« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Sanford: King David Didn't Resign, So Why Should I?
And the South Carolina governor started out by using an interesting comparison to respond to calls for his resignation. King David didn't back down after his own sex scandal, he told his colleagues, and neither will I.
Watch:
Said Sanford:
I have been doing a lot of soul searching on that front. What I find interesting is the story of David, and the way in which he fell mightily, he fell in very very significant ways. But then picked up the pieces and built from there.
As King of Israel and Judea, David saw Bathsheba in the bath (he was walking on the roof at the time, goes the story) and immediately had to have her. After getting her pregnant, he tried to conceal it by ordering her husband Uriah to return from war and sleep with Bathsheba, so that the baby would be thought of as Uriah's.
But Uriah preferred to remain at war. So David gave an order that Uriah should be abandoned in battle, ensuring his death. Then he married Bathsheba.
When all this came out -- thanks to an intrepid reporter from the Bethlehem-based State, who was tipped to emails exchanged between David and Bathsheba, then staked out David at the Jerusalem airport -- David refused to resign as king of Judea. His presidential hopes also took a hit.
Late Update: In a statement issued after the meeting, Sanford doubled down on the David analogy:
I remain committed to rebuilding the trust that has been committed to me over the next 18 months, and it is my hope that I am able to follow the example set by David in the Bible - who after his fall from grace humbly refocused on the work at hand. By doing so, I will ultimately better serve in every area of my life, and I am committed to doing so.













Classic narcissistic smug born-again Christian bullshit. " I'm worthy of being forgiven -- you however, are a worthless Heathen bound for hell. "
June 26, 2009 1:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
i loved combat. vic morrow was a great actor
thanks for reminding me
June 26, 2009 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I suppose he will now follow King David's example and marry his lover?
June 28, 2009 9:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Johann;
But Mark, Governors Jim McGreevy and Eliot Spitzer DID resign, so why shouldn't you. Are the Democrats more apt to stand up and take their medicine than Republicans?
June 29, 2009 4:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
With a profound sense of irony I say, amen...
June 29, 2009 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
And king Solomon, king David's successor, had 1000 wives, so why shouldn't king Sanford?
Cherry picking mores from a different time, place, and situation can justify anything, including infidelity, mayhem and murder.
June 30, 2009 7:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
I love Jesus.
June 26, 2009 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
it was a tv show
June 26, 2009 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
My mom who was very strict about language of her children once said, "What is good for the goose is good for the gooser". I think in this instance, her statement stands in spite of how discombobulated it was at the time she said it. She would be totally embarrassed if we had explained exactly what sh meant. However, in the case of Sanford, I will give him some slack when he apologizes to Bill Clinton. The Bible is so correct when it says, "Judge not lest ye be judged also". Now Mr. Sanford not only has to live with the consequences of HIS choice, but no doubt he is haunted with his judgmental statements about Clinton. Well, now that I think of it, I doubt that is true. At least he should be very aware of what a goof he appears to be on the issue of "going on and rebuilding his life." In the end, I really feel sorry for the poor guy. He seems not to get it even after his quick judgment of Bill Clinton.
June 29, 2009 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
what an arrogant...
so what he wants someone to die so he can live with his silly maria? is my take wrong? or is he saqying he was king?
i hope people in SC have had enough. if i was jenny i know i would have.
June 26, 2009 1:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
I was thinking the same thing. If Maria has a husband he better be very careful if he goes in to battle with the Philistines. I know what you are thinking, Sanford is a Philistine. (I apologize to Philistines everywhere.)
June 26, 2009 2:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
amazing that Sanford picked out David for his comparison as to bad deeds. David did surely muck it up, however, his true repentance obviously is something that Sanford knows nothing about. It seems like all of Sanford's regret centers around his getting caught, not for how he betrayed his family. No comparison with Sanford's silly apology with David's deep mourning for his sin. Ever since reappearing and talking to the public about his problem, Sanford has only made himself look sillier and sillier. Crass too. Sanford is no help to Republicans whatsoever. He even makes Clinton seem like a true gentleman hero by comparison. Sort of the logical pay off for his judgmental stand against Clinton. Wonder how satisfied Sanford is with his sort of judgment on Clinton mess. Strange with all that blabbing that Sanford still got himself into this mess. I think he is toast as far as the governorship is concerned.
June 28, 2009 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Go fuck yourself.
June 26, 2009 1:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
'Cuz yer not King David, Bozo.
June 26, 2009 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I knew King David. King David was a friend of mine. And you, Gov. Sanford, are NO King David.
June 26, 2009 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
jejeje
June 26, 2009 10:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
shorter sanford: "what can I find in the bible to justify my behavior?"
