South Carolina Special Election: Mark Sanford vs Elizabeth Colbert-Busch

Good afternoon everybody, welcome to my 2nd news post in my current trial run of blogging about recent news in politics and gaming.

In South Carolina's 1st Congressional District a special election was held yesterday in order to fill the empty seat in congress previously held by Representative Tim Scott who was appointed to the seat previously held by Jim DeMint who had resigned from the Senate on December 6th 2012 to accept a position as president of The Heritage Foundation.

During mid January choices were made for candidates for both parties for the special primary elections which took place on March 19th 2013, Elizabeth Colbert Busch(Stephen Colbert's sister!)
(Stephen-left, Elizabeth-right)
Won the Democratic nominee and on the Republican side it was former Governor Mark Sanford who the nomination, a man who's teeth are literally so clean you see those pearly whites before you actually see him.
Mark Sanford won the special election by 8.83 percent of the vote going to him.

Elizabeth Colbert Busch-45.21%

Mark Sanford-54.04%

Now I congratulate Mr.Sanford on winning but there's something that doesn't feel quite right to me. Although he did win the special election, tomorrow he is due for a court hearing for allegedly trespassing on his ex-wife's property, even though as part of the divorce agreement which was finalized in 2010 states that neither Mark nor his ex-wife may come over to the other's house without permission. His ex-wife states that she saw Mark sneaking out of the house on February 4th, his ex-wife claimed that Mark was sneaking out of the house and was using his cell phone as a flash light, Mark stated that he had gone to the house to watch the second half of Super Bowl XLVII with his son, claiming to have attempted to contact his ex beforehand but was unable to do so.

His ex filed the complaint the next morning.

It doesn't stop there.

In 2009 Sanford had suddenly disappeared for five days and told his staff that he was hiking the Appalachian Trail, when confronted he was covering it up telling everyone he was actually here, no he was actually there not here until he admitted to the public in a news conference he was with a mistress in Argentina his wife later then filed for divorce shortly afterwords and he is now engaged with his mistress.

Now the thing I don't understand is why would the voters vote for a man who clearly committed adultery?

I am a Christian and I do believe in forgiveness and redemption, but when it comes politics I keep my religious views out of politics because like Thomas Jefferson said in the Treaty of Tripoli which was made in the late 1700s.

"As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion."

It is a beautiful thing to say how you asked the lord for forgiveness and he gave you a chance to redeem yourself, but when it comes to politics and you disappear for 5 days not telling anyone where you left then comeback to admit you've had an affair, which turned out to be a year long affair, VANISHING from the world, politically your career should have been dead.

Mark Sanford had previously in his political career voted to impeach President Clinton due to the White House scandal during the 1990s for "Being unfaithful to his family and the people of America." Fast forward to now, how was he even considered a candidate for this election?

He was unfaithful to his wife and kids and to his state and yet he not only becomes the nominee for the election and proceeds to win the election?!

On top of that he had also used tax payer money to fund this trip to Argentina which his office stated "Was a professional and a appropriate business development trip." Clearly this was not the case as Republican Party member and majority leader of the State Senate Harvey S. Peeler Jr. stated "Leaving aside his personal life, when you see taxpayer dollars, that's what Republicans are all about - spending tax dollars wisely. This was not spending tax dollars wisely." A very good point made.

His own political party even started to go against him after this story broke out and he was later shunned by the people of South Carolina, Democrats(obviously) and even his own party members. Yet he returns and is the one who wins the election.

Sanford has also been charged with 37 violations by the State Ethnics Committee, also admitted to affairs with multiple women, was threatened with impeachment by the State Legislature and yet he's elected.

If we as a nation decided to impeach Clinton based on a lack of morality and honesty then South Carolina should not have even voted for a man like Sanford, his past speaks for himself and you hear his past more then you do himself.

It was a good thing to impeach Clinton, that showed how morally strong we were as a nation. Now why didn't South Carolina do it as a state?

For more on the Mark Sanford scandal head to the link below V
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/26/us/26sanford.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Thank you for reading. Join me next time when I will be covering the Katie Couric story of  "Are Video Games Ruining Your Life."


Popular Posts