The unethical and increasingly ridiculous Mark Sanford, now in the process of losing what should have been a sage House seat for Republicans in South Carolina, has added the public crime of “making Americans dumber” to his list of disqualifications for public office.
Sanford was the rising star South Carolina governor—married, with children— who went AWOL on the job to have a clandestine liaison with his South American mistress, using public funds in the process, and lying through his staff to cover his tracks. He didn’t have the courage or the decency to resign, nor did he have the common sense and decency to quietly disappear so he would stop embarrassing his wife, his state, Republicans, men, and Homo sapiens everywhere. Instead he returned to run in a primary for a House seat, and since Republican primary voters will apparently vote for anyone or anything, won. Now he’s running behind in the polls to a Democratic candidate whose key qualification is that her brother is a popular TV comic.
Sanford has run a full page ad in some newspapers, painting himself in heroic terms and comparing himself to the martyrs of the Alamo:
“In March of 1863, there was similarly little time. A South Carolinian by the name of William Travis drew a line in the sand with his sword and simply asked those who would stay and fight, to cross it. His efforts, and that of those who died with him there at the Alamo, ultimately inspired Texans to come to the aid of their brethren and defeat Santa Anna’s army though they were outnumbered at the onset by six to one. I’m outnumbered right now, but will fight to the end toward freedom and financial sanity in Washington so important to sustaining it. I’d ask you to cross the line and fight with me.”
What a tone-deaf insult to those who perished in and near the San Antonio shrine. The reference to Travis is apt, though: the Alamo’s commander also abandoned his wife, a son and an unborn child when he decided he needed a change of scene. But as I’m sure you noticed, the ad also exemplifies Sanford’s carelessness in his work and low respect for facts. The siege of the Alamo did not occur in 1863: that would mean it was part of the American Civil War. Travis, Crockett, Bowie, Bonham and the others died in March of 1836.
I know—just a typo…though can’t take the care to ensure that he doesn’t allow a whopper to creep into a full page newspaper ad is hardly someone I would want to trust with, for example, balancing a state budget. Still, the cognitively challenged who voted to return the disgraced ex-governor to public service are easily misled, so I am certain that, thanks to Sanford, South Carolina’s population of historically ignorant just took a leap upward.
Thanks for everything.
And remember the Alamo.
Pointer: Alexandra Petri
Facts: USA Today
7 thoughts on “More Reasons Not To Vote For Mark Sanford”
One quibble, Jack: “Instead he returned to run in a primary for a House seat, and since Republican primary voters will apparently vote for anyone or anything, won.” I would amend the sentence by deleting the word “Republican,” and leaving it at that. You’ve belabored the primary voters in too many contests for Democratic nominations, and for the same sin, not to know better, so I suspect this was a momentary oversight made in the heat of emotion. It seemed worth pointing out, though.
I think Republican primary voters have been even more reckless than their more liberal counterparts, don’t you? Carly Fiorina, Christine O’Donnell, Todd Akin, Linda McMahon, Joe Miller, George Allen, Sharron Angle, Mourdock…these are embarrassingly bad candidates. The Republicans might as well have been trying to lose the Senate.
Actually, Angel wasn’t too bad, nor was Mourdock. And O’Donnell is actually really smart and personable, she just had utter fuckwits running her campaign.
That she had to fight off attacks from Karl Rove’s people didn’t help…
You’re too kind. No, really.
Any half competent candidate would have beaten Reid, and the Nevadans were dying to dump him. Angle was too bad to beat him, which means she was too bad. Mourdock’s idiotic God comment via rape was inexcusably stupid and offensive, now and anytime, but especially after Akin’s gaffe and the Democrat “War on Women” nonsense.
As for O’Donnell, if you listen to fuckwits, you are, indeed, a fuckwit. Any one who is told to start a campaign spot with “I am not a witch,” and doesn’t reply, “You’re fired!” cannot be trusted with sharp objects, much less a Senate seat.
The date is correct Jack, everything else is a typo. He meant to refer to the famous Battle of Fort McAllister which featured another South Carolinian
Ah! That explains it!
Good history, Tex. Travis probably went wrong in his earlier life when he decided to attend Yale. A lot of guys have made that mistake!