June 26, 2009 1:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I surprised he didn't try:
George W. Bush went AWOL
I went AWOL
George W. Bush became President
I will be Pres.. (Bolt of lightnight stike)
June 26, 2009 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sanford was not annointed by God, King David was.
June 26, 2009 1:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
No way! The Lord Cheeezuz wants this good man of faith to be governor, silly! If you feel your own faith being tested, make an offeing by sending cash to Draft Sanford 2012.
June 26, 2009 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
At first I thought you were referring to that god of basement-dwellers everywhere, The Lord Cheetos.
June 26, 2009 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
No; he meant Cheez Whiz.
June 26, 2009 5:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jimmy Swaggart was anointed by God too.
...oh...nevermind....perhaps we are in agreement on the significance of this anointing of which you speak.
June 26, 2009 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, the story merely illustrates what's wrong with monarchy.
I bet David's subjects started thinking about an impeachment process.
June 26, 2009 2:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I waiting for him to move on to a comparison to King Solomon and sign up for the FLDS and move to Colorado City. This guy is insufferably arrogant.
June 26, 2009 1:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
wowowowowoWOW!
what a prick!
Talk about a sense of entitlement and false sense of victimhood. He won't resign because the King of Israel didn't abdicate?
What a prick. Self-serving SOB. Hypocrite. He violates one of the key laws of the Bible and then hides behind it?
Totally ignoring the fact that he disappeared from his job for 7 days?
In the real world, not showing up at work for 7 days without telling anyone would result in being fired, or at least severely reprimanded.
June 26, 2009 1:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a douchebag. Did it ever occur to Sanford that David could whack anybody who disagreed with him? State governors, not so much.
June 26, 2009 1:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it's safe to say that no public relations expert is advising him.
Gov. Sanford? It's not the sex that's the issue. It's the dereliction of your responsibilities and the lying. David King David pull that crap, as well?
June 26, 2009 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sigh. That should read: Did King David pull that crap?
June 26, 2009 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
In a way, he did. It was usual for a king to join his generals in battle, but when Joab and the other generals went to war against the Ammonites that spring, David stayed behind in Jerusalem. Some warrior-king. David sometimes sounds more like W.
June 26, 2009 2:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, didn't he become king by playing the harp for King Saul or something? ;)
June 26, 2009 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I always loved the "wow, wow! See, I'm forgiven because I touched the Ark of the Covenant and lived!" part. "Everyone knows that to touch the Ark is death because, well, everyone just knows it which is why it's in the Holy Writ, which is why no one ever tried to touch it before I did! But I did and I lived so, hey, knocking up that hot married babe and then sending her husband to the hottest part to get killed? Total free pass from the Big Cheese himself, baby!"
June 26, 2009 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is why I love the Bible.
This asshat David was held up for respect just WHY exactly? Because he was good with a slingshot? Cuz he wrote really good songs?
June 26, 2009 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
He was the OT King of Pop!?!
June 26, 2009 5:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lucky for Sanford that the new age self-described KOP met his maker yesterday. Otherwise more than three or four hundred people would be paying attention to the Guv's shenanigans. He can make asinine comments like this for weeks now and only political junkies will notice.
June 26, 2009 6:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ullaritta:
You're joking, right? "Right to their privacy?" Not when they are supposedly a public servant and they disappear for 9 days. Then go to Argentina on a trip paid for by the state of South Carolina.
June 26, 2009 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well if he's going Old Testament on us, how about this one:
Leviticus 20:10 (King James Version)
10. And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
June 26, 2009 1:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
They skip all that moldy Leviticus stuff, except the line about men laying together as a man and woman do. That one's Golden, good for the campaign trail.
June 26, 2009 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess he's cherry-picking the word of god.
June 26, 2009 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
god wants him to not resign! his righteous work in South Carolina is not ended, sayeth the Lord!
June 26, 2009 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
"guess he's cherry-picking the word of god"
Why is Leviticus like the Bill of Rights?
Because like strict Constitutionalists, strict Christians can pick and choose the parts they actually accept.
God said "Eat a lobster and you will go to hell", and depending on how you read that language about milk and calves the same goes for eating a cheeseburger or a pepperoni pizza. Which probably doesn't stop Fred Phelps from cramming down a Big Mac between his 'God hates fags' gigs.
The Catholic Church knew what they were doing before Reformation by insisting that the Bible not be translated into the various vernacular, because Christianity is a lot safer when delivered through a filter with all of its inconsistencies blurred. For example if you read through the four accounts of the Passion in the Gospel you get four different stories, none of which line up with your typical Passion Play. Which leads me to wonder how many self proclaimed Bible readers really have done any deeper reading than you would get in 4th grade Sunday School.
