy of voting for the supposed "lesser of two evils" just because one ******* has an (R) next to their name. If that's the "math principle" you're talking about then, no, it doesn't mean **** to me.

[diverdog]

You've never really argued anything. You just post bumper-sticker slogans and empty platitudes followed, often, by bizarre statements that appear to be attempts at humor. We'll continue to argue but you can definitely stop doing whatever it is that you think you do.

That is some funny shat right there

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

That is some funny shat right thereNo surprise. Sicem does have a lot in common with you guys.

[diverdog]

No surprise. Sicem does have a lot in common with you guys.Sic'em likes lesbian porn? Never knew that!

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Sic'em likes lesbian porn? Never knew that!Skittles and zima while smoking ceegars, i rectum

[diverdog]

Skittles and zima while smoking ceegars, i rectum

You're an old dude aren't cha? I am guessing a cross between Ned Flanders and Grampa Simpson.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

You're an old dude aren't cha? I am guessing a cross between Ned Flanders and Grampa Simpson.Might you be a cross between Lisa Simpson and Waylon Smithers?

[olevetonahill]

This thinking is exactly what perpetuates the cycle of ****ty elected officials in both parties that are utterly destroying our country. The zero-sum game of ensuring your side "wins" regardless of how ****ty and destructive that elected official may be. Politicians and political parties understand only one thing and there is only one way to get them to understand -- electoral loss. Only major losses at the ballot box will make a political party shift course but one election cycle won't do it....it takes major losses over a series of electoral cycles. This is the reason why we're seeing an internal shift in the GOP away from neoconservatism and toward libertarianism. The neoconservative wing of the party is responsible for its electoral loss and the party has started shifting away.

Electoral success at the ballot box would have done nothing to improve the country.


Sic heres the way I see it.and why i dont understand the voting for a 3rd party that has absolutley NO chance to win

Say Ya have 2 snakes in yer shack ok? Ones an Eastern Diamond back Rattler. the other is a small copperhead. Not way on the Outside of you shack is a Very nice and gent Grass snake

No say you get the choice of voting for which ****in snake is gonna bite ya, Its Guaranteed yer gonna get yer azz bit but You have the choice.So does 1 other person.

Now which snake ya gonna vote for. remember that the grass snake is way o/s and will slither away without you even seeing much of him, so that pretty much makes him null and void in the discussion
So if ya voted for the grass snake and hes slithered away and Its a fact yer gonna get yerass bit, so since you wasted your vote on a Long shot that leaves that other person to decide which snake is goona Bite yerass.
Understand NOW?

[olevetonahill]

Sic'em likes lesbian porn? Never knew that!

Sic STARs is Lesbo porn.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

Sic heres the way I see it.and why i dont understand the voting for a 3rd party that has absolutley NO chance to win

Say Ya have 2 snakes in yer shack ok? Ones an Eastern Diamond back Rattler that will not only bite you, but set it up so his offspring will continue to bite you. The other is a small snake that is half non-venomous, and has some copperhead blood in him too, or so you suspect. Not way on the Outside of you shack is a Very nice and gent Grass snake

Now say you get the choice of voting for which ****in snake is gonna bite ya, Its Guaranteed yer gonna get yer azz bit but You have the choice. So does 1 other person, who is gonna vote for the full-blown eastern diamonback. He don't GAS about individual freedom from snake toxins.

Now which snake ya gonna vote for. remember that the grass snake is way o/s and will slither away without you even seeing much of him, so that pretty much makes him null and void in the discussion
So if ya voted for the grass snake and hes slithered away and Its a fact yer gonna get yerass bit, so since you wasted your vote on a Long shot that leaves that other person to decide which snake is goona Bite yerass.
Understand NOW?FIFY