|
||||
|
I am Tom Freeland,
a lawyer in Oxford, Mississippi. The picture in the header is my law office.
I'm on Twitter as NMissC
Missing Posts: If you have a link to a post that's not here or are looking for posts from Summer of 2010, check this page. Search NMCError: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page. PagesCategoriesBlogRollLaw: NationalMississippi & Local: BlogsMississippi & Local: PressPolitics |
I’m sure this isn’t the final irony to the Sanford storyStanford voted to impeach Bill Clinton, saying it wasn’t just about lying under oath, it was a bigger lie about promises between a man and a woman. He also stuck some harpoons into majority leader Livingston during the whole impeachment mess. ThinkProgress both reported all this, plus some of Sanford’s remarks from back then, and then notes that there are already rumblings in the South Carolina legislature of moves to impeach the governor.  25 comments to I’m sure this isn’t the final irony to the Sanford storyLeave a Reply Cancel reply |
Write NMCtips, tirades, or just say hello at nmisscommentor (@) gmail.com
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
Archives
|
||
|
Copyright © 2012 T. Freeland - All Rights Reserved
Technorati Profile 56 queries. 1.642 seconds. |
||||
Who paid for the flight?
NMC, it’s easy to pile on someone who formerly dogged another for the same thing. It doesn’t remove the fact that Clinton needed impeachment. He was found not guilty butwas still impeached. Not having impeached Clinton would have been totally wrong.
The point you’re missing, osa.canuc (whatever that means), is that Sanford’s downfall underscores the long ago-established point that Bill Clinton’s impeachment had far less to do with moral imperatives than it did with political knifework — to say nothing, as history has revealed, of the hypocrisy surrounding the entire episode.
OC, keep diggin’…that’s a really cool hole you’re workin’ on..wasn’t it like 90% of the repugs screamin’ impeach him havin’ affairs of their own….really lovin’ all that moral indignation the repub party has had lately
And, oh by the way, let me slip in to “THE” kingfish mode for a moment… He’s the leader of the Free World.. He deserve’s whatever He can get in the Big Oval
Everyone back away from the computer a moment, I’m about to shout.
OC HAVE YOU NO SENSE OF HUMOR?
Hey, am I missing something? You’re tagging these posts Terry Sanford, who was a good and decent Democratic governor and senator from NC, someone that Mark Sanford isn’t even in the same league with.
SORRY Big Country,mistake, and I will fix them
I’m thinking of giving up my sense of humor and sense of decency in an attempt to enhance or revitalize my other five failing senses. Maybe some of the others have already made that committment with their sense of humor.
NMC. Who made up that whole “CAPS is shouting” rule anyways? I’m feelin’ some kind of slow whittling away of my First Amendment rights following that rule. Down with the Caps Nazis. (Note to the humorless amongus-that was sarcasm)
Note to Cap’n Crunch: Try “Oh SAy CAN yoU Cee” for a hint on OC’s screen name.
NMC, you are a dear and thank you for your keeping us “keeping on”.
It’s alot to post about these days (current events), most likely your readers and bloggers were avid “Weekly Readers” in elementary school..
The initial post read Stanford rather than Sanford in the first sentence, oh well, we know who you are referencing, does not the story bring back memories of Gov. Fordice?
I can’t wait for this campaign line:
“It doesn’t matter who I’m screwing as long as it isn’t you with taxes.”
We are not that far away.
I thought the theme of Clinton’s saga was that we should not concern ourselves with the private sex lives of politicians.
Is there a double standard between Democrat sex scandals and Republican sex scandals?
There is no double standard, Lost Gap 5. Clinton didn’t rail against extra-marital affairs with pious outrage — he just had one. Big difference in doing that and doing what Newt and this Sanford hypocrite did: engage in the very activity you’re condemning, invoking the Good Book and “family values.” It will be impossible now for Sanford to run for President, not because he had an affair but because he condemned Clinton for doing it while doing it himself. Then, there’s the assurance that ads will run against him if he does, quoting those email messages to his paramour: “the erotic beauty of you holding yourself (or two magnificent parts of yourself) in the faded glow of the night’s light – but hey, that would be going into sexual details …” It just won’t work for him, not because of the infidelity, because of the hypocrisy. American voters react to hypocrisy more quickly and more forcefully than they do to any other issue.
“It doesn’t matter who I’m screwing as long as it isn’t you with taxes.”
Can I order that on a tee-shirt and maybe a ballcap?
Lost Gap 5:
I am not an advocate of impeaching Mark Sanford. I am advocating laughing at him. If the conservative response to Clinton had been derision, it would have been hard to argue against.
The disconnect between his public positions and what he decided to do is also part of it.
Finally, this is a stunning story and would have been that and interesting from any politician of any party with the kind of national profile Sanford has.
For those who think this derision is reserved for Republicans, I remind you of the name Eliot Spitzer.
Karma went all the way to Argentina, but it got him. Ha!
and John Edwards.
and more locally Musgrove-
oh say can you see? I’d say oh say can you say Canuck?
Ca·nuck (kə nuk′)
a Canadian; sometimes, specif., a French Canadian
Reporting on this story, Fox labeled him a Democrat:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/200906240026
as is its habit when Republican politicians get caught:
(Found in comments at the first link.)
Mark Foley “D” FL
http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/images/item/oreilly-foley-d-3.jpg
Pat Toomey “D” PA
http://images2.dailykos.com/images/user/191280/toomeypartyswitch.jpg
Lincoln Chafee “D” RI
http://aycu19.webshots.com/image/4378/2001551296293851628_rs.jpg
Spitzer was breaking the law. She was a prostitute.
The good book says “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God.” Not one of us is not a sinner, hence we are all hypocrites. There is nothing wrong with speaking out on moral values then falling victim.
There is a double standard. It’s a shame. Yes, Sanford can be laughed at. However, it is ridiculous when the POTUS lied in a deposition, and it doesn’t matter the subject, and remained in office. That is a sin AND A FELONY. Sanford did not commit a felony.
As I recall, Bill Clinton’s little fling was with a 22 year old intern. I was more appalled at his apparent taking advantage of his position of power to influence a young “employee” into performing a sex act. That’s what warrented impeachment rather than the act itself.
Bellsouth, the canucks are canucs
Everyone is wrong about the Clinton impeachment. It was about lying under oath, both in the Paula Jones case, which was the underlying civil case, and in the Lewinsky (sp?) affair, which somehow, someway, was in front of a D.C. grand jury. Hillary wasn’t at home “standing by her man and baking cookies”. She was too busy “standing by her man” and running the “Bimbo Eruption Unit” of the Clinton campaign. Why did this take on the prominence that it did? Because Paula Jones refused. She refused Clinton’s advances, then she refused Hillary’s smear campaign to paint her as “trailer park trash”. In the end, Paula Jones was proven to be correct about everything. Good for her.