Please enlighten me on Sanford

[Jeremy]

I know noting about him.

So if you think Sanford is better than Johnson because he can appeal to the mainstream people more and pick up some of the early states (SC obviously)... please tell me his record, the views he supports, if he's philosophical like RP or not, etc... Did he endorse Ron Paul? If so, why wasn't he at the rally? If not, why not???

[Jeremy]

Sanford publicly aligned himself with McCain in a March 15, 2008, piece in the Wall Street Journal. Likening the presidential race to a football game at halftime, Sanford noted that he "sat out the first half, not endorsing a candidate...But I'm now stepping onto the field and going to work to help John McCain. It's important that conservatives do the same."[18]

tisk tisk

[Jeremy]

I realize his voting record in congress is appealing. But Johnson is closer to the Ron Paul supporters since... he was one himself.

I would support either one, but the question is if we want to draft one... who?

[Kotin]

how about they both run. Let's stack the deck.

[TruthAtLast]

tisk tisk

I'm not too worried about him giving the token support to McCain which is really just lending his support to the party and seemingly positioning himself by affirming his loyalty. McCain didn't win and he may have even known he wouldn't win, but it may have been a good idea to support McCain in the long run.

I'm more concerned with how he votes, what his experience is, what his beliefs are, and probably most importantly, how well he can speak and debate. :D



BTW - off topic but can someone get rid of that green monster: :bunchies:

[The00viper]

Mark Sanford went to Bilderberg earlier this year. Do not trust him.

[Jeremy]

I'm not too worried about him giving the token support to McCain which is really just lending his support to the party and seemingly positioning himself by affirming his loyalty. McCain didn't win and he may have even known he wouldn't win, but it may have been a good idea to support McCain in the long run.

I'm more concerned with how he votes, what his experience is, what his beliefs are, and probably most importantly, how well he can speak and debate. :D



BTW - off topic but can someone get rid of that green monster: :bunchies:

That is Egnorth and you have hurt his feelings :(

[Jeremy]

Mark Sanford went to Bilderberg earlier this year. Do not trust him.

If I was invited I would go too

[TruthAtLast]

If I was invited I would go too

me too. keep your friends close and your enemies closer right?

[Jeremy]

But when I came back I'd probably write a book about it or something =p

[TruthAtLast]

But when I came back I'd probably write a book about it or something =p

I might anonymously "leak" a video of the event. :)

[WRellim]

I know noting about him.

So if you think Sanford is better than Johnson because he can appeal to the mainstream people more and pick up some of the early states (SC obviously)... please tell me his record, the views he supports, if he's philosophical like RP or not, etc... Did he endorse Ron Paul? If so, why wasn't he at the rally? If not, why not???

Go digging on Google News for him (http://news.google.com/news?q=mark%20sanford) -- currently he is battling like CRAZY to reduce the budget in South Carolina... guy's got solid brass balls; the kind we need.

Here's a recent article:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/11/friday_line_republican_governo.html?hpid=topnews
4. Mark Sanford: If Republicans are looking for a dyed-in-the-wool reformer, Sanford is the guy. During his three terms in Congress as well as the two terms he has now spent as the governor of South Carolina, Sanford has exhibited an unwavering commitment to fiscal discipline -- often angering and alienating many within his own party. Sanford is the ultimate political iconoclast -- a true outsider freighted with all the best (and worst) implications of that term.
And here's another on (about this year's FAIL!):
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1856620,00.html?iid=tsmodule

Meanwhile, out in the states, Republican governors blame the folks at the top of the party for destroying the GOP brand through their ineptitude and graft. There is concern that Democrats not only have a better sales pitch but also that they are using better technology to attract money and turn out voters. "After 2006," says South Carolina governor Mark Sanford, "we put the same leadership back in place. It's just insane. In the corporate world, you would not do that." If Republicans claim to be the reform party of small government, Sanford says, they must first stop seeing their appropriators convicted of felonies. "You have a lot of members of Congress who are not upholding what this brand is about."
In other words, a LOT like Ron Paul (who he "understudied" and normally voted with in Congress).


The only thing I have "against" Sanford is that he did not endorse Ron Paul -- but as I also know that Ron meets and talks with him regularly, it may have even been Ron that advised him NOT to. (Keep in mind that Ron really did NOT want to win this election... like it or not, he only wanted to run to start a dramatic CHANGE in the party.)

[trey4sports]

i dont care for sanford.
social statistim and fiscally conservative (somewhat)

is he talking about ending the fed?
whatabout the war on drugs?

he seems to be all for huntin down them terrorizers in the middle east, whoopin sum iraqi ass.