One of my grandmothers was a Seventh Day Adventist, and while some people think them a little kooky, at least Adventists attempt to take Leviticus seriously and don't run their Christianity cafeteria style.
(Me I like shellfish and ham and swiss sandwiches and am willing to take my chances with a vengeful God.)
June 27, 2009 4:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Pure narcissim. Do SC Republicans buy this crap?
"Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fail." -- Me
June 26, 2009 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obvious - Sanford's a "Cafeteria Christian".
June 26, 2009 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
he thinks it's about the affair. It's not. It's about dereliction of duty for having left his state without any leadership for what was going to be 10 days--just left the state, left the entire country--felt no professional responsibility to tell anyone, ditched his Lt. governor, all his colleagues, his staff--that's tantamount to walking out on the job, just quitting.
He shouldn't be allowed the opportunity to resign. He should be fired.
June 26, 2009 1:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Absolutely! I could care less about "Bathsheba". The whole sitting-governor-disappearing-without-a-trace thing is the real reason he is not fit to continue as Governor. Oh, and the using state funds to visit Bathsheba should only make it easier to fire him. His little junket showed his total disregard for the people of his state, not to mention his family.
June 26, 2009 2:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, TPM Gary and Inner Child, it's about No call-No Show sbandonment of your employment as Governor. It's about your corruption, using public fund to finance you tryst. I don't really care whether you were on the Appalachian Trail or the Inca Trail, you didn;'t have enough vacation days to take the time off and you didn't call in either. You're fired!!!
You need to spend more time with your family AND your Bible!!!
June 26, 2009 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your superstition does not trump my constitution.
June 26, 2009 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
So King David raped a woman because he couldn't control his urges. It must have been her fault because she was naked in the bath. Then he covers it up by sabotaging her husband on the battlefield. Sweet!
Fundy religions all give men slack for this shit, then make women cover themselves head to toe and follow ridiculous rules only for them.
This is the life of a Bible Hero, a patriarch? Doesn't sound very admirable.
Bible study is dangerous if this behavior is considered holy and worth emulating. It sanctifies hypocrisy.
June 26, 2009 1:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
So is Sanford going to send the rival of his Argentinian lover to his death, then marry the Argentine and have a child who grows up to become his successor? 'Cuz that would be awesome.
June 26, 2009 1:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
It would make one helluva reality show.
June 26, 2009 2:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's hope Sanford's mistress isn't pregnant. God killed the child David & Bathsheba's conceived. He wasn't merciful about it either.
June 26, 2009 2:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Cite? ;-)
June 26, 2009 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
www.biblicalbloodgore&smiting.org -- JK!
June 26, 2009 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
2nd Samuel Chapter 12
15 Then Nathan returned to his house. The LORD struck the child that the wife of Uriah had borne to David, and it became desperately ill.
18 On the seventh day, the child died. David's servants, however, were afraid to tell him that the child was dead, for they said: "When the child was alive, we spoke to him, but he would not listen to what we said. How can we tell him the child is dead? He may do some harm!"
The poor kid suffered for seven days in order to teach David a lesson. That ain't cool.
June 26, 2009 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's not exactly known for his mercy (or his sense of humor, come to think of it)! 'Specially in the OT.
June 26, 2009 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Read the Book of Joshua and then put it in the context of the Shoah.
It is pretty chilling stuff. I mean it is exciting and all to think about trumpets blaring and with God's aid having the walls of Jericho fall down. The unnice part is what happens to the people of Jericho after that.
Because the Promised Land wasn't empty the first time around either, Joshua had to create the living space for the Chosen. And his methods are to a modern audience disturbingly familiar.
Once you get beyond the Bible Stories for Children highlights the Old Testament gets pretty grim in its moral implications.
June 27, 2009 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Resignation would be a matter of honor. Since he has now destroyed what honor he may have had previously he has none to preserve so there's no real motivation for resignation other than humiliation and shame. I don't see that he's done anything that is actually impeachable though the only real determiner of what is impeachable is the requisite number of legislator's votes.
June 26, 2009 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
One can argue that under the state constitution he had a duty to transfer power and that his failure to and the associated conduct is per se impeachable.
But one can argue a whole lot of things. The ultimate standard is just what you have said, Oleeb.
June 26, 2009 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Praise the lord and pass the cheese whiz.
June 26, 2009 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that men of action have too much testosterone which has to be released one way or the other.
For thousands of years the men of action have had several mistresses and nobody demanded them to disappear from the public scene.
This American hunting for anybody who possibility had a mistress has gone too far and too many wise and smart public servants have had to resign.
We should stop this madness by not purchasing and reading tabloids. And support those public servants we feel are doing the right thing.
They do have the right to their privacy. This we should give them.
