19 March 2012

That's a doubtful package deal, ladies and gentlemen of SC GOP!

According to the news:

A county Republican group in South Carolina wants its candidates to promise to not cheat on their spouses and not watch pornography.
Out of natural (yeah, yeah, I confess to it) interest in the subject, I read the whole article and even watched the clip. Apparently, there is a list of 28 (!) items in the pledge any aspiring SC GOP politician must sign to get further in the political race. Since the article is more focused on the sex-related items of the pledge, so are we* - in this post, at least.

It appears that there are more items related to sex/gender in the pledge than the two mentioned above (no cheating and not watching porn). Here they are, four all in all:

At the first glance, the whole deal looks like an end to any hopes and/or aspirations of non-political kind a person could nurture. Should one sign such a pledge, what venue - aside, of course, ATF (alcohol, tobacco and you know what) - remains open? I wouldn't mention controlled substances where a young Republican is concerned, surely.

So I would propose a gradual method of getting a candidate to embrace the full scope of that pledge. For instance, put a check box near every item in the form to be signed. Allow the signatory to leave one (or more) of the four items unchecked, the addition of the unchecked item(s) to be considered later: say closer to the pension edge or thereabout. That should make the whole process easier to accept. At least I am reasonably sure it would.

I have another remark, of a purely technical nature, about the proposed list above. If a person signs up for abstinence before marriage (item 1), how could the said person make sure she/he doesn't make a mistake with the gender of her/his chosen spouse (item 3)? After all, you cannot judge by appearance alone these days. I feel that this list needs more work. Or, possibly, an addendum that will resolve all related glitches... whatever.

But I am confident that, after a few hours of a brainstorming, all the issues could be resolved. And the life of the GOP candidate in SC will be made much purer. But not without a reasonable slack where some slack is in order.

(*) I sincerely hope you believe me at that and would vote for me when the time comes.


Shaun Downey (Jams O Donnell) said...

Ach and now the membership consists of one hermit in a swamp?

SnoopyTheGoon said...

Well, this hermit needs more watching, since there aren't many witnesses in the swamp ;-)

Andrew Ian Dodge said...

Woah they are doing their best to attract young candidates aren't they? Does the SC GOP realize how much damage they are doing the GOP reputation nationwide?

SnoopyTheGoon said...

Well, it's only one county, maybe they have a problem with too much sex there...

David All said...

This must be the Year of the Wackos as far as the Republicans are concerned. Maybe it is result of the unusally early spring the eastern half of the USA is experiencing! Now you know why South Carolina was the first state to suceed from the Union in 1860 and then went on to start the Civil War by firing on Fort Sumter.

Concerning pre-martial Sex: The longtime Speaker of the US House of Representatives, Sam Rayburn of Texas was once asked how he felt about a proposed piece of legislation. He replied by telling how a pretty, good looking 18 yr old girl in the choir of a Baptist Church in his district had replied to a stern Deacon's question of whiether she believed in pre-martial virginity.
"I am for it, but I aint fanatical about it"! 

Dick Stanley said...

It's only that the media is pro-Democrat that it would even pick up something like this. As puny and uninfluential as it undoubtedly is, even in SC. Always on the hunt for stereotypes they are, especially in the South.