# Another social conservative falls from the moral high ground



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

via Washington Times:

*Social conservatives fall from moral high ground*

*Republicans retreat from values claims*

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/200 ... gh-ground/



> Social conservatives, the once-powerful force that focused the Republican agenda on moral virtue and family values, _have suffered a diminished brand on the national political landscape as a steady stream of their icons have fallen prey to the vices they once preached against._
> 
> *Extramarital affairs, gambling, alcohol abuse, prostitution and sexual pursuit of minors have taken a toll on the GOP.*
> 
> ...


What a guy this "leading contender for the GOP Presidential nomination" turns out to be!

"As a congressman, Sanford voted in favor of three of four articles of impeachment against President Bill Clinton, citing the need for 'moral legitimacy.'"

Can you say "hypocritical Republican blowhards"? I knew you could!

The GOP is full of hypocritical leaders and followers. This isn't the only example (from either party) but it's humorous seeing the GOP faithful scramble to deflect attention elsewhere (Kerry, Clinton...Obama?!).

However, there is no distracting the issue on this one, conservatives.

Not only did he cheat, but he lied and misled staffer and his constituents to do so (and probably on taxpayer dollars as well). *Deflect all you want, but the GOP is falling apart from the tearing of their "holier than thou" attitudes and their opposing, hypocritical actions.*

Now you know how stupid the GOP looks to the rest of the country, when they try to preach conservative family values with people like Senator Wide stance, a VP Candidate with a pregnant teen, a Florida Republican Rep sending explicit text messages to underage male pages in his office and the adulterer from Nevada. And finally this week, we have a GOP kingpin with his Argentinian f_ck buddy. Granted, the Dems have their share of scandals but at least they don't have the hypocrisy to claim the high moral ground preaching they are the standard bearers for family values!

Remember when Bobby Jindahl (another so called leading GOP candidate for Pres) said in his infamous Presidential rebuttal quote "Our party is determined to regain your trust" ? :lol: riiggghht.

You know what the GOP is now being called right? Haven't you heard?

*G*rand *O*l' *P*erverts.

Can you see that ship sailing away with the 2012 elections? Think anything else needs to happen to blow it away faster? I couldn't make this stuff up any faster if I tried... the GOP doesn't have any toes, feet, or ankles to keep shooting themselves in. At this point it would be best if they didn't even bother putting any candidates up for nomination or election in the next term election. Geeesshhhh And they now think the American public is going to listen to any of their arguments on any upcoming issue in Congress? Seriously?

And to think none of you were brave enough to post a thread on this yesterday... the truth must seriously sting. I thought I was told that folks here of all political flavors would work hard at posting articles from all sides of the spectrum? I would think a fair and balanced article about this important political news would surely be here before now. Hmmmm....

I'm just shocked... shocked I say... [/sarcasm]

Ohhh and one last thing... remember that little ditty I mentioned above about "moral legitimacy" spoken from Gov. Sanford voting to impeach President Clinton? You know.. because adultery is wrong in his little world, and therefore impeachable, ohhh and also Clinton perjured himself, which he often pointed out is a crime,... (but let's not forget that Sanford isn't offering to resign right?)... well...

Guess what?

Adultery is a crime in South Carolina. I wonder if the good Governor will see charges because of all of this?

*Via Think Progress:*




> *Any man or woman who shall be guilty of the crime of adultery or fornication shall be liable to indictment* and, on conviction, shall be severally punished by a fine of not less than one hundred dollars nor more than five hundred dollars or imprisonment for not less than six months nor more than one year or by both fine and imprisonment, at the discretion of the court. . . . "Adultery" is the living together and carnal intercourse with each other or *habitual carnal intercourse with each other without living together of a man and woman when either is lawfully married to some other person*.


Today's GOP: a glass house divided against itself.

Hollywood script writers couldn't write better material if they tried to invent a brand new soap opera....

Good stuff. Comedy at it's finest. :lol:


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

"i did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinski"...... 

:lol: :lol: and old Bill was the President too.. :lol: :lol:

i believe you Bill, a BJ is just a BJ! :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

R y a n said:


> And finally this week, we have a GOP kingpin with his Argentinian f_ck buddy.


