Don't forget McGreevey. For some reason, Democrats appear more likely to resign - and resign summarily - than republicans.

I think Jim McGreevey headed for the exits pretty quickly, too.

On the other hand, Rod and Patti Blagojevich seem like a pretty happy couple.

the audacity of such a cheesy whiny ludicrous argument!

i would laugh more heartily if it weren't such a pity that fools like this have ANY say in public policy.

gawd, the disreputable has become commonplace -- and this pig just wants to hold his place in line...

At least Republicans are trying to follow God's law.

We should get more credit for trying and failing than Democrats get for never even bothering to try.

Steve writes: the party probably ought to stop lecturing everyone else about higher moral standards.

I'm reminded of the old saw about glass houses and stones. And, to mix metaphores, 'those without sin. . ."

The D's are the party of party; aging hippies, flower children, and peace, love and understanding.

Remember "if it feels good, do it?"

You R's are so uptight. Man. . .

Because Democrats are perceived as more socially libertine, they get off easier.

No, it's because Republicans are public scolds about "morality" - both as a group and in most cases, the actual individual that gets exposed as a sinner has personally been a scold about morality.

McGreevey's and Spitzer's conduct, coupled with Obama's failure to speak out against Ensign's and Sanford's affairs, are likely to hurt Dems in 2010 and 2012.

Where is there any proof that Dems & Repubs are "equally adulterous"?

The only Dem I can think of recently that strayed & got caught out was Spitzer. I don't even pay much attention to these political sideshows, but there's been a ton of Republicans that haven't been behaving themselves. (Including a couple that are seriously warped creatures imo. Imagine if Vitter was a Democrat. Does anybody think that Republicans wouldn't be reminding Dems about him every single day?)

And Myke -- generalize much? There are plenty of Democrats who are religious, plenty of Democrats who are married, and relatively few that achieve the depths of a Newt Gingrich.

But more to the point, shouldn't there be a double standard? I can appreciate why Ruffini would lament a "structural disadvantage" on this, but hasn't the Republican Party invited this disadvantage?

I don't agree with you. It would be one thing if a politician was proclaiming family values, and then going to strip clubs every chance that he could.

We don't know what was happening in his private life. Had he been having marital difficulties for a while? Had he and his wife barely been civil for the last 5 years, only staying together for the kids? And then on an overseas trip, something happened that he never expected, he fell in love again?

I don't know what happened, but I don't think it's fair to judge him solely based on his support for "family values".

Myke K - Oh, please! Give me a flippin' break. Was Sanford "trying?" He made a conscious decision to screw around, just as much as Eliot Spitzer did.

And "God's Law?!?" If you really want to follow God's Law, then everyone, including Republicans, should line up and stone Gov. Sanford to death. That's the sentence for those guilty of adultery, according to Leviticus, right?

As pointed out, Spitzer resigned. I think I still see David Vitter in congress, making his sanctimonious statements about family values after being caught frequenting hookers. That, to me, is a difference. For some reason, Republicans (unless it is for a homosexual transgression) seem to get a pass if they "confess to their sins." When Democrats "stray", however, then it is a sure sign of moral turpitude. That's the double standard I see going on.

God's law....

Iran? Who cares? It's time for naval gazing and panty sniffing!

And then on an overseas trip, something happened that he never expected, he fell in love again?

And it was such a sparking thing! It was like rainbows and unicorns and the smell of possums in the early morning as you run over them with a rototiller.

Governor Sanford, quit posting in blog comment threads and get back to work while you still have a job.

And one more note:

If you are suggesting that Sanford needs to resign because he had an affair, then you are becoming the political arbiter of virtue and morality.

The Republicans do that. We shouldn't.

It's time for naval gazing

Mmmm, grinning cat prefers sailors.

In fact, the double standard is the opposite of what Ruffini says: Republicans get off easier than Democrats. People who think of the Republicans as the 'family values' party see Ensign or Sanford as exceptions (rather than as evidence of systemic hypocrisy in the party), and Clinton or Spitzer as typical of Democrats.

"McGreevey's and Spitzer's conduct, coupled with Obama's failure to speak out against Ensign's and Sanford's affairs, are likely to hurt Dems in 2010 and 2012."
This is a more interesting (and funnier) comment than the original post as it gives a glimpse into the mind of the poor conservative troll. This all HAS to hurt Obama. It simply must. The democrats MUST somehow suffer for this because that is how the world should work. If thinking that way helps you get through the day, go ahead. Poor troll.

grinning cat,
So what do you propose we do about Iran? There is nothing we can do at this point. Maybe you can suggest we talk about Universal Healthcare, but to bring up Iran reminds me of the old "But think about the children!" line.

