Sanford admits to affair

[dannno]

Oh please elaborate...

Ok.

Well first of all they're all different, it is measured by the term "libido", and there are good, bad, ugly, sexy, upstanding, moral, nasty, good hearts, bad hearts, moral and immoral men (and women) who have both very high and very low libidos.

That is why it's bad to judge people based on their sexual activities, and that is, according to Christianity, why Jesus came. Because everybody is imperfect, and everybody has different desires for different things at different levels. Personally, I don't think having sex is inherently bad or immoral. It certainly can turn into that, because you can really hurt someone when you lie. But sex doesn't always lead to hurt feelings, it's a beautiful thing and a fun activity. I see no reason why it is inherently bad.

People who are born with insatiable libidos crave sex as much as a fat person who hasn't eaten in 12 hours or more craves a buffet. Ever been in a restaurant and can barely read the menu and can't think straight you're so hungry?? Imagine having other things that give you that same sort of craving. So yes, sometimes it really DOES feel like you're going to die if you don't have sex, at least for some people. The brain puts out the same sort of chemicals that makes you feel exactly the same way, so that you think you need to have sex to survive. It's a trick your brain plays and it's not fun.

The male/female break-down I insinuated in the first post is false, but there are probably 3-10 times as many insatiable men as there are women, so women just call those freaks sluts and don't give it a second thought. Men, on the other hand, are a bit more understanding because there are more who have very high libidos. I'd also say that a woman necessitates a higher libido, relatively to a man, in order to "require" sex. That's related to a biological function...however there are some women who require sex and some men that don't (Abstinent men, Priests who don't have sex, etc..)

 

[Chieftain1776]

Oh I should add that I've been following him on Twitter. So he's made some tweets in the past few days from Argentina. Hopefully he didn't pull a Clinton and tweet while er... he was otherwise engaged.

Also I've been watching his follower count, expecting it to go down, but there's like a hundred more followers over the past few hours.

O tempora O mores!

 

[pinkmandy]

Okay, think about the original story. He went hiking according to his staff. Then, they found his SUV at the airport. It contained hiking stuff (sleeping bag, clothes, etc.). Then, when asked about the hiking Sanford said he didn't know where his staff got that information. The affair doesn't explain that.

Is it possible he was going hiking but ran into someone else at the airport? And if he went to Argentina, didn't he need his passport? Aren't they chipped? Wouldn't that have been discovered?

Just another discrepancy. There seem to be quite a few of them imo.

I was just thinking...why didn't he call at least? From the plane or something- even he didn't tell the truth (because he was having an affair) it seems he would have called and made up something? Once he was away from his staff, to cover his ass? Is it possible that maybe he wasn't allowed to make a call? Or did he fear being found? But if he feared being found, then why would he think anyone would be trying to locate him if he was just going on a trip to get away?

This whole story makes no sense.

 

[runningdiz]

I told you all he was a SCUMBAG from day 1! I knew he was banging some chick all along.

On Fathers Day no less...he's awol...then lies about it to his constiuents...

NEVER TRUST A BILDEBERGER!!!!!!

NEVER TRUST AN ADULTERER!!!!!

I do believe in a post yesterday you said he was gay and having a gay affair....

 

[0zzy]

You guys crack me up.

Though this news is totally shocking to me. I go to the forums and go WTF! IS THIS TRUE?

Crazy stuff, crazy stuff... why did he admit it btw? His wife knew, who else? Why'd he go public? :\ I still like the guy, policy wise, but there goes his chances.

 

[silverhawks]

Sanford is a NEO-CON.

That said, he just opened up the field for a Gingrich/Romney ticket in 2012, imo, rather than the more obvious Gingrich/Sanford ticket. And this ticket will be promoted as the saving grace of conservatism by Glenn Beck and Fox News, neatly complying with all of Beck's "principles and values". Wait and see.

 

[specsaregood]

Sanford is a NEO-CON.

That said, he just opened up the field for a Gingrich/Romney ticket in 2012, imo, rather than the more obvious Gingrich/Sanford ticket. And this ticket will be promoted as the saving grace of conservatism by Glenn Beck and Fox News, neatly complying with all of Beck's "principles and values". Wait and see.