Moral high ground?? Ryan you do not belong here. Period.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

4CurlRedleg said:


> R y a n said:
> 
> 
> > And finally this week, we have a GOP kingpin with his Argentinian f_ck buddy.
> ...


We have talked to Ryan about the F bomb, but he doesn't understand. Clean out your mouth or stay away. That's not a request. Not everyone who reads these posts are adults.

Ryan, we started talking about this yesterday. No one is protecting him. Famous and fair FOX news ripped him. We don't protect our guilty like the Clinton lovers did. If you notice my post I said I wasn't angry with Clinton about his affair, I was angry because he lied. Same with this guy. I'm not sticking up for the liar.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

4CurlRedleg said:


> R y a n said:
> 
> 
> > And finally this week, we have a GOP kingpin with his Argentinian f_ck buddy.
> ...


:roll:

That was the Washington Times choice for the title of their article.

You just don't like the fact that this assessment is spot on accurate, no matter what my choice of colorful language is, and whether it suits your prudish views. This is the politics forum, and politics is a messy business. You might want to contact the good Governor of South Carolina, and let him know that his behavior (described above) does not sit well with your conservative value set.

Sorry to have offended your delicate sensibilities. It would seem that you would rather attack me (again), rather than attacking the point of the story. This does seem to be a continuing pattern with you. Maybe you should look within yourself and determine why you have these feelings of inadequacy.

It would seem that you have a problem with my posts 4curl. You are welcome to ignore my posts. Noone forces you to click into them and read them. Maybe perhaps deep down you realize that the logic I type here is usually well researched and written. Do you wish you had better abilities at self expression? Do you secretly loathe your inability to express yourself in proper depth and context?

Perhaps you feel a need to express your feelings of inadequacy with personal attacks against me at all costs? Perhaps you have self loathing issues that causes you to strike out at others on internet forums?

I don't know the answer. But you need to do a bit of personal self reflection.

In the mean time... set me to Ignore.

Peace.

edit: This was written before Plainsman's reply.

Plainsman thanks for the "we have talked to Ryan before" ... You say this like I am some child.... this is the Politics forum. Sorry to have also typed a forbidden word. It just came out in the course of typing my reply.

I thought the politics forum was assumed to only be read by adults, dealing with adult political issues.

Apparently that isn't so. Please let 4Curl know I didn't realize.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> You just don't like the fact that this assessment is spot on accurate


Do you have a problem with the English language Ryan. How many ways must we tell you we agree that what he did was wrong. Type it 100 times, ten languages, what? If your looking for an argument look elsewhere we agree. 
The only thing wrong you posted was how we will not accept it, we protect him, etc. Your not listening Ryan. You only think you know what we are going to say. Open your eyes and read my boy. This is about the point where you would make some smart remark about typing slower.



> That was the Washington Times choice for the title of their article.


Then the Washington times has hit a new low and are acting like children. It sounds like their writer has an inadequate vocabulary. Perhaps the gift of a dictionary is in order.


----------



## southdakbearfan (Oct 11, 2004)

Ryan, you only come here to offend others, period. Then try to turn it around, crying and whining about being picked on.

Has anyone said this guy isn't a total slimeball? Will he or will he not be ran out of office? Period.

You know what the difference between a democrat and a republican is in these cases?

The republicans get forced out of office, as they should, and go away.

The democrats make up all sorts of stories to retain their power and positions because they are to valuble to not have there!!!!!!!! yeah right. See Slick Willy, Ted the Swimmer and others.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Plainsman said:


> > You just don't like the fact that this assessment is spot on accurate
> 
> 
> Do you have a problem with the English language Ryan. How many ways must we tell you we agree that what he did was wrong. Type it 100 times, ten languages, what? If your looking for an argument look elsewhere we agree.
> ...


I think we got the order of the posts screwed up Plainsman.

My "spot on blah blah" reply was to 4curl regarding the nature of the GOP claiming moral superiority as a platform in general, and then encountering all of this scandal. Combine that with him being a leading GOP 2012 frontrunner.. and it is a huge deal.