And Susan, I wonder how old you are? How many marriages have you been through? I would guess zero.

From what I remember about half of marriages end in divorce. Not a great statistic. And unless you want to alienate all of those voters, perhaps we should STFU about this.

One should always remember that "Republican" and "Robespierre" are both "R" words---and he who boasts loudly of holding the reins of the guillotine should refrain from earning an appointment beneath its blade....

Thank you for pointing out that Republicans always like to have it both ways. Democrats get off lightly? Tell Bill Clinton that.

Generally Democrats don't give a rat's ass what you do with your genitals. The usual exceptions are:

1: If you're doing it with/to children or animals.
2: If you're doing it with a nonconsensual adult.
3: If you're the type of schmuck who tries to legislate morality and condemn others for their indiscretions. Practice what you preach, d-bag.

Other than that, we'll pity your spouses & children, but it's none of our beeswax.

Any conservative speaker/columnist/yakker who claims this is not the way it is, is lying.

From what I remember about half of marriages end in divorce. And unless you want to alienate all of those voters, perhaps we should STFU about this.

Good point. Turning away divorced voters is a significant danger for Democrats.

I also don't think the left understands how dangerous it is to mock political figures who have histories of chastising others for affairs when those politicians themselves are caught in infidelity. You risk antagonizing every voter who has ever loudly criticized his neighbor's affair while secretly having one of his own. Will it be worth it?

I can't believe I'm going to echo Myke K., but in "Among The Believers", V.S. Naipaul described extremely sanctimonious and self-righteous Saudis going on drinking, whoring, and gambling binges in Abu Dhabi, replete with (back in 1980) $1000 a night western prostitutes. Naipaul tasked his interviewee about Saudi hypocrisy, favoring the morality police at home, but heading to Abu Dhabi all the time to blow off steam, adopting a strategy that would now probably be called 'what happens in Abu Dhabi stays in Abi Dhabi.' The Saudi's response was that it was better to try to be moral and to accept that, being human, people were likely to fall short, than not to try to live an upright life at all. I have to admit some logic in that view, although with all the stoning, public flogging, and amputations they probably have at least a little more room for tolerance.

However, anyone who is going to try to impose their morality on me had damn well better be faultless by their own standards, so I'm loving every minute of Sanford's sowing and reaping. Live by the sordid, die by the sordid.

I think I missed the part in the bible about marriage being between one woman, one man, and his Argentinian lover: maybe this will underline the silliness in worrying about gay weddings threatening the institution of marriage.

DR - One of the hypocrisy issues is that while Repulbicans use the language of moral values, the way they govern is to refuse others the right to decide what is moral (abortion, gay issues, stem cell research, etc.) When you have no inclination to act on something, morality has nothing to do with it.

grinning cat, I like where you're going. We should ask Iran what they think should happen to Governer Sanford!

They are spin, spin, spinning it as best they can. The only Republicans forced to resign (as far as I can recall) were the ones doing acts considered illegal (hitting on an underage page, doing a wide stance in an airport bathroom, etc.). Gingrich? Reagan? Guiliani? Vitter? Ensign? Um, no.

On the other hand, Clinton is the only Dem I can think of who didn't resign over an affair, but he damn near got impeached. So, once again, hypocrisy abounds.

The Saudi's response was that it was better to try to be moral and to accept that, being human, people were likely to fall short, than not to try to live an upright life at all.

Well, one of you libs gets it.

Another thing you don't get is that some women are impossible to be faithful to. I know it's not PC to say it but you can't pretend it isn't true.

Hey wait a minute - who's saying that Sanford should resign because of an affair?

Perhaps Sanford should resign because he's the freaking GOVERNOR, and he LEFT THE STATE FOR A WEEK WITH NO ONE IN CHARGE AND DIDN'T TELL ANYONE WHERE THE HELL HE WAS. I'm just sayin'.

Ruffini's argument about not resigning over an affair would be a lot stronger if this was at all about an affair. It's not, but he'd sure appreciate if we'd all just act like it was. So far, everybody seems to be playing along just like he wants.

"But more to the point, shouldn't there be a double standard? I can appreciate why Ruffini would lament a "structural disadvantage" on this, but hasn't the Republican Party invited this disadvantage?"

Since when have Democratic candidates not used their own "family values" as selling points during campaigns? Yeah, there are a few like Ted Kennedy and Barney Frank, just like their used to be some like Barry Goldwater and John McCain on the GOP side.