June 26, 2009 2:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Whaaaa? Privacy doesn't include being awol from your job! THAT is the problem; he doesn't get that, and obviously neither do you!
What adult can just disappear for days on end without being in touch? Well, a husband who relies on his wife to do everything for the household -- okay; that's covered. But anyone with a job? I don't think so. How about a job that carries responsibilities that absolutely NO ONE else has? That is the problem!
And I take exception to your notion that the governor of South Carolina is A POWERFUL MAN. He may THINK he's powerful; evidently he does. But Governor? of SC? Powerful? I don't think so.
June 26, 2009 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, I misread, but your description only makes it more ridiculous! A Governor of South Carolina -- a "Man of Action?"
Have you seen him on a boogie board at the beach or something?
June 26, 2009 3:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Try to follow along here. It's not the adultery. It's the dishonesty and untrustworthy nature of the guy. It's the abandonment of his family on Father's Day weekend. It's the abandonment of his state without leaving a clue to his whereabouts. In short, he's an irresponsible fuck. It's the lying before, during, and after the fact. It's the fact that he did it at taxpayers' expense. And, on top of all that, it's all of his public statements and campaign ads propping himself up as morally superior and wagging his finger at others for doing the same thing that he just got caught doing.
Liar. Hypocrite. Irresponsible jerk. No right to remain in office. And now add arrogant to the list.
June 26, 2009 3:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
"It's the abandonment of his family on Father's Day weekend."
Actually that seems to be the only charge he can be absolved of. According to Mrs. Sanford's statement, she asked him to leave the family home. (She doesn't say, but implies, that this was because her husband was refusing to give up Maria.)
June 27, 2009 1:41 AM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know who these "men of action" are, but I don't believe it's testosterone that is released. I think the word you're looking for is "jism" and there are ways to release it that don't require you to disappear for a few days without telling anyone where you've gone.
I'm sorry, I keep forgetting: IOKIYAR
June 26, 2009 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a liberal blog, we all appreciate that he wanted to get some action, some Argentinian action, to be exact. Even so, we still abandoned John Edwards for his infidelity. Sanford deserves no less. Frankly, that he abandoned his four sons on Father's Day was probably the most tragic of all. He is not fit for office for so many reasons. I can forget about the sex. It's it so NOT about the sex.
June 26, 2009 3:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
...I am sick of the notion that poor men (especially "powerful" ones) just can't control their little winkies...get a grip (literally!) If your wife can't trust you, why should we? I'm sorry, if you can't keep the stallion corralled, find another line of work...and that goes double for those of you espousing family values.
June 27, 2009 5:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's the problem. Sanford is a Republican. Republicans have made their living recently on being the "family values" party, whose dedication to the "sanctity" of marriage prevents us from descending into the dreaded "moral relativism" of cultural decline.
Then they turn around and get their freak on with prostitutes who share a first name with their own wives, in bathroom stalls, and in Argentina.
This would not be an issue if not for the fact that the Republicans themselves have made it an issue. They use their self-proclaimed moral superiority as a club to bludgeon their opponents, while living up to none of the standards that they themselves so spectacularly fail to live up to.
If a vegan wants to shout from the street corners that anyone who eats meat condones murder, that's his right. But can he really claim a right to privacy if he goes to Burger King and eats a Whopper with cheese, and gets caught doing so? Can he really say it's no one's business what he eats while making it his business what others eat?
June 26, 2009 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's why God created life-size rubber dolls.
June 26, 2009 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think King David was a Republican, so Sanford's reliance on his precedent is entirely justified.
No, wait. I think this is just like the Civil Rights movement! Republicans are working to change society's standards that unfairly penalize cheating politicians, to make acceptable the concept of "public service, private life," by sending forth true-believing martyrs to the cause such as Sanford, Vitter, et al.
Scratch that. The acceptance of "public service, private life" would make us like Yurp, and Republicans hate Yurp, so that can't be it.
Oh, screw it. Enough with trying to understand Sanford. He's nuts.
June 26, 2009 5:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
David wasn't forced out of office - but Saul was.
And G-d specifically said that murdering Uriah the Hittite (i.e. abandoning the state executive for a week) was the reason David was not allowed to build the temple during his lifetime.
You expect this "the patriarchs had lots of concubines and so can I" stuff from Mitt Romney (R-Kolob) not Sanford.
The more I see of this G-d's Own Party (GOP) the more I believe that the central tenet of modern american christianity is not WWJD but DAISNAID (do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do)
The possibilities of openly biblical based politics are fun!
Will Sanford (R-Judea)consult the witch of Endor to see if he should chop a baby in half?
Will Sanford claim to be Phinehas and run people through with a spear in mid-coitus?