It had nothing to do with anyone admitting the guy is a slimeball. That isn't the angle of the story or my point.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

southdakbearfan said:


> Ryan, you only come here to offend others, period. Then try to turn it around, crying and whining about being picked on.
> 
> Has anyone said this guy isn't a total slimeball? Will he or will he not be ran out of office? Period.
> 
> ...


Not at all SDbearfan. My intent is not to come here simply to offend others. In this case, it is to point out smug hypocrisy shown by the GOP over and over, and how they mighty are falling left and right in their house of glass.

I didn't turn anything around, nor did I whine about being picked on. :huh: Did I miss realizing I was being picked on somewhere? If you are referring to the above, it would seem to me we have whiners who would rather complain about the inferred use of a word that offends them. It would seem_ they_ were the ones whining.

The Republicans should get forced out of office when they run on a platform of moral superiority, and in fact chastize and lecture others about it, and then they hypocritically do the very thing they rail against. So yes, when they dilly dally, they will be forced to fall upon their own sword.

Problem is... Sanford was a leader of this high morals group, and when it came time for him to follow his own rules, he isn't gracefully resigning on his own. In fact he has said he won't.

If he is forced out, it will not be him going willingly. That would seem to be the honorable thing to do for someone who is the gold standardbearer for the GOP values coalition wouldn't you think?

The Democrats do not make the mistake of trying to claim to be the party of perfect family values. Noone made the claim that they were more perfect.


----------



## southdakbearfan (Oct 11, 2004)

Sanford was a leader of jack and squat, and jack left town.

Only the media thought he was a leader, and tried to post him up as such.

And if you don't think you whine about it, re-read your posts.

As far as campaigning on moral high ground or not, all douchebags engaging in this type of activity should be forced out of office immediately.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

southdakbearfan said:


> Only the media thought he was a leader, and tried to post him up as such.


Wrong. Apparently you haven't followed the GOP party leadership very much. It would seem you don't even know much about his bio or past.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Sanford

Until June 24, 2009, he was the chairman of the Republican Governors Association. It would seem the chairman of the GOP Governors association might be construed as their "leader" :huh: 'course that is just me....

Last I heard based on that he might have been a governor... of some state or other... maybe South Carolina? Hmmm I thought a governor was a leader.

And you mean to tell me that you didn't hear that he was on the short list for the 2012 Presidential run with Palin, Jindahl, and Pawlenty? Really?

You do follow GOP politics right?


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

R y a n said:


> Maybe you should look within yourself and determine why you have these feelings of inadequacy.
> Noone forces you to click into them and read them. Maybe perhaps deep down you realize that the logic I type here is usually well researched and written. Do you wish you had better abilities at self expression? Do you secretly loathe your inability to express yourself in proper depth and context?
> 
> Perhaps you feel a need to express your feelings of inadequacy with personal attacks against me at all costs? Perhaps you have self loathing issues that causes you to strike out at others on internet forums?
> ...


Tossing out the f-bomb and now a personal attack. When was the last time you read Chris's rules??

My son occasionally reads over my shoulder while I am on here, thanx to you I have to proof read for content.


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

> Noone forces you to click into them and read them. Maybe perhaps deep down you realize that the logic I type here is usually well researched and written. Do you wish you had better abilities at self expression? Do you secretly loathe your inability to express yourself in proper depth and context?


 :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:   :lol: :lol: :lol:


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> I think we got the order of the posts screwed up Plainsman.


That could be. Yesterday on Nodak_Norsk thread we discussed Sanford. At first I was not aware he had lied so I wasn't to tough on him. Once I found out he was lying through his teeth I had no more respect for him. Then later I found that he and his wife had split a week ago. Still he lied just like Clinton who should have resigned and so Sanford should too. No double standard here.



> "As a congressman, Sanford voted in favor of three of four articles of impeachment against President Bill Clinton, citing the need for 'moral legitimacy.'"


Good he did the right thing. At least he votes right even if he can't live up to it himself.



> Can you say "hypocritical Republican blowhards"? I knew you could!


Ya, I can say that what's your point. Oh, I see you want to tick people off then cry because they get angry with you. Look inward for your problems Ryan.



> The GOP is full of hypocritical leaders and followers.


Yes, both parties are. Both parties are hypocrites about many things.


> it's humorous seeing the GOP faithful scramble to deflect attention elsewhere (Kerry, Clinton...Obama?!).