Gingrich, another Republican that has admitted to having an extra-marital affair, and 3 marriages. Further proof that having an affair does little to harm one's political aspirations.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newt_Gingrich
In 1981, six months after his divorce was final, Gingrich wed Marianne Ginther.[32] He remained married to Ginther until 2000, when they divorced. Shortly thereafter, Gingrich then married Callista Bisek, with whom he was conducting an extra-marital affair at approximately the same time he was leading the Congressional investigation into allegations that Bill Clinton lied under oath about his affair with Monica Lewinsky.[33]

 

[Chieftain1776]

Gingrich, another Republican that has admitted to having an extra-marital affair, and 3 marriages. Further proof that having an affair does little to harm one's political aspirations.

Yeah ironically though I think a staunch libertarian would catch more grief from the media than someone like Newt. I really think the media hates libertarians more than neo-cons. They can call Neocons hypocrites for "wanting government in the bedroom but not the boardroom" and involved in foreign wars. They can't do that to libertarians but probably would give more time and effort to such a story just to make them look bad.

If you've ever seen the left wing response to libertarians in the blogosphere you'd see what I mean.

 

[Chieftain1776]

The emails have come out. No love-child mentioned...yet.


http://www.thestate.com/803/story/839350.html

A sample:

“As I told you I shouldn't have done this trip but I would have felt worst if I wouldn't have come because it was too over the date, he is a very nice guy, great heart ... but unfortunately I am not in love with him ... You are my love ... something hard to believe even for myself as it's also a kind of impossible love, not only because of distance but situation. Sometimes you don't choose things, they just happen... I can't redirect my feelings and I am very happy with mine towards you.”

 

[Bruno]

I'd vote for a cheater (just wouldn't marry one) but not a Bilderberger. Looks like he's both.

 

[HOLLYWOOD]

Big news in Argentina too...

You can watch the news on these stations:

http://delicast.com/tv/Argentina/TN24Horashttp://delicast.com/tv/Argentina/TN24Horas

 

[paulitics]

Something stinks about this, and that is the media's behavior leading up to this event. This type of thing should have not been any kind of news story, yet it was featured on primetime news yesterday. I mean why would they all of a sudden, become investigative reporters hunting for a scandal. Politicians leave all the time, and give excuses that are sometimes a lie.
Sanford is a typical politician, he isn't a saint. I always knew that. He is too much of a phony to get my vote for president, but I don't see why he should step down from his position as Governor.

 

[Flash]

I said a while ago I didn't like him for attending the Bilderberg group, but I was called a conspiracy nut. Same thing our opponents call us.

 

[anaconda]

Still seems weird that he ducked out for 4 days. Most politicians that have affairs don't disappear for several days before the announcement. Something is fishy here. I suspect dirty pool and foul play. I don't give a shit if a politician cheats on their spouse. That's personal stuff.

 

[dannno]

Something is fishy here. I suspect dirty pool and foul play. I don't give a shit if a politician cheats on their spouse. That's personal stuff.

Yep I agree with all those. I've been focusing on the affair itself, but thought I'd solidify my position on the shiftiness of the situation as a whole.

 

[Chieftain1776]

Pretty good article with a mention of the Ron Paul Movement by neo-con Reihan Salam "We'll Miss Mark Sanford" http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-06-24/well-miss-mark-sanford/

 

[RevolutionSD]

Sanford is a politician, aka authoritarian sociopath. Cheating on his wife is certainly not the worst thing he's done.

 

[Heata]

I have to agree that the entire thing sounds fishy.

But..

I really don't care that much about all of this. If a clue was to come out about someone blackmailig him, then the situation becomes interesting. Call me when that happens.

 

[pacelli]

How do you know that she broke her vows? You're just speculating.

Wondering the same thing myself.

 

[Cowlesy]

I hope you're right. I've been quite depressed about the future of the country lately, and Sanford was my one bright spot.

This really hurt my spirit.

This.

What a metaphorical kick in the nuts.

Damn you Sanford.

writeoff.