June 26, 2009 2:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Maybe if Sanford kept on reading that Bible of his, he would have got to the part where God kills the child of David & Bathsheba in retaliation for David's bad behavior. If that's Sanford's idea of "picking up the pieces".... For Sanford to compare himself to the King of the Jews is hubris in extremis. I'm surprised he didn't say anything about the media crucifying him and the people worshipping false idols instead of ME MARK SANFORD.
The Constant Weader at www.RealityChex.com
June 26, 2009 2:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
God kills an innocent child for the sins of the father.
I think God should resign.
June 26, 2009 2:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just one more reason to blindly believe!
And besides, that innocent child that god murdered -- I'm sure he's in a "better place" doncha know!
June 26, 2009 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I think God should resign."
Well in fairness he did semi-retire and turn over day to day operations to his Son. (Though probably not without grumbling about that weak, namby-pamby Sermon on the Mount thing. " 'Suffer the little children to come to me' indeed, I'll show you suffering children!")
June 27, 2009 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even more evidence for the diagnosis of narcissistic personality disorder: Now Sanford thinks he is King David.
June 26, 2009 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why is it always the heroes they draw parallels with? There are plenty of bad actors in the Bible but I guess their kind just don't exist anymore.
June 26, 2009 2:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow... I've rarely seen self-justification rise to the level of comparing oneself to a divine chosen king.
That's some serious self-delusion, too.
June 26, 2009 2:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well I (and others)have said loud and clear in several fora here that he would *definitely* not resign. http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/mare_nostrum/
Anxious to forgive him for human frailty and drawn into the love story, people have naively written things like, "Naturally, he can't continue as governor."
Curb your enthusiasm. Him moving on makes sense in the abstract, sure, but not all of you realize what a fricking cad we're dealing with here (ever heard of a sense of entitlement? ;) ). Ssuggest forgiving his sorry ass *after* he is driven from office, which is the *only* way lover body is going *anywhere,* unfortunately.
June 26, 2009 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Lover boy," sorry. And "Suggest..."
June 26, 2009 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm torn. ON the one hand, I was thinking "Comedy GOLD" if he stays in office. Then, this self-righteous BS from today so deeply annoys me that I hope the citizens of SC start staking out the governor's mansion until Sanford resigns, or flees to Argentina, or both.
BTW, I sorta like "lover body"...
June 26, 2009 2:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for your kind support for "lover body," CT Voter!
I actually hear you as to the rest. It bothers me personally that people are like, "Aw shucks, it seems like he really cares for this woman!" and that makes the whole thing go away. But I also started thinking, where is this rapscallion most useful to us?
And it might just be in the statehouse in Columbia, South Carolina, not as a Harlequin Romance hero but as an egomanical laughingstock.
June 26, 2009 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or, the next candidate for Prez in 2012? I think he should go for it, myself!
June 26, 2009 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right -- Nixon wanted to run against McGovern! Why can't we run against this guy?!
Shoot, I believe the Lord has already forgiven him and may have big plans for him on a Sarah Palin or New Gingrich ticket!
June 26, 2009 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is he taking notes from the Peter Hoekstra meme? These Republicans are seriously mental...
June 26, 2009 2:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
June 26, 2009 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
So accurate it bears repeating:
June 26, 2009 2:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, and I don't think people here or elsewhere realized this. If it were *us,* we would sure resign!
But that's the wrong way to view it, of course. Think how a classic narcissistic smug born-again Christian (as you say) dickhead would proceed, not your average man.
June 26, 2009 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
I kind of glossed over the bible, but I understand that his sins will be forgiven if we nail him to a piece of wood and let him hang around for a couple days. I think if he gets his interpretation of bibical precedent, than I get mine.
June 26, 2009 2:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Notwithstanding the narcissism and false equivalency, it's clear what Sanford is doing. He is using the only weapon he has left in his arsenal: religion.
I live in SC and unfortunately there are a ton of fools here that will fall for this line.
1. Commits sin.
2. Asks for forgiveness and declares he is repentant.
3. Refers to "forceful" Bible passages to support and justify why he should be granted absolution by the Bible-thumpers in this very conservative state.
Pathetic.
June 26, 2009 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Will you go down to state and pray with him, TPC?
June 26, 2009 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Been running prayer vigils at my house 24/7 since it was determined King Mark was "missing." Wanna join us?
June 26, 2009 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
So I guess they all forgive Bill Clinton?
Nope....
These are truly primitive people.
June 26, 2009 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well of course they wouldn't forgive Clinton. He's a Democrat, which is worse than Satan itself in this state.
Besides, Clinton didn't have the temerity to equate himself to a biblical king, although he did play the religion card, just not as heavily and foolishly as Sanford just did.
