Nevada Sen. John Ensign to admit extramarital affair

[Martinus]

Until this, he was the single most popular political figure in Nevada. I wonder if this kills that off.

There's hope.

[Caliga]

Errr... in Nevada, people would have a problem with some guy cheating on his wife with another guy's wife?

[Vince]

Until this, he was the single most popular political figure in Nevada. I wonder if this kills that off.

Vote for Ensign!  At least he's not Gibbons!

[Hansmeister]

Errr... in Nevada, people would have a problem with some guy cheating on his wife with another guy's wife?

Sure.  It's almost as bad as a Senator from Lousiana sleeping with a hooker. 

[MadImmortalMan]

So, I'm coming home from SF again last night and the only radio station I can get in the pass is the Reno AM GOPtard talk station. This dude (I think he was a local Hannity-wannabe--the way he was talking about northern Nevada, I don't think it was a national show) was calling for Ensign's resignation. I'm thinking WTF, really? Isn't that a bit extreme?

But no, he was screaming his fool head off about how the Senator was supposed to be about family values (a vibe I never really got from him, but ok) and all this other shit. It looks like the wacko right is actually ready to throw Ensign under the bus over this retarded thing.


So here's my question: Why would anyone "run on family values" in the first place? Isn't that just setting yourself up for future failure as a hypocrite? And what does it mean in practical terms? I mean, usually, a person running for office takes a position on a certain thing in order to use the power of the government office he's seeking to have an effect on that thing. So what's the stance for "family values" voters? What's the outcome there? Outlawing divorce, criminalizing adultery, what? Nothing like that is feasible. There is only a downside. It's stupid.

This moron was also all going on about how we have to keep our standards intact and blah blah and how the Democrats would not throw the guy under the bus, they'd circle the wagons. Apparently that makes Republicans better.  Yeah, you have the most popular politician in the state, who everyone assumed would end up on a national ticket eventually and in a leadership position in the party, but you want to completely scrap all that for a stupid affair he had when he was separated from his wife? There's just no pragmatism in people like that. Here's an idea: don't run on a quixotic platform that will inevitably make you a hypocrite in the future if you ever make a mistake. Then, when you get caught tapping your foot in a bathroom stall, it won't wreck your whole life.

To be fair, a lot of callers were disagreeing with the fool, and most of them were also GOP, so they're not all retards. Maybe the host wanted Gibbons to appoint him to the Senate, I don't know.




Caveat: There are some rumblings about the chick in the affair being an employee and getting a lot more money after the affair started and other crap, so he might have some legal reason to step down after everything comes out anyway. I just don't think this zero tolerance attitude is warranted. Also, if you supported a guy like Ensign in the first place for family values reasons, I'm not sure why. I honestly don't remember him being Mr. Morality of the Senate or anything. Though I don't watch as closely as some.

[Darth Wagtaros]

Family Values is a popular thing to run on.  Really all you have to do is keep your indiscretions secret and you sound like the voice of the moral majority.  They aer a powerful voting bloc after all.  The bigger question is why anybody would believe it.

[Phillip V]

Meh. Ensign's wife next to him. Cindy is the woman on the right. Not an upgrade. Note: 2001 picture.

[Martinus]

So here's my question: Why would anyone "run on family values" in the first place?

Hate sells, and with racism and antisemitism pretty much becoming toxic in modern politics, hatred of them damn homos desacrating our marriage and corrupting our youth becomes the last "legitimate" bigotry platform, at least as far as internal (i.e. not international) politics is concerned, these days.

In Europe you can also hate the rich and the immigrants (actually I guess the hatred of immigrants may become more acceptable in the US in future), so homophobia is not as necessary to make political headlines.

Edit: Of course (for those not bright enough to make the connection), family values is the code word for "bash the homos" as we probably all agree.

[alfred russel]

So here's my question: Why would anyone "run on family values" in the first place?

Hate sells, and with racism and antisemitism pretty much becoming toxic in modern politics, hatred of them damn homos desacrating our marriage and corrupting our youth becomes the last "legitimate" bigotry platform, at least as far as internal (i.e. not international) politics is concerned, these days.

In Europe you can also hate the rich and the immigrants (actually I guess the hatred of immigrants may become more acceptable in the US in future), so homophobia is not as necessary to make political headlines.

Edit: Of course (for those not bright enough to make the connection), family values is the code word for "bash the homos" as we probably all agree.

"Family values" platforms encompass more than gay rights and were used long before gay rights were a political issue. I'd say the family values heydey was the Dan Quayle era of whining about single mothers.

[Ed Anger]

"Family values" platforms encompass more than gay rights and were used long before gay rights were a political issue. I'd say the family values heydey was the Dan Quayle era of whining about single mothers.

Thank you for the Murphy Brown flashback.

[Valmy]

It must be affair season for American politicians.

[Ed Anger]

It must be affair season for American politicians.

It is summer, and all the ladies are wearing next to nothing and a young man's fancy turns to love.

[alfred russel]

It must be affair season for American politicians.

Maybe we should have a running "Republican admits infidelity" thread, like the thread about detroit.

[Martinus]

So here's my question: Why would anyone "run on family values" in the first place?

Hate sells, and with racism and antisemitism pretty much becoming toxic in modern politics, hatred of them damn homos desacrating our marriage and corrupting our youth becomes the last "legitimate" bigotry platform, at least as far as internal (i.e. not international) politics is concerned, these days.

In Europe you can also hate the rich and the immigrants (actually I guess the hatred of immigrants may become more acceptable in the US in future), so homophobia is not as necessary to make political headlines.

Edit: Of course (for those not bright enough to make the connection), family values is the code word for "bash the homos" as we probably all agree.

"Family values" platforms encompass more than gay rights and were used long before gay rights were a political issue. I'd say the family values heydey was the Dan Quayle era of whining about single mothers.

Well, these days it seems to be mostly about it (oh and hating sluts, aka "pro life").

[alfred russel]

Well, these days it seems to be mostly about it (oh and hating sluts, aka "pro life").

It really isn't. In fact, it really isn't about anything. It is one of those buzzwords that everyone can be for, like a strong defense and better schools. The left has tried to reclaim family values with slogans like "Hate is not a family value" and "Pro Family, Pro Child, Pro Choice."