I guess I haven't seen that. If I did I wouldn't think it was humorous. I didn't think it was humorous when Clinton lied, and I didn't think it was smart of Gingrich when he was a hypocrite either.



> However, there is no distracting the issue on this one, conservatives.


The guy is just a republican not a conservative.



> Deflect all you want


Who's deflecting. We have been talking about this for a day already and no one deflected. Your a day late getting into the discussion and have many ideas about us that are not substantiated.



> the Dems have their share of scandals but at least they don't have the hypocrisy to claim the high moral ground


They always claim to have the high moral ground. It's the liberals that have to always be politically correct, and that's a matter of morals to them. They need hate crime legislation based on morals. Even their anti firearms they base on morals. Health insurance for everyone is a morals issue for them just like the illegal aliens getting a free pass.



> Grand Ol' Perverts


You have been telling us for a couple of years that your a republican.



> And to think none of you were brave enough to post a thread on this yesterday...


Like I said your a day late, so we have cleared that up right? Bravery, what does bravery have to do with this????



> I thought I was told that folks here of all political flavors would work hard at posting articles from all sides of the spectrum? I would think a fair and balanced article about this important political news would surely be here before now. Hmmmm....


Is there anyone in particular that your trying to insult?



> ohhh and also Clinton perjured himself, which he often pointed out is a crime,... (but let's not forget that Sanford isn't offering to resign right?)... well...


There is a big difference. Sanford didn't purger himself in front of congress and while under oath. I'm not letting Sanford off the hook, just pointing out the huge flaw in your thinking.



> That was the Washington Times choice for the title of their article.


I don't pay much attention to papers anymore. I always thought it was the New York Times and the Washington Post. Could you post a link for me? I would like to see who the fool author is.

I hope this sets everything into perspective for you Ryan. No one here is defending Sanford, we all agree he is a hypocrite, it will be up to the people of South Carolina if he leaves or not. No hypocrisy here, I would expect the rest of the nation to stay out of it if our governor messes up. I think your assesment that we were all a bunch of hypocrites was a premature *&&^% on your part. I would suggest catching up with the posts on here next time before you try rub peoples face in the dirt.



> I thought I was told that folks here of all political flavors would work hard at posting articles from all sides of the spectrum?


No that's what you told me you wanted me to do. I think you PMed me, and called me about that. I don't do this as a job Ryan, I do it for fun. I'm conservative so someone else will have to post the other side of the spectrum. Likewise I don't expect liberals to come on here and post pro conservative. People can post what they like. We are not the "Washington Times".


----------



## zogman (Mar 20, 2002)

Big Question..............Why is Ryan still here????

Bring back Horsager and Jiffy :lol: They were very knowledgeable on rifles and shooting :sniper: :sniper:


----------



## southdakbearfan (Oct 11, 2004)

R y a n said:


> southdakbearfan said:
> 
> 
> > Only the media thought he was a leader, and tried to post him up as such.
> ...


Well, for one I do know that those on the list won't be running for president. That is just the media creating stories to fill time slots, just like 99% of the crap they all spew out.

None of them will be candidates, NONE OF THEM!

So he was chairman of the republican governors association, so what, so was the governor of south dakota at one point in time, or at least very high ranking chairperson, you think he is a candidate for president now too? I don't tend to follow what groups/associations people belong to and base my opinion on whether they are a leader or not on that.

There are a lot of governors that aren't worth a hoot, they may think they are leaders, they may even be a learder in position, but that doesn't make them a leader. It just means politics is so corrupt that no good people could run.

Thats how you get a president like we have now, or how you get a jimmy carter, etc etc.

So keep hurling your intellectual insults. I know I can take them, and any criticism you want to throw with it.

The question is, why can't you take any criticism whatsoever without insulting people??????


----------



## Gunny (Aug 18, 2005)

Let me "deflect" (another way to say I know my party did similarily putrid things, but don't bring them up because than I have no argument on who is "morily superior" :roll: ) for a second.

Which is worse:

The Chairman of the GOP Govs Association going AWOL so he can go to Argintenia to get it on with his lover...

or?

A Presidential candidate who cheats on his cancer stricken wife with his "videographer" who he just happens to "allegedly" kock up?