June 26, 2009 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
No one is sayng we will not forgive him. You're forgiven! Now pack you bags and get out! We don't want him as governor, but he's forgiven, sure!
June 26, 2009 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Sanford want to compare himself to an ancient king, the homecoming of Agamemnon is more appropriate.
Of course, it is too late for him to actually do anything about it...
June 26, 2009 2:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent. Because I wouldn't be at all surprised to see Jenny get her Clytemnestra on for this.
June 26, 2009 8:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
King David didn't "resign" after committing adultery with Bathsheba AND murdering her husband (a documented alien) as a coverup. Pray tell, Governor, what is the behavior for which you would resign?
June 26, 2009 2:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here in South Carolina we always thought he wanted more power, Now we know he thought he was the king of South Carolina
June 26, 2009 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
That piece of shit! I wasn't mad about this until now - before it was just lame. He references the Bible in order to brush aside an act the Bible condemns? Throw the bum out.
June 26, 2009 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow. What is there to say, really?
June 26, 2009 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
please please let this clown stay in office as long as he wants, crapping all over the burnt remains of the Rethug brand. His people are already out for a Night of the Long Knives on his sorry ass. drag it out all you want: it will all end in a larger puddle of his tears.
June 26, 2009 2:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, David didn't resign, but his family paid a heavy price for his sins. The biblical narrative has Nathan the Prophet delivering a four-part judgement on David:
1. "The sword shall never depart from your house." Three of David's sons (Amnon, Absalom, and Adonijah) all died violent deaths.
2. "Behold, I will raise up evil against you out of your own house." David's sons fought constantly among themselves, and inflicted much injury on each other and other members of the family. Absalom murdered Amnon, for example, after Amnon had raped Absalom's sister Tamar. And, of course, Absalom ultimately ended up leading an armed insurrection against David.
3. "I will take your wives before your eyes, and give them to your neighbor, and he shall lie with your wives in the sight of this sun." Absalom's rebellion forced David to flee Jerusalem with all but 10 of his wives and concubines. Absalom publicly raped the 10 that were left behind in order to show his domination over the old man. (This, remember, was David's favorite son. Nice kid.)
4. "The child that will be born to you shall die."
And the baby that was conceived while Bathsheba was still married to Uriah became ill and died.
So sure, Mark. Be like that great guy David. Don't resign. Let your wife and your boys bear the constant public humiliation for the next couple of years. Shouldn't do them any harm, should it?
June 26, 2009 2:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Damn. The Bible needs to be R-rated!
June 26, 2009 2:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
That doesn't sound like my loving God.
It must be is evil twin...Skippy.
June 26, 2009 2:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
1. David repented --read Psalm 51. Compare that to the tripe being served up by Sanford.
2. God forgave David and later called him a man after His own heart.
3. The baby born in sin died despite David's earnest pleas -- actions have consequences.
4. God was gracious - Solomon was born to David and Bathsheba.
5. Solomon - lead astray by the pagan wives he married for political expediency -- worshipped false gods, a really big no-no. Solomon does not repent.
6. Nonetheless, because of His love for David, God permits Solomon to peacefully lives out the rest of his days -- then permits the Kingdom to be torn asunder.
Look at the legacy Sanford is leving his family and state. Truly, may God have mercy on them.
June 26, 2009 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, what a loving, and "gracious" god; he just HAD to teach David a lesson so he killed off his baby. Oh, well -- it was that baby's own damn fault for being born in sin.
Hey! I think just found a biblical reference to justify abortion!
And then he forgives Soloman and lets him live to a ripe old age, but get this:
" then permits the Kingdom to be torn asunder."
For Kingdom, read PEOPLE living there! Yep god was a real sweetie back then. I think the other dude's right -- it WAS his evil twin, Skippy!
June 26, 2009 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey! I think just found a biblical reference to justify abortion!
---------------------------------------------------
That wasn't abortion, it was infanticide. Typical republican. No fetus must die, but once its born who gives a fuck what happens to it.
June 27, 2009 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not really. Even though the kid was killed in his infancy, it was because he was conceived in sin. So, carrying that thought onward, ergo any conception which lacks the holy matrimonial OKAY, should be smited! Under the indisputable law of: Hey! God did it First!
Remember that the "pro-lifers" see no difference between fetuses and people. So if a person (infant) is smited by god for having the bad luck of being conceived by unmarried people, surely a fetus, which after all can't even suffer like an infant, would surely be included in the smite-fest!
June 27, 2009 7:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
A really big no-no? What about a little fairness from GOD? Some fair play -- or do some people get to 'sin' if their fathers repented properly?
June 26, 2009 5:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly, and all these were consequences AFTER David repented. Imagine the consequences if He didn't. (Probably all of the above AND impeachment/death).