Mike

The argument is silly. When they don't resign they hurt the party. If Reid was caught tomorrow I would hope he would resign and that would be that, like Spitzer. But he wouldn't and every time someone disagrees with them, like Vitter, it's brought up. For republicans, Sanford's credibility is crap and he can't possibly hold the same positions he held two weeks ago. His credibility is crap and right now if I were a republican I would want him to disappear yesterday.

The other point is two fold, first if you are popular you can weather a pretty damn ugly storm. the other point is there are rarely two identical set of circumstances. It's looking like Sanford used state funds to leave the country, Spitzer used his own cash and crossed state lines. The public will always remember the cheating, but the details are what usually determines who leaves and who stays.

Another thing you don't get is that some women are impossible to be faithful to. I know it's not PC to say it but you can't pretend it isn't true.

It was already said once in this thread, but it bears repeating -- adulterers should be stoned to death according to the Bible. You're justifying a crime punishable by death under "God's Law", by saying it's the woman's fault. Stay classy.

to the republicans on this blog -

"Would that be pork chops or pork ribs?"

asiangrrlMN -

Clinton was impeached but acquitted in a Senate trial.

Anyway, I'm unaware of any Dem criticizing Sanford for adultery. Rather it's the hypocrisy that's being pointed out (Mike K's situational ethics notwithstanding).

.

Another thing you don't get is that some women are impossible to be faithful to. I know it's not PC to say it but you can't pretend it isn't true.

And one more thing -- you hate Hillary a lot, so I'm sure she's one of those women, right?

I wouldn't know, Kreniigh. None of my three wives have been Democrats.

We don't know what was happening in his private life. Had he been having marital difficulties for a while? Had he and his wife barely been civil for the last 5 years, only staying together for the kids? And then on an overseas trip, something happened that he never expected, he fell in love again?

See, if that had been all that happened, he would not have any trouble. Politicians divorce and remarry all the time, without anyone batting an eyelid. It's only when you combine the end of your marriage with diapers, or prostitutes, or interns, or campaign employees, or boys in restrooms, or pressuring your spouse into group sex, or a graceless abandonment of a terminally ill spouse, or for crying out loud, walking off your job and disappearing for a week, that you end yup having to sresign, and sometimes not even then.

Another preemptive accusation, or projection on the part of Republicans. These aggressive hypocrites and their ass-licking followers (like Myke K) have not shown any honor since Bush stole the 2000 election. And the only case I can think of as far as that goes was Bob Livingston.

Republicanism is a mental disease. Denial of reality, excessive self-righteousness, hyperactive stupidity, and reverse perceptions (let's all throw our support behind the Iranian protesters!!) are some of the symptoms. Excessive greed, lack of empathy, and an inability to perceive irony are a few more.

Excessive mocking is one treatment, and complete separation from any meaningful power is recommended.

What double standard? The same religious nuts who are calling for Sanford's head would cheerfully call for a Democrat's head just as loudly.

Myke K,

Why are you blaming us for your party's behavior or lack their of. Didn't you guys just have a minister telling them to have more sex with their wives?

The Democrats make not bones about liking sex. It's your party that like to marry props[sic] to lie to people under the guise they are happily married.

Then you had the wife complaining that her husband was having anal sex with her in while she slept, and the husband claimed he didn't know.

I can just imagine how these so-called godly men perform in bed - it's probably worse than their behavior in public. I wouldn't want him bringing his anger in bed with me either.

But then that explains why some of your party sleep in their office in the District of Columbia

Dude, I think they need more than anger management.

Iran? Who cares? It's time for naval (sic) gazing and panty sniffing!

Oh my! We forgot for a moment how crucial it is to keep up with events in Iran -- the Iranians might not fully realize that our thoughts are with them.

How did you ever get the impression that what goes on in the political blogosphere is at all important? Don't you get it? This is a hobby. It doesn't matter. It doesn't change anything.

What we are all doing here is called screwing around.

DR nails it:

If you are suggesting that Sanford needs to resign because he had an affair, then you are becoming the political arbiter of virtue and morality.

Democrats, as a whole, are too decent, or uninterested, in wielding the morality club. A Democrat cheats and the Republican machine, as well as the rank and file, mount a never-ending assault on the guy. A Republican cheats; Republicans don't go after him (unless they're looking for an excuse), and Democrats wont, because they respect privacy.

Of course, if I looked at ANY of the threads after Edwards or Spitzer I would see a lot of, well, hatred. Hell hath no fury like the long-term memory of a woman scorned. But, how do we measure something like this objectively?