Both should get what they deserve.

They are both losers.

They can each be grouped together as "richards", both Sanford and...

Whats that other guys name?

I guess I willl have to look under the rug to find that out... :wink:


----------



## omegax (Oct 25, 2006)

My take on very public falls from grace:

This stuff happening is not endemic of Social Conservatism. People make mistakes. Some Liberals have a tendency to rub this sort of thing in, because of the resentment over feeling like the social conservatives are telling them how to live their lives. They rub it in because it's their way of saying "See, you guys can't all live up to it either, so knock it off!" The thing they're forgetting is that they never said they were all perfect. They just want to get closer to their version of "moral" on a macro sense, but acknowledge that mistakes are made on a micro sense.

Now, I HATE being told I can't put a few bucks down on sports, or commit any number of other victimless crimes. However, pointing out that social conservatives make mistakes doesn't get any closer to people not trying to push their morals. They already know that.


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

Gunny said:


> They can each be grouped together as "richards", both Sanford and...
> 
> Whats that other guys name?


Most know him as the "Breck Girl" or as John Edwards.


----------



## Gunny (Aug 18, 2005)

:lol:


----------



## Ron Gilmore (Jan 7, 2003)

zogman said:


> Big Question..............Why is Ryan still here????
> 
> Bring back Horsager and Jiffy :lol: They were very knowledgeable on rifles and shooting :sniper: :sniper:


Zog, I doubt either would want to come back! But I like your thinking!!!!

Ryan, just go away!!!!!!!!


----------



## bearhunter (Jan 30, 2009)

Ron Gilmore said:


> zogman said:
> 
> 
> > Big Question..............Why is Ryan still here????
> ...


 maybe he would go away if everyone would quit responding to his posts :wink:


----------



## Habitat Hugger (Jan 19, 2005)

As a very long term lifetime Republican, I agree with Ryan to a certain extent. 
I'm sick of fellow Republicans claiming moral high ground (call it what you wish) and yelling "Family Values" every chance they get while voting against birth control, abortion, gays, stem cell research, then seemingly breaking every rule they want to set for everyone else. 
Yes, you guys will call me a troll, but I've been immersed in all these controversies all my life till I retired, and in all honesty, I've seen conservatives break or bend the rules for themselves and their families so many times I almost get apoplexic when I hear any of them prosyletize about "morality" and the nonsensical label of "Family Values!" Sorry, but I've seen so much crap and hipocrisy following the Family Values quote that its like waving a red flag in front of a bull to me! 
Yep, there are a lot of very moral upstnding Republicans (many of them close friends of mine) and similarly many moral upstanding Democrats, many of them close friends of mine too. 
NEITHER party has a lock on all theswe "immoral" things. All I can say to BOTH political parties is PLEASE don't try to shove your own moral values down my throat, thank you! Especailly when you bend and break the rules for yourselves and your families! 
Our upstanding now famous governor (who voted against birth control programs every time, HIV prevention, etc. and supported the "just say no" programs now taqlks about his "Spiritual Advisors" which is the exact same thing that Clinton did when he got caught! He spent time with his "Spiritual Advisors" too! YYYYUUUKKKK!!! 
So pklease don't wave the bible when you try to preach morality! You don't have to be good for God's sake! Why not simply be good for Goodness Sake?

Politicians - both parties - mostly hippocrites!!! IMHO!


----------



## USAlx50 (Nov 30, 2004)

If the gov was a Dem there would have been the same posts cutting him down from the conservative side. I'm a conservative guy too, but some guys need to hear the truth even when it doesn't fit their beliefs or agenda.

Who are you guys going to argue with if Ryan isn't around?


----------



## 4CurlRedleg (Aug 31, 2003)

USAlx50 said:


> Who are you guys going to argue with if Ryan isn't around?


Who needs to argue or read the hateful profanity he spews??


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

4CurlRedleg said:


> USAlx50 said:
> 
> 
> > Who are you guys going to argue with if Ryan isn't around?
> ...


hateful profanity...? :withstupid:

Either you are clinically delusional or completely out of touch.

Seriously 4Curl.

Seek help. You are crying out for it.

.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

No explanation needed right?


----------

