As a gay American I get great satisfaction seeing politicians destroy their marriages and reputations because of infidelity and lies. When homosexuals are being denied our constitutional rights to marry based on arguments that we are going to destroy the institution, I enjoy watching the politicians that work to deny us our right do their best to destroy marriage themselves. I could give a flip about his humanity, when it is politicians like him that don't give a second thought to lumping committed gay couples in with incest and pedophilia. I look forward to watching this man and his family dragged thru the mud. He took a vow to be faithful, he broke it, he deserves everything that is coming to him.

I agree. Sanford sought to deny marriage to millions based on who they love. Now he's getting a taste of being pilloried for loving someone else.

kiojn:

As a gay American I get great satisfaction seeing politicians destroy their marriages and reputations because of infidelity and lies. When homosexuals are being denied our constitutional rights to marry based on arguments that we are going to destroy the institution, I enjoy watching the politicians that work to deny us our right do their best to destroy marriage themselves. I could give a flip about his humanity, when it is politicians like him that don't give a second thought to lumping committed gay couples in with incest and pedophilia. I look forward to watching this man and his family dragged thru the mud. He took a vow to be faithful, he broke it, he deserves everything that is coming to him.

You've got a point there worth expanding upon. Just where does a marraige between Atheists conducted by a JP fit in with the 'moral' union? Does the government have the right to decree that all nonreligious marraige ceremonies be rendered null and void? I guess they'll pass on that idea since most are hetero marriages. Ahhh, the slippery slope of hypocrites.

kiojn:

I look forward to watching this man and his family dragged thru the mud. He took a vow to be faithful, he broke it, he deserves everything that is coming to him.

You had me til the highlighted part. That isn't reasonable it's just mean.

Well then, you're a pretty small person. FTR I support gays being allowed to marry (if nothing else just to stop all the hot air wasted on the issue, by both sides), but for you to take so much pleasure in this guy's personal problems is sad.

"I look forward to watching this man and his family dragged thru the mud." Really? What did this guy's family ever do to you? Your statement is petty in the extreme, grow up.

A Dude:

Well then, you're a pretty small person. FTR I support gays being allowed to marry (if nothing else just to stop all the hot air wasted on the issue, by both sides), but for you to take so much pleasure in this guy's personal problems is sad.

Are you kidding? - Both you and the other poster need to realize that this guy is talking about a lifetime of prejudice, coupled with the real possibility of violence against his person in certain parts of this country, and you think he should be sympathetic to Sanford's family?

Here, let me elucidate: his wife was on his side about gays. I'm sure she never said, "Honey, I really think gays should have the same rights as us, don't you?" - No, because Repubs don't care about anyone else; they care about the status quo.

So, his kids don't deserve it, but in reality they also won't _really_ suffer anymore than anyone else who's parent skips out on them (which is to say, a lot, but not more).

Yeah, I _do_ take pleasure in this guy's personal problems; you know why? Because he _made_ his life public. He decided that one of his platforms was denying gays the right to marry; he was vocal about criticizing Clinton, and he went around claiming moral superiority.

Well, when you put yourself on a pedestal that says "I'm better than you," you deserve whatever comes of it.

nagatuki:

Are you kidding? - Both you and the other poster need to realize that this guy is talking about a lifetime of prejudice, coupled with the real possibility of violence against his person in certain parts of this country, and you think he should be sympathetic to Sanford's family?

Not at all. But NOT being simpathetic makes his no better than those that discriminated against him.

nagatuki:

Here, let me elucidate: his wife was on his side about gays. I'm sure she never said, "Honey, I really think gays should have the same rights as us, don't you?" - No, because Repubs don't care about anyone else; they care about the status quo.

So, his kids don't deserve it, but in reality they also won't _really_ suffer anymore than anyone else who's parent skips out on them (which is to say, a lot, but not more).

Because all kids have to deal with this in a national spotlight. Oh wait...

nagatuki:

Yeah, I _do_ take pleasure in this guy's personal problems; you know why? Because he _made_ his life public. He decided that one of his platforms was denying gays the right to marry; he was vocal about criticizing Clinton, and he went around claiming moral superiority.

Well, when you put yourself on a pedestal that says "I'm better than you," you deserve whatever comes of it.

Granted as long as you realize that it makes you know better than those who took pleasure in Clinton's troubles. Is that really the company you want to keep?

Paul Begala, Democratic Strategist, said on RealTime, that he viewed it exactly the same as the Clinton scandal, no ones business. You have to admire integrity like that.