Wait, who was the last Republican to resign after a sex scandal? Maybe Foley? Because Fossella, Craig, Vitter, Ensign, and Sanford didn't (Sanford still might, but there is also the AWOL factor not just the affair). Sanford and Ensign have resigned from party leadership positions, and Fossella and Craig were basically forced out of the next election, but none of them resigned from office. Meanwhile, Spitzer and McGreevey both did, and Edwards didn't hold office of course. To be clear, my point isn't that they should have resigned because of their personal scandals, but Ruffini's statement that Republicans are "forc[ed] into resignation or disgrace more easily than their equally adulterous Democratic counterparts" doesn't hold water, at least for the resignation part. And as for the disgrace part, it seems that adulterous affairs haven't hurt Gingich's standing in the party, not to mention that their last presidential nominee is reputed to have regularly cheated on his first wife.

Another thing you don't get is that some women are impossible to be faithful to. I know it's not PC to say it but you can't pretend it isn't true.

If she's impossible to be faithful to, then maybe you shouldn't marry her and swear fidelity to her in the first place, you limp-dick assclown. I'm pretty sure your Jesus had a few choice words for liars and adulterers. He didn't blame women for the sins of their scum husbands, either. You might learn a thing or two from him.

I thought someone would have pointed it out by now, but for those not in the know, Myke K is a parody of Mike K (a real Repug sycophant), and should be taken as such.

With all the crap that Repugs and their supporters spew, it can be hard to tell.

"human failing that strikes Democrats and Republicans equally."

Another way of phrasing this would be to say that Republicans are not morally superior to Democrats.

If Republicans want to publicly acknowledge that, and alter their rhetoric accordingly, great. We can drop these stupid holier-than-thou arguments and get back to real policy.

But I note that at the same time he makes this argument, Ruffinni sneaks in the suggestion that Democrats are "socially libertine." Nice.

Michael, even for satire, it's still not funny. I've heard men of all political persuasions say shit like that specifically to blame woman because it's easier to wink and nudge with other men than it is to take responsibility for their own actions. Despite it being a plank in the party platform, misogyny ain't limited to just Republicans. For a well-known example, recall the pointing and laughing at Hillary Clinton, and men saying how they just couldn't fault Bill for sticking it in that intern because, well, have you seen his wife lately hurrhurrhurr.

Something for the men here to think about.

"Some women it's impossible to stay faithful to."

Here we go again with the blame game!

Oh, just come on out with it, that it's cheaper to keep her. Besides, we only see their wives during the election and when they get caught up in a scandal.

There is nothing inherently "scandalous" about having an extramarital affair. Nothing at all. It's only an issue because the media and public choose to make it one. It's a totally manufactured "problem." France, Italy and other countries seem to get along quite well without making an issue of it at all (except for Berlusconi with 18 year olds or things like that). And to those who say "Yeah, but this is America, we do things differently here," just because a society has attitudes doesn't make those attitudes right. Most people in the U.S. once thought interracial marriage was wrong--but that didn't make it so.

In today's climate, JFK couldn't run for president, nor Bobby Kennedy, nor LBJ. It's some system of attitudes we have when many of the best and most effective leaders of the past wouldn't be able to get elected.

Heh. Heh heh. He said Democrats...get off easier. Heh. Heh heh heh.

Maybe the Republicans smell too much like PORK!!!!

Hey Myke K, "what can I get for you today, pork chops or pork ribs?"

Hey Lee,

What's this with the "dead Presidents" with you guys? It appears you have to look to the past on everything. I understand you guys would like to take us back to prehistoric times, but, it's time to move on.

Besides, the Dems don't make a issue out of family values. They try to deal with life as it is today...

Oh, if only Bill Clinton had resigned! We wouldn't have suffered the 8 years of George II. They couldn't have pried Al Gore out of the Oval Office with a crowbar, six men, and bulldog. I blame everything on the Arkansas Assassin.

Years ago I had a hooker friend who worked Las Vegas conventions. I asked her about various professions, politicians, etc. "Democrats have got dicks," she said. (Her term for hooker-friendly types.) What about Republicans? I asked. "You'll have to ask the bellboys," she said.

Yeah, Steve, the Republican holier than thou attitude does make it extra sad and delicious when they get caught not being so holy. But this same logic only further empowers the Republicans who are always bitching about some Democrat's big house or expensive haircut, with the apparent logic that Democrats say they care about the poor and the environment, while everyone knows that Republicans are just selfish consumption oriented pigs so it doesn't count when they have 8 houses and makeup artists.

Novel concept-- maybe politicians of both stripes should get held to account for misuse of their offices, we should let their wives hold them to account for screwing around on them, and they should all stop acting like consumption driven pigs.

