"Generally you don't downgrade when doing these things."

I wouldn't be so sure. Perhaps you have heard this old chestnut: "If you have steak every night, eventually you develop cravings for hamburger." You should also consider that he fell for Ms. Argentina over time on-line. He may never have seen her as her feelings developed.

I figure something quite different happened. When women have had multiple children by one man, they often lose sexual interest in him. Mrs. Sanford had four kids by her Governor husband and I would guess she hasn't been enthusiastic about having sex with him in years. What do men do when their wives lose interest? Eliot Spitzer provides one answer, namely they start paying for sex. Bill Clinton provides another answer, namely they jump anyone who seems interesting, regardless of appearance, never getting too close to anyone so as not to threaten their marriage. Mark Sanford provides yet another answer, namely they drift into new relationships, whether they initially intend to or not. Newt Gingrich provides still another answer, namely they dump their old spouse and marry someone else (a/k/a serial monogamy).

Only one style of answer works for Good Christians, though, even if that answer means that most Christian men eventually turn into hypocrites, namely try to get that magic back with your one and only. However, counseling seldom reanimates romance, praying rekindles things even more rarely, and hyper-romantic behavior might work once or twice but over time loses its power. What then? Back to my last paragraph.      

to then turn around and say that Sanford doesn't deserve to be hounded to death in the same way those folks were, well, that's rank hypocrisy on their part.

Clinton and Edwards were hounded to death, in no small part, because of the cover-ups, not the affairs. As for as I'm concerned, that's true here, too. If you're the sitting governor, you don't get to vanish for a long weekend, leaving your staff to concoct excuses.

Cover-ups? That probably explains why Senator Ensign's approval ratings have dived into oblivion.

Every adulterous affair by any politician gets covered up. Voters don't like adulterous affairs. Nixon didn't cover-up any affairs, he covered up things like break-ins. In that case, his cover-up may truly have sunk him. That sort of thinking doesn't apply here.

...the Republican establishment, for the most part, was at Clinton's throat for what he did...

I think Clinton was deemed to have lied under oath for denying he had sex with someone who gave him head. Clinton intended to deceive his interrogators about his relationship with Ms. Lewinsky, but his literal words were arguably accurate. Prior to Republicans' settling for this relatively minor offence as their basis for impeaching Mr. Clinton, they were ready to accuse him of crimes ranging from murder to drug trafficking, rape, and various forms of financial manipulation, none of which could be proved.

Clinton's successor, Mr. Bush, ordered torture of captives in Afghanistan and Iraq. This crime was more serious, in every moral and legal sense, than Mr. Clinton's crime, yet no action was ever taken against him. In all likelihood, none ever will be.

Yet, for someone who likes to deny being "conservative", you can be expected to spin Clinton's "crime" as worthy of impeachment even as you spin Bush's crime as non-criminal altogether. Even when you get referred to U.S. Criminal Code sections, you choose to see no evil in Bush even as you presume evil in Bill and Hillary Clinton.

Your answers to people on this forum and on Plastic routinely rely on linguistic equivalents of what Mr. Clinton was accused of doing. If we could only read your mind, we'd know what your words really meant, but you always remain on guard to ensure that your thoughts remain opaque, and that your words' intent remains deniable. Under such circumstances, maybe you should be more merciful in your consideration of Mr. Clinton and his acts, but that would require levels of self-awareness that you remain unwilling to contemplate.

Prior to Republicans' settling for this relatively minor offence as their basis for impeaching Mr. Clinton, they were ready to accuse him of crimes ranging from murder to drug trafficking, rape, and various forms of financial manipulation

Oh yes, therre are many interesting accusations against Bill Clinton.  The death of Clinton's lawyer, Vince Foster, happened under suspicious circumstances, and some believe that Clinton ordered his death.  There is also a whole book about how terrible Clinton is, written by Christopher Hitchens, entitled "No One Left To Lie To".    

Oh, please, you can google Vince Foster, Mena Airport, Juanita Broaddrick, and Whitewater as easily as I can.

you can google Vince Foster, Mena Airport, Juanita Broaddrick, and Whitewater

What do you think I think he did?

Ce n'est pas une pipe. C'est une signature.

I presume you think it was because he had an affair. Otherwise, why compare it to the situation at hand?

I presume you think it was because he had an affair. Otherwise, why compare it to the situation at hand?

He didn't have an affair, but he did cheat on his wife (by most definitions, anyway - I know if I had an intern give me a blowjob, my wife would consider it cheating...).  He also attempted to cover it up.  While perhaps not quite to the same level as what Sanford did, it was bad enough that it certainly warranted some criticism.  Impeachment, no, but definitely worth of criticism.

Ce n'est pas une pipe. C'est une signature.

He didn't have an affair, but he did cheat on his wife

He also attempted to cover it up.  While perhaps not quite to the same level as what Sanford did...

The difference between cheating and having an affair is that an affair means that there is an ongoing relationship; cheating can just be an isolated incident.  Exactly how much of a relationship Clinton had with Lewinsky is a matter of speculation, but it does not appear to have been an actual affair.  The only person who knew for sure was Vince Foster, who is strangely no longer available for interviews.

Sanford tried to get people to lie under oath in a legal proceeding? Gosh!