June 26, 2009 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
And that was just the “A’s".
June 29, 2009 12:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
When I read about this guy fighting tooth and nail to reject SC's share of the stimulus money and prevent more funding for unemployment benefits in his state, I thought he was just an extreme example of right-wing idiocy. Now I realize he is totally fucking bonkers. I hope he is ejected from the gov's mansion pronto.
June 26, 2009 2:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, SC is short on money, but there was plenty for his intercontinental airfare, wasn't there? The guy obviously also needs help with math. When you're broke, you don't get to fly ti Argentina.
June 26, 2009 4:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
On the one hand: If we're going to go with the biblical analogy, then the Governor should man up and resign his post, and repent of his wrongdoings, before things get really nasty. He's already lost his family, and who knows what kind of relationship he's going to have with his children as a result of this; what else might God decide to take away from him as a result of his "wickedness"?
On the other hand: if we're going to go with his own standards, then he should either (as Cenk Uygur suggested in his broadcast) apologize for his previous calls for other officials to resign because of similar behavior, or he should just get the hell out of the public sector altogether.
What he shouldn't be doing is what he's doing now, which is acting like everything is hunky-dory, cuz it so obviously is not.
June 26, 2009 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I should think an astute reporter would simply ask Sanford's opinion on the same story that Nathan used with David?
June 26, 2009 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent!
June 26, 2009 4:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
This just goes to show what a piker Vitter is. Why didn't HE think of this first? Same outcome, of course (not resigning).
June 26, 2009 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Flying Spaghetti Monster to Sanford: A better comparison than King David is David Vitter.
BTW: I liked "lover body," too. Of course, that was part of his problem.
June 26, 2009 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ah for love of lust and war.
King George may have to return for that pious pardon his lordship may now be expection.
June 26, 2009 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
He should resign because he abandoned his state in a clear dereliction of duty and because he stole from the state, having it, in part, pay for his "fall from grace".
June 26, 2009 3:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I knew King David.
King David was a friend of mine.
And you, sir, are no King David.
June 26, 2009 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
D'oh you beat me to it. This exactly what I thought when I saw the headline.
June 26, 2009 4:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have a friend who works for the newspaper(The State) who busted him. There's more to this story to be coming out soon. The man has no shame and is hung up on his own claim to fame. The state GOP is aware of the "rest of the story" and will hear increase demands for his resignation. the sooner to be better!
June 26, 2009 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
They're a patient crowd over at The State!
Pretty wild that they sat on those e-mails for six months, biding their time. And I can *well* believe you that more is coming, surely. I'm starting to flip on this whole thing, though, as discussed with CT Voter and CVille Dem further up above:
If the Lord wants this megalomaniacal whack-job as His servant, further dishonoring their already disgraced political party and burying it deeper in odiferous disrepute, who are we to question Divine Wisdom?
June 26, 2009 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
i hope you are right
June 26, 2009 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dear republicans and comnservatives: HAHAHAHA! Watching your pathetic attmepts to spin out of the ever widening revelation of your holier than thou hypocrisy and watching the ever quickening swirl of your entire philosophy and world view down the toilet of history is extremely gratifying to me. In fact it is the best thing to happen in American politics since LBJ enacted civil rights legislation. Maybe even since Lincoln freed the slaves.
June 26, 2009 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
What a narcissistic piece of crap...condemning Clinton, Spitzer, etc., hypocritically demanding resignations for their behavior...this is exactly why I can't stand these holier-than-thou, hypocritical GOP right-wing,"Christians"...I can hardly wait for the "rest of the story" to come out....
June 26, 2009 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Minor factual correction: David was king of Israel and JUDAH, not Judea, which was the name of the Roman province in later times.
I love the fact that Sanford would try to excuse adultery by citing a hero whose adultery led him to MURDER. How's Maria Chapur's husband doing?
June 26, 2009 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, Judea is a Latin derived spelling of the Hebrew Yehudah, the same of the both the tribe and its territory (centering on its capital, Beit Lehem).
Once Solomon died, his kingdom split into Israel (the 10 northern tribes) and Judah. That polity continued into Roman times, until the Romans destroyed it and renamed it "Palestina".
June 26, 2009 5:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's just getting ready for his next analogy:
"Sanford: Jesus Didn't Resign After The Crucifixion, So Why Should I?"
and as for Jesus, He was only gone for 3 days.
June 26, 2009 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Correct me if my OT is wrong, but wasn't David a Jew? Is Sanford saying that he is also really a secret Jew, a converso, as it was. Mark is NOT his given name, but is fairly common among Jews of his age. Did he adopt Mark when he secretly converted? If that is, as I suspect true, all sorts of other interesting lines of inquiry open.