Yeah, yeah, I know. The Rapture will commence shortly. A girl can dream though....

If you are suggesting that Sanford needs to resign because he had an affair, then you are becoming the political arbiter of virtue and morality.

Actually, Sanford needs to resign because he went AWOL for 6 days.

You'd be fired if you did that from your job.

I sometimes wonder if Clinton's taking a stand against the "Resign, Philanderer!" impulses of voters and the media proved to Pols that infidelity does not necessarily mean the end of a career. If you can hang on long enough - put enough distance between the revelation of your escapade and your next election, project contrition, and you can survive. It is all about the scales with which your voters weigh your value v. transgressions AND other political "bumpers" off which you can play your chances to stay alive politically. Even as Sanford's press conference seemed a rambling train wreck, I still sensed threads of method to the maddness of it all. The calculations were already - if inartfully - underway.

Spitzer might have been able to survive a mere affair. But he was snagged via means that implied he was playing the financial system - the sort of thing he had developed his brand fighting. And his infidelity involved prostitution; presumably the hookers might be induced to tell sordid stories to the press. Sanford's mistress - assuming she really is in love with him - is unlikely to pose that sort of threat - intentionally anyway. Who knows if any more emails will make their way into print?

The McGreevey situation was made really untenable - if memory serves - by his giving state jobs to the objects of his affections. I'm not sure he could have held on in the absence of the "abuse of power" complications. Somewhere along the line I got the impression that resignation from office was a relief for him.

If my governor pulled what Sanford did last week - for whatever reason - I would not be happy. Would I insist that she resign? Depends on whether her going AWOL coincided with a crisis made worse by her being AWOL and on who the person in line to succeed her is. I suspect that these "political bumpers" are among those that Sanford is now evaluating.

Its not the hypocrisy that makes R sex scandals worse then D sex scandals.

Clinton accepted a private offer of oral sex - Craig accosted people in public bathrooms

Spitzer paid a prostitute to have sex - Vitter paid a prostitute to change his dirty diapers

Edwards had an affair while his wife had cancer - Gingrich handed his wife divorce papers in the recovery room after surgery

Ryan repeatedly tried to get his wife to have sex with strangers so he could watch, Gulianni tried to have his mistress move in with his wife and kids, etc etc

R sex scandals are orders of magnitude more scandalous even without any hypocrisy angle

Sanford is probably the least offensive of the Rs, since disappearing for 5 days is just flaky, not downright creepy like most R politicians

It goes well beyond the simple violation of their family values ideals.

Many on the right actively promote the idea that liberal "if it feels good, do it" activities, the immorality of gays, etc. are actually destroying America. Just in March, Sanford gave a speech about how our internal struggles are a foe seeking our destruction like the British, Germans, and Japanese in various wars.

Given their logic, they not only are hypocrites. They are actively destroying America within. If they truly believe immoral sexual behavior is destroying America, then they should suck it up and keep their dicks in their pants.

Well said, Steve. It is the hypocrisy.
What happens is-- they do it too, in secret.
Just previously they were bloviating against others doing it. Yet it turns out they do it too.
But they've forbidden you to do it.
However, oh, my god--they get caught red-handed doing it.
Thus it is a bunch of cognitive dissonance with which they carry out their lives.
I still don't think they get it.

"It's only when you combine the end of your marriage with diapers, or prostitutes, or interns, or campaign employees, or boys in restrooms, or pressuring your spouse into group sex, or a graceless abandonment of a terminally ill spouse, or for crying out loud, walking off your job and disappearing for a week, that you end yup having to sresign, and sometimes not even then." Posted by: rea

Nice catch Rea! Good old Jack Ryan of Illinois, who couldn't be satisfied with just Jerri Lynn Ryan (Seven of Nine) for God's sake, drops out of the senate race just in time to allow a relative newcomer named...

... Barack Obama ...

... to win a seat in the U.S. Senate and go on to become the first black President of the United States.

It gags enough that these morally lapsing conservatives want to both run on 'Family Values' and cheat on their spouses. It is pure schaudenfreude (sp) to think one of their owns moral failures is the reason Barack Obama is President of the United States.

Rea, you did miss "Or dumping a spouse who remained faithfully married to your during your internment by the North Vietmanese," which come to think of it also might of helped a little bit in getting Obama elected.

Come off it, people.

Failure to match your ideals to your actions with perfect consistency doesn't equal "hypocrisy". We're only human.

Those amoral libertines who want to excoriate social conservatives, not for their failure to practice what they preach, but for having the temerity to preach in the first place, are themselves practicing hypocrisy - or at least disingenuousness - on a grand scale.