No, he did something arguably worse - disappeared from the country without notifying his staff where he was going.  If something had happened that required his executive leadership, he would have been derelict in his responsibilities.  Now, as for Clinton, I make no apologies for what he did in terms of trying to cover up his cheating (as for the distinction between an affair and cheating, I agree with what skeptic said - for another example, having sex with a prostitute would be cheating, but I would hardly consider it to be an affair, and considering the relatively limited relationship Clinton seems to have had with Lewinsky, I would call that cheating, but not an affair).  I think asking people to perjure themselves definitely opened him to censure.  I don't think it was impeachment-worthy, however.  Impeachment should be reserved for serious dereliction of duty or crimes against the state, and I really don't think what Clinton did came anywhere close to either of those standards.  And to deflect your criticism - I'm consistent about this.  I don't think anything Bush or Cheney ever did rose to impeachment level either.  It would take some serious badness for me to think impeachment was justified (murder, massive fraud, selling secrets to the enemy, something along those lines).

Ce n'est pas une pipe. C'est une signature.

South Carolina doesn't need constant oversight, and it's not as if governors lead states anyway. We should encourage politicians to stay away, they do less harm that way.

...considering the relatively limited relationship Clinton seems to have had with Lewinsky, I would call that cheating, but not an affair

Just like those commercials Billy Mays has been showing up on promoting his truly amazing garden augur, so does Limbaugh's brain allow him to twist ever so tortuously into any issue that arises and find the Democrat's at fault:

1.  The North Koreans have nukes and they're unbalanced -- it's Obama's fault.

2.  The Iranians are rioting over their stolen election and the government is bringing the shit hammer down -- it's Obama's fault.

3.  The Metro train disaster -- it's Obama's fault.

4.  Jon and Kate are divorcing -- it's Obama's fault.

5.  T.O. and his model teammate can't get along -- oh wait, that's Donovan McNabb's fault.

Tending to final details.

Hard to imagine one of the little girly-men who run the Democratic Party not being afraid of a hydraulic excavator, let alone comfortable enough with on to use it to relax.

Hard to imagine one of the girly-men who run the Democratic Party reveling in stories about killing some black girl. Hard to imagine you saying anything critical about someone taking evident pleasure in some little black girl's death, even as you endlessly trash Democrats and liberals.

Hard to imagine you saying anything critical about someone taking evident pleasure in some little black girl's death...

Deliberately obtuse much? Look at 7 et seq., that subthread which you happen to have been posting in.

What's the racist content of comment #7?

Look at his follow-ups in 48, 49, et seq. Then look at Logan's defence and subsequent retraction. Then ask if that black girl brought Articles of Impeachment against Bill Clinton, or something similarly witty.

Are you admitting, then, that there is no racist content in comment #7?

Laughing at some black girl's death, as Alf subsequently admitted he was doing, strikes me as ugly racialism.

BTW, 7 et seq. =/ 7, but when you don't want to understand something, no one on Earth can make you. Good thing everything you believe becomes true, by self-definition.

You wanted me, in comment #47, to express outrage at the content of comments # 48 & 49?

Come on, Novy, surely even you can understand that 47 comes before 48.

Come on, Zyx, surely even you can understand that Alf made himself clear in Post 7, that later posts merely confirmed what would have been plain to you to begin with if you weren't spinning. Still, now that you've read 48 and 49, you prove my original assertion by your continued silence.

You still think it's hard to imagine me being critical of comments #48 and 49?

Have you been critical? I hadn't noticed.

You wished harm on his children and you want me to be critical of him?

What made your response both so clever and disingenuous was that, in your immediate search to rationalise what your friend/alterego had said (as if it was racially uncharged or neutral), you got to spit on me personally while retaining plausible deniability about your underlying intention to be insulting when you casually accused me of wanting Alf or anyone else to get hurt out in meatspace, you chose to ignore that Alf has never presented himself as actually having any children that anyone could wish harm to, you equated opining that certain actions incur bad karma with "wish[ing] harm on his children" as if I or anyone else wants to cast some spell on you or curse you/Alf whether they agree with you or not, and finally you avoided acknowledging that you and Alf really do see eye-to-eye even on matters like humourousness of accidental deaths of innocent black girls.

Spin me away Mr. Smoothie, as always, but your non-responses to one post after another tell me something very different from what you try to imply with your Clinton-language.

Spare us your moralizing. If Sanford ran president the Democratic party planned to exploit that girl's death by suggesting he intentionally built a coon trap.

"Coon trap"? Hysterical. No one here had ever heard of that incident before you rammed it home multiple times. Did those evil Democrats use this against Sanford when he ran for Governor? They must not have used it very well.

Now he drills holes in foreign women to unwind.

digs holes on his property to unwind.

Oh yeah...this is more of what this country needs.  Although, I have to say that I wish Dubya had pursued this pastime.  Better holes in your yard then holes in the Middle East.

Why does reduced fat Swiss cheese have twice as many holes are regular Swiss cheese?

FYI - Yer a sick fucker.

Why does reduced fat Swiss cheese have twice as many holes are regular Swiss cheese?

I hope you don't have children. Karma can be even harder than comedy.

Yee-ouch. I didn't see that. You're on your own, Urk.

-=Logan
Research, facts, a Republican needs not these things.

I think his love of it caused him to subconciously sabotage himself.

That's a good one.

All they want to do is eat your brains.

Why does reduced fat Swiss cheese have twice as many holes are regular Swiss cheese?

Do not read the link unless you really want to know about the sorrowful plight which has befallen two of America's reality show idiots.  Rest easy Sweet Lou, being able to avoid the information contained herein will allow you to be among the very few able to weather this storm.

Tending to final details.

With all the shenanigans that have gone down as a result of fertility treatments I think I'd rather spend my life as a childless couple rather than ask my spouse to go on them. I mean really, 8 kids?

The Ocho is for ESPN, not a proper number of dependents.

♫You's a superstar boy, why you still up in the hood?♫