I will hold my judgment till i know more, as of know im skepitcal

[TruthAtLast]

Go digging on Google News for him (http://news.google.com/news?q=mark%20sanford) -- currently he is battling like CRAZY to reduce the budget in South Carolina... guy's got solid brass balls; the kind we need.

Here's a recent article:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/11/friday_line_republican_governo.html?hpid=topnews
4. Mark Sanford: If Republicans are looking for a dyed-in-the-wool reformer, Sanford is the guy. During his three terms in Congress as well as the two terms he has now spent as the governor of South Carolina, Sanford has exhibited an unwavering commitment to fiscal discipline -- often angering and alienating many within his own party. Sanford is the ultimate political iconoclast -- a true outsider freighted with all the best (and worst) implications of that term.
And here's another on (about this year's FAIL!):
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1856620,00.html?iid=tsmodule

Meanwhile, out in the states, Republican governors blame the folks at the top of the party for destroying the GOP brand through their ineptitude and graft. There is concern that Democrats not only have a better sales pitch but also that they are using better technology to attract money and turn out voters. "After 2006," says South Carolina governor Mark Sanford, "we put the same leadership back in place. It's just insane. In the corporate world, you would not do that." If Republicans claim to be the reform party of small government, Sanford says, they must first stop seeing their appropriators convicted of felonies. "You have a lot of members of Congress who are not upholding what this brand is about."
In other words, a LOT like Ron Paul (who he "understudied" and normally voted with in Congress).


The only thing I have "against" Sanford is that he did not endorse Ron Paul -- but as I also know that Ron meets and talks with him regularly, it may have even been Ron that advised him NOT to. (Keep in mind that Ron really did NOT want to win this election... like it or not, he only wanted to run to start a dramatic CHANGE in the party.)

I'm still learning more but this was a good start. thanks.

I'm not looking for another EXACT Ron Paul clone. Ron Paul is a hero, no doubt. He had his purpose in this Movement. But it would be very difficult for Ron Paul to win an election even if we gave him $100 million. People still think some of his views are too extreme.

What I want is someone with conviction that can win mainstream support and has a true belief in the party's conservative roots.

So what if he doesn't openly talk about ending the FED or the war on drugs. To be honest, though I agree with Ron Paul on those issues they cost him a ton of credibility. There are a ton of people I know (including my own family) that agreed with about 80% of what Ron Paul said in the debates but they couldn't vote for him because of the other 20%.

Things happen slowly and knowing that Sanford is open-minded enough to entertain the idea of sound money and the possibly (at some point) of looking into the issue of the Federal Reserve Act, is good enough for me. He doesn't need to publicly say it. In fact I DON'T WANT HIM TO. I'd much rather get our guy elected and work on our agenda after he is sitting in the oval office.

We still have Ron Paul to keep those issues at the forefront. He mentions it practically every time people interview him. We don't have to have one guy do everything. There are lots of people we have at our disposal and they can all play some roll in this Movement. Right now we need to figure out which one can play the roll of getting elected President.

[Truth Warrior]

Bilderberg is a huge red NWO flag for me. Secret societies just tend to give me the creeps. If Mark is a "player", no thanks.

I wonder if Ron would go, if he were EVER invited. I suspect not. ;)

[pastortony]

i dont care for sanford.
social statistim and fiscally conservative (somewhat)

is he talking about ending the fed?
whatabout the war on drugs?

he seems to be all for huntin down them terrorizers in the middle east, whoopin sum iraqi ass.

I will hold my judgment till i know more, as of know im skepitcal

While you have a right to be skeptical, you also can't expect to win with a dream candidate either. Someone with a vocal oppostition to the war or drugs, especially as a centerpiece to his campaign, will not win a national election. You might as well put a bullseye on that candidate because that is the first issue that his opponents will target and exploit to no end.

I can see the TV commericals now with images of junkies, pot parties, drug dealers, etc with the voiceover asking "Is this the kind of country you want to live in?"

While those of us who have a more studied political mind understand what opposition to the war on drugs means, the general public isn't ready for it just yet. No amount of education is going to sway opinion just yet.

History has shown us that incrementalism is what got us to this point. We need incrementalism to get us out of it as well. Start with the big issue - limited government, and work from there.

[Varin]

Sanford on the issues


http://www.ontheissues.org/Mark_Sanford.htm

http://www.petitiononline.com/msan2008/petition.html

[TruthAtLast]

Sanford on the issues


http://www.ontheissues.org/Mark_Sanford.htm

http://www.petitiononline.com/msan2008/petition.html

thank you for the links.