I do not take glee in his disgrace, but rather his now-exposed hypocrisy.

Kiojn,

Would you not rather Sanford have come to support gay marriage without ruining his own marriage, or dragging his family through the mud? Wouldn't it be even better had he been faithful in his own marriage and simply had a change of heart and mind on the subject of gay marriage?

I assume your answer is "yes" to these questions. I will assume also by the hatred you spewed that you are poisoned by your rightful anger about how Sanford has talked about gay people and the prospect of gay marriage. Be careful that you don't become the same kind of slimeball that you denounce. Anger finally kills its host.

Really. As if only fundamentalist nutjobs are guilty of hypocrisy. Truth be told, I find liberals often to be more dogmatic than the religous. More arrogant too but that's neither here nor there, I suppose. I agree that lumping in homosexuals with pederasts and their ilk is heinous and offensive, but that doesn't make it anything other than inhumane and lousy to take joy in someone else's pain. You're just mirroring his own small-minded, hateful garbage. You wanna one-up Sanford? Then be better than him. Set a selfless example. Kicking him while he's down is hardly transcendent. How many homosexuals out there aren't laughing vindictively? Wouldn't you rather stand behind those men and women than some vindictive hair-trigger?

Nag, Sanford is totally wrong about gay marriage. Gay people should absolutely have the right to marry one another. But it's an understandable mainstream opinion, believe it or not. It's not always 1964 and not every person standing against changes in certain societal laws are the equivalent of Bull Connor hosing down black people.

And very idea of gay marriage has only even been accepted among gay people themselves generally in the past 10 years or less. Yes, that's true. There has been a major shift in gay culture in just the past 10 years, a desire to become far more mainstream than before. (Oh, for a big dose of irony, black Democrats, religious and non-religious alike, are among those most staunchly anti-gay marriage.)

And Sanford is morally superior to Bill Clinton. So are you. Sanford had an apparently serious affair with a mature woman over a course of years. Yes, he was involved in deceit and breaking of his marriage vows.

But Clinton has had a lifetime of serial philandering and humiliating his wife and child; who, every time he was ready to be embarrassed politically attacked and defamed the women he slept with.

In regard to Lewinsky, he wasn't even having a mature affair with a woman, he was just getting his rocks off with some adoring young bimbo in the Oval Office. The President! Why? Because he wanted to and he could. Because of his deep narcissism, selfishness, neediness and appetites. I would have had so much more respect for him if he was capable of having a full relationship with another woman.

But most of all, he lied to everyone up until the very end. He lied under oath in a sworn legal deposition. He lied to the American people repeatedly, even scolded them for the even believing that such allegations were true. He lied to all of his friends, including Al Gore, his closest advisors, Cabinet members, wife, lawyers, allies. He brought them into his office to look them in the eyes and personally deny the stories of Oval Office blowjobs and asked his closest friends to stick their necks out and support him and they did.

He had a plan of destroying, once again, the person who made the allegations, Lewinsky, until quite literally he was confronted with physical evidence. And then when he finally had to admit everything, he did so in his classic lawyerly-political style, and was arrogant and defiant about the whole thing. He is incapable of shame. He is a sick man.

That is what Clinton did. I can deal with hypocrisy. We all hopefully have standards, and being human we will fail to meet them at times. What Sanford did pales in comparison to what Clinton did. But we're told to not have an opinion about Clinton because that was "personal" and we should not be so Puritanical to judge.

wow, jiojn. really? I mean, really?

real classy.

I'm a homosexual who's not laughing with glee, but I'm not going to be overcome by remorse seeing him cry his eyes out in public.

If you've worked to actively make the lives of an entire community worse, then that community does get to take some satisfaction in seeing your profound hypocrisy exposed. My hope is that when people like Sanford, and to a greater extent, Ensign, are revealed to have absolutely no respect for the institution they've appointed themselves guardians of, people will see the cruelty and emptiness of the argument against same-sex marriage.

As far as people arguing that he's better than Clinton, the only reason Sanford is being so forthright and thorough in his admission is because the emails between him and his mistress have been released, so it was all going to come out anyway.

So don't begrude us gays a little schadenfraude against our oppressors, because more likely than not you have no idea how frustrating and humiliating it is to have your rights and lives at the mercy of public opinion.

JHMCC:

So don't begrude us gays a little schadenfraude against our oppressors, because more likely than not you have no idea how frustrating and humiliating it is to have your rights and lives at the mercy of public opinion.

I don't. I merely objected to the portion of the statement about his family. As if the children are guilty of the sins of their father.