June 26, 2009 3:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
This Biblical allusion totally Colbert Bait.
June 26, 2009 3:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Too bad it is Friday.
June 26, 2009 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dear Governor Sanford:
Jesus Loves You, but I think you are a Douchebag.
Sincerely,
Me
June 26, 2009 3:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
This may be all to the good - it may help dampen Bible literalism.
June 26, 2009 3:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like my literal Bible moist. He likes her damp littoral spaces between the tan lines.
June 26, 2009 4:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
As a Grumpy Elder at my church (Warning: Mainline Protestant interpretation ahead), I would like to point out several parts of the Biblial story the Gov. seems to have forgotten and may not like:
-As punishment for David's contract killing of Uriah and adultery, (per the writers' not me) God kills David's first child with Bathsheba.
-David suffered, what appears to be a nervous breakdown, due to his adultery and the death of his child with Bathsheba.
-His second son, Absalom had his body guards kill the heir apparent, his older brother (don't wanna look up his name) under the pretext a year earlier his brother had raped their sister (What took you so long?)
-Absalom, attempted a coup that was nearly successful, David had to flee the palace, but he had the concubines provide intelligence to him and his right hand man killed his son in battle.
-David and Bathsheba's child, Solomon seized power in a program that, shall we say, makes Michael Corleone look like a choir boy.
This flawed sinner's understanding of the story of David is that no matter how powerful or influential someone becomes, we are all human and without God's guidance can become morally bankrupt as anyone, the important part of this story is David's acknowledgment of his sin and contrition. Something most pols don't seen to understand.
Gov. Sanford should be careful what he asks for, as ye sow so shall ye reap or as I like "Kara's a bitch (to people like Sanford)."
To be a tad hypocritical, as the late great Gov. Ann Richards said about some family related problem of her opponent (paraphrase) "That's a issue in their family and I'm not going to touch it with a ten foot pool. It's none of my business"
We've got way more ammunition against the Wingers, than a sorry sad story of a failed marriage. Let's move on to more important stuff, like defending the Constitution.
June 26, 2009 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Governor Sanford neglected to note that God did not let David off the hook for his transgressions. Bathsheba and David's child died in childbirth. David's son Amnon rapes his sister, Tamar, and then Amnon is killed by his brother Absolom, who later challenges his father, David, as king. Absolom dies a tragic death as well. If this is what King Sanford calls "picking up the pieces", he should reread his Bible.
June 26, 2009 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey, great minds think alike, beat you by 120 seconds.
June 26, 2009 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have no idea if the David story is remotely true, but if it is, he and Sanford are both Class A shits.
June 26, 2009 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
We're missing John Sweeney in your lists - sex, alchohol, domestic abuse. His story has it all.
June 26, 2009 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
only in america could an idiot like sanford make that kind of comment and hope, even hope, to get away with it.
god punished david plenty for what he did with bathsheba. remember, david's favorite son, absalom, rebelled against him and drove him from the holy city of jerusalem.
later, david's troops ignored his order to spare absalom's life and killed the favorite son, bringing the king worse grief than he had ever known.
is sanford prepared to be driven from office -- by one of his sons, no less? is he prepared to bury a rebellious child, with all the grief to himself (and, don't forget, his wife) that that entails? i doubt it.
2 samuel
June 26, 2009 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Paying for sex from a professional is illegal, immoral and requires a (Democratic) governor to resign.
But exploiting the affections of someone else's wife? THAT's DIFFERENT!!!
I love the smell of Republican hypocrisy in the afternoon.
June 26, 2009 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Could this jerk possibly be a bigger douche bag?
June 26, 2009 4:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
You owe an apology to douche bags all over the world!
June 26, 2009 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is this King David thing where the term "I took a bath on that one" from. I took a Bathsheba was a little to much to get out.
This dude shoulda just read the Ten Commandments if he needed reference material, for Gods sake.
Also was Mark trying to one-up Clinton & Spitzer by going bigger? Narcissistic & jealous, great combo.
June 26, 2009 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bathsheba had some pretty snazzy tan lines too.
June 26, 2009 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let's see . . .
1. David was a KING and not democratically elected,
2. they want to impeach you for leaving the country without handing over power to your lieutenant governor (NOT for an affair).
3. you also don't seem to put the interests of your state first, and would refuse federal funds based on an esoteric political principle in an effort to "flip the bird" to the Democrats.
June 26, 2009 4:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
King David was a shepherd who played the lyre a stringed instrument. Sanford is a liar stringing along fleeced staff and constituents. This latest line of swagger may qualify him for the full Swaggert of phony or how I have sinned public hypocrisy.
June 26, 2009 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink