Sometimes we libtards are our own worst enemy. Fired or not, I say that Sanford is a crap governor and needs to be nailed to the wall for this. If we don't (as us liberals are often wont to do) then six months later Sanford will be on a platform denoucing gay marriage and think nothing of it. I know this will happen because it already has with hypocrits like Vitter. Let's NOT look a gift horse in the mouth, people just because it doesn't come in the package we want.

This isn't "irrelavent." It can be tied to a lot of other stupid decisions by Stanford, too. For instance, the idea that he may have been taking taxpayer-funded trips to fuck his South American mistress puts a whole new perspective on his recent postering over the stimulus (giggle) money (Perhaps what he REALLY objected to was that the stimulus money would have oversight and that would make it a lot harder to skim some off the top for his Argentinian booty calls. Or maybe he was just mad that they didn't spend it all on lube and cock rings. I dunno.)

In any case, it would be wise if Democrats would learn to use leverage when they actually have it

And what shows more "fiscal restrait" then frequent (and possibly taxpayer-funded) jaunts to foriegn countries just to get some? (And isn't that taking jobs away from hard-working All-American mistresses who now have to resort to having sex with their own husbands? Norquiest should be outraged at this lack of patriotism on Sanford's part!)

Sorry Grover, but from the looks of it, most Conservatards think that "finicial disipline" is something that should involve a whip and assless leather chaps.

For some perspective, keep in mind that he had this press conference after being caught in a lie about why he mysteriously and abruptly "disapeared" without informing anyone to take a possibly tax-payer funded trip to be with his mistress. And we're suppose to feel sympathy for this WHY?

Yes Sanford was "human", but not in a way the signifies humanity's most positive qualities. Instead he embodied our most destructive tendencies: cowardly self-centeredness. (That why I have to scoff a little at the "We shouldn't be digging into his private life" arguments. Because, of course the issue at hand isn't privacy, it's secrecy)

Also, I noticed that Sanford didn't show this "humanity" to all the people of his state when he tried to reject sorely needed stimulus money that might serve their needs. Funny how he was able to control his emotions when it came to being concerned about other people eh?

Why feel sorry for the guy? He had a tough life no doubt but so have half the children who've ever lived on this planet and without the benefits of stardom, fame, money, etc. Jackson must have spent at least a fraction of his life on top of the world, feeling he had accomplished something no one else had ever done before him. How many of us can say that?

I think that was the point of the article. Even though Michael had the comforts of life, it STILL didn't alliviate the misery in his life, like we are constantly told they will. Even though he could afford the best doctors in the world, he STILL died at a relatively young age. Even though he could afford top-notch psychological conseling, he still had a host of mental problems. He was admired and revered by fans around the world, but MJ still felt severly insecure about his looks. He achieved feats no Black person at the time has achieved, yet still felt ambivalence about his racial identity. Just to add to the weird dichotomy, even though he was insanely wealthy, he STILL ended up with massive debt. This is all despite the myth that money, fame and celebrity can "fix" all these problems. They don't and I think the article was stating how Jackson was sad example of that.

Oh and as an aside, while I DO agree that we don't need as many stories on this as Salon is reporting, I always feel that hand-wringing self-rigteous over this kind of thing can be just as bad. Generally if you really don't want to follow MJ news, then just don't look at it. No need to make a big dramatic display about it as if we were going to give you the Nobel Prize for "bravery" or some crap like that. Just pay attention to something else. Especially since such sanctimony tends to verge on overwrought hyperbole ("Michael Jackson didn't have any impact over the music industry." HAH!) It gets ridiculous.

In ANY case, even with the overabundance of articles about Michael's death, this one attempted to take a different angle on Mike's career that was rather interesting. Good piece.

Er...you do know that Michael Jackson's passing is getting WORLDWIDE mourning, right? You know, because he didn't achieve anything? The desperate quest for self-satisfied self-righteousness causes some people to make some silly statements (And cliched. Must the sactimonious always mine the perpetually untrue "Oh those Americans and their pop culture" well, as if no other country has it?)

In any case, I wonder if Michael's video's could be seen as a subtle cry for help. For a guy who has been mocked as "effeminate" with his high-pitched, soft-spoken demenor and slight build, he certainly liked to evoke "macho" imagry in his videos. Besides the military fetishization already mentioned in the article, there were also images of gang and gangster culture ("Bad", "Beat It") in many of his music, as well as videos of violence and anger ("Scream", "They Don't Really Care about Us" "Leave Me Alone" etc.)

Dana Perino: "Also maybe we should, like, nuke Argentina or one of those other Mexican countries. Wasn't that, like, where the "Bay of Pigs" happened anyway, or whatever" (stares off into space.)