Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

South Carolina U.S. Senator Jim DeMint will replace Ed Feulner as president of the Heritage Foundation. Mr. DeMint will leave his post as South Carolina's junior senator in early January to take control of the Washington think tank, which has an annual budget of about $80 million.

Sen. DeMint's departure means that South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley, a Republican, will name a successor, who will have to run in a special election in 2014. In that year, both Mr. DeMint's replacement and Sen. Lindsey Graham will be running for reelection in South Carolina.

Mr. DeMint was reelected to a second term in 2010. The 61-year-old senator had announced earlier that he would not seek a third term.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... hare_tweet" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

dbackjon wrote:

South Carolina U.S. Senator Jim DeMint will replace Ed Feulner as president of the Heritage Foundation. Mr. DeMint will leave his post as South Carolina's junior senator in early January to take control of the Washington think tank, which has an annual budget of about $80 million.

Sen. DeMint's departure means that South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley, a Republican, will name a successor, who will have to run in a special election in 2014. In that year, both Mr. DeMint's replacement and Sen. Lindsey Graham will be running for reelection in South Carolina.

Mr. DeMint was reelected to a second term in 2010. The 61-year-old senator had announced earlier that he would not seek a third term.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... hare_tweet" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

This is good news. He was a slave to the Tea Party. Maybe Nikki will put a better person in his place (or at least someone that isn't a total slave to the Tea Party.)

Why the shaking head about this? I'm kinda neutral on something like this. It's not like he just ran for re-election this past cycle, and he had said he's not running again anyway. And the way politics has gone lately the individual person matters little - both parties are almost just the letter after their name - a "D" or an "R". And in this case he's leaving the letter the same since SC elected an "R" governor. Is there an uproar about this in SC, since it's their Senator? If there isn't then all's well really.

GannonFan wrote:Why the shaking head about this? I'm kinda neutral on something like this. It's not like he just ran for re-election this past cycle, and he had said he's not running again anyway. And the way politics has gone lately the individual person matters little - both parties are almost just the letter after their name - a "D" or an "R". And in this case he's leaving the letter the same since SC elected an "R" governor. Is there an uproar about this in SC, since it's their Senator? If there isn't then all's well really.

+1

GannonFan wrote:Why the shaking head about this? I'm kinda neutral on something like this. It's not like he just ran for re-election this past cycle, and he had said he's not running again anyway. And the way politics has gone lately the individual person matters little - both parties are almost just the letter after their name - a "D" or an "R". And in this case he's leaving the letter the same since SC elected an "R" governor. Is there an uproar about this in SC, since it's their Senator? If there isn't then all's well really.

No uproar that I'm aware of - Haley will likely appoint someone a bit more moderate, but still a R.

GannonFan wrote:Why the shaking head about this? I'm kinda neutral on something like this. It's not like he just ran for re-election this past cycle, and he had said he's not running again anyway. And the way politics has gone lately the individual person matters little - both parties are almost just the letter after their name - a "D" or an "R". And in this case he's leaving the letter the same since SC elected an "R" governor. Is there an uproar about this in SC, since it's their Senator? If there isn't then all's well really.

I don't foresee any uproar. Most people don't care. He'll be gone next month and hopefully SC will be better off.

GannonFan wrote:Why the shaking head about this? I'm kinda neutral on something like this. It's not like he just ran for re-election this past cycle, and he had said he's not running again anyway. And the way politics has gone lately the individual person matters little - both parties are almost just the letter after their name - a "D" or an "R". And in this case he's leaving the letter the same since SC elected an "R" governor. Is there an uproar about this in SC, since it's their Senator? If there isn't then all's well really.

I don't like quitters


Unless you are moving to a higher office, you should fulfill the term the people elected you too.


And I don't like the revolving door, from either party, to lobbyist.

dbackjon wrote:I don't like quitters


Unless you are moving to a higher office, you should fulfill the term the people elected you too.


And I don't like the revolving door, from either party, to lobbyist.

Well, fortunately for America that doesn't happen very often.

dbackjon wrote:

GannonFan wrote:Why the shaking head about this? I'm kinda neutral on something like this. It's not like he just ran for re-election this past cycle, and he had said he's not running again anyway. And the way politics has gone lately the individual person matters little - both parties are almost just the letter after their name - a "D" or an "R". And in this case he's leaving the letter the same since SC elected an "R" governor. Is there an uproar about this in SC, since it's their Senator? If there isn't then all's well really.

I don't like quitters


Unless you are moving to a higher office, you should fulfill the term the people elected you too.


And I don't like the revolving door, from either party, to lobbyist.

So what do you think about JJJ (Jesse Jackson Jr.)?

Yes he has health issues but why did he run for reelection and quit right being reelected? If the health issues were that big of a concern, he shouldn't have run. I'd agree with you on the quitters, but it happens on both sides of the aisle.

I really don't think Jon was taking a party shot here. It sounds like his real beef was the fact that DeMint quit.

As a Republican, I'm not sure I like it, either. While I don't know that a "think tank" qualifies as a "lobbying" job, it IS a bit on the "cushy" side, as Jon described it. As far as I'm concerned, it's almost a sinecure. In that respect, I don't like it, especially since as a second-term senator, he'd moved up the ranks and had some modicum of leverage in the Senate. That won't be easy for the GOP to duplicate, particularly with freshman Senators.

Barring extreme health issues (i.e. an anyeurism or something along the lines of what happened to Gabby Giffords) or an ethics scandal, this sort of thing shouldn't be allowed. And if it IS an ethics scandal, a resignation STILL shouldn't be allowed; there should be a formal vote of expulsion with an attendant disbarment from running for ANY level of office ever again.

dbackjon wrote:

GannonFan wrote:Why the shaking head about this? I'm kinda neutral on something like this. It's not like he just ran for re-election this past cycle, and he had said he's not running again anyway. And the way politics has gone lately the individual person matters little - both parties are almost just the letter after their name - a "D" or an "R". And in this case he's leaving the letter the same since SC elected an "R" governor. Is there an uproar about this in SC, since it's their Senator? If there isn't then all's well really.

I don't like quitters


Unless you are moving to a higher office, you should fulfill the term the people elected you too.


And I don't like the revolving door, from either party, to lobbyist.

It's not a prison term, it's an elected office. He's over 60 and he has a chance to take a job that probably pays well and is more suited to his lifestyle - if you want to say "cushy" sure.

Like I said, if the "people" who elected him, who frankly are the only ones who really matter in this debate, don't seem to mind, and if they would just elect someone from that same party anyway (R or D) then what does it matter? The voters are content with their representation and isn't what this is all about?

dbackjon wrote:
I don't like quitters


Unless you are moving to a higher office, you should fulfill the term the people elected you too.

Nice caveat to allow you to meet your ever evolving low standards.

Why shouldn't you "fulfill the term people elected you too" [sic] if you decide to run for a higher office? Run after your term is finished.

Elected officials were specifically elected, by the people (as you point out) to do a job for them. They weren't elected to go around the country campaigning for some other job. Often, the issues of the country are not the same as the issues in the state or district in which the candidate ran...so effectively, if someone is moving up, they are essentially bailing out on their promise to the people. And lord knows someone isn't getting any work done locally if they are running for President.

So, Obama was a quitter...just like DeMint. Two peas in a pod.

But wait, DeMint actually is leaving the office...which allows someone else to replace him and do the job. He isn't trying to do two jobs at once...ignoring his constituents but keeping them tethered to him, while trying to grab a bigger piece of the action.

DeMint's actions are more honorable.

Cluck U wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
I don't like quitters


Unless you are moving to a higher office, you should fulfill the term the people elected you too.

Nice caveat to allow you to meet your ever evolving low standards.

Why shouldn't you "fulfill the term people elected you too" [sic] if you decide to run for a higher office? Run after your term is finished.

Elected officials were specifically elected, by the people (as you point out) to do a job for them. They weren't elected to go around the country campaigning for some other job. Often, the issues of the country are not the same as the issues in the state or district in which the candidate ran...so effectively, if someone is moving up, they are essentially bailing out on their promise to the people. And lord knows someone isn't getting any work done locally if they are running for President.

So, Obama was a quitter...just like DeMint. Two peas in a pod.

But wait, DeMint actually is leaving the office...which allows someone else to replace him and do the job. He isn't trying to do two jobs at once...ignoring his constituents but keeping them tethered to him, while trying to grab a bigger piece of the action.

DeMint's actions are more honorable.

There IS that perspective. This perspective effectively skewers those who would try to bash a certain other "quitter."

UNI88 wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
I don't like quitters


Unless you are moving to a higher office, you should fulfill the term the people elected you too.


And I don't like the revolving door, from either party, to lobbyist.

So what do you think about JJJ (Jesse Jackson Jr.)?

Yes he has health issues but why did he run for reelection and quit right being reelected? If the health issues were that big of a concern, he shouldn't have run. I'd agree with you on the quitters, but it happens on both sides of the aisle.

Never didn't say it didn;t

And no, JJJ should never have run for re-election. Not that it would matter from a R or D standpoint - a R will never win that seat.

But the voters should be able to decide, not an appointment after the election

Cluck U wrote:

dbackjon wrote:
I don't like quitters


Unless you are moving to a higher office, you should fulfill the term the people elected you too.

Nice caveat to allow you to meet your ever evolving low standards.

Why shouldn't you "fulfill the term people elected you too" [sic] if you decide to run for a higher office? Run after your term is finished.

Elected officials were specifically elected, by the people (as you point out) to do a job for them. They weren't elected to go around the country campaigning for some other job. Often, the issues of the country are not the same as the issues in the state or district in which the candidate ran...so effectively, if someone is moving up, they are essentially bailing out on their promise to the people. And lord knows someone isn't getting any work done locally if they are running for President.

So, Obama was a quitter...just like DeMint. Two peas in a pod.

But wait, DeMint actually is leaving the office...which allows someone else to replace him and do the job. He isn't trying to do two jobs at once...ignoring his constituents but keeping them tethered to him, while trying to grab a bigger piece of the action.

DeMint's actions are more honorable.

When McCain was running, I was not upset that he was potentially not fulling his term - nature of the beast.

Now if you want to pass a federal law like we have in Arizona - the resign to run law, then ok.

SuperHornet wrote:

Cluck U wrote:
Nice caveat to allow you to meet your ever evolving low standards.

Why shouldn't you "fulfill the term people elected you too" [sic] if you decide to run for a higher office? Run after your term is finished.

Elected officials were specifically elected, by the people (as you point out) to do a job for them. They weren't elected to go around the country campaigning for some other job. Often, the issues of the country are not the same as the issues in the state or district in which the candidate ran...so effectively, if someone is moving up, they are essentially bailing out on their promise to the people. And lord knows someone isn't getting any work done locally if they are running for President.

So, Obama was a quitter...just like DeMint. Two peas in a pod.

But wait, DeMint actually is leaving the office...which allows someone else to replace him and do the job. He isn't trying to do two jobs at once...ignoring his constituents but keeping them tethered to him, while trying to grab a bigger piece of the action.

DeMint's actions are more honorable.

There IS that perspective. This perspective effectively skewers those who would try to bash a certain other "quitter."

No, it doesn't.

And Palin is still a quitter.

I agree with Jon on this one. When you run for elected office, you're making a commitment to your constituents that you will serve them throughout your term. It's similar to joining the military, you've been elected for a 2,4 or 6 year term. Unless there are extenuating circumstances you should honor your commitment and a job with a think tank doesn't qualify.

On the flip-side, the people of SC might be better off so it could be a good think in this individual situation.

AZGrizFan wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

And I don't like the revolving door, from either party, to lobbyist.

Well, fortunately for America that doesn't happen very often.

I find that laughable... (see the guy laughing)

Chizzang wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
Well, fortunately for America that doesn't happen very often.

I find that laughable... (see the guy laughing)

He was being sarcastic.

And fly down to Phoenix this weekend for my party. V will be there, showing off her tits to a bunch of gay guys.

dbackjon wrote:

Chizzang wrote:

I find that laughable... (see the guy laughing)

He was being sarcastic.

And fly down to Phoenix this weekend for my party. V will be there, showing off her tits to a bunch of gay guys.

I too was being sarcastic... (try to keep up)
AZ and I have a totally gay spat going right now

Chizzang wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

He was being sarcastic.

And fly down to Phoenix this weekend for my party. V will be there, showing off her tits to a bunch of gay guys.

I too was being sarcastic... (try to keep up)
AZ and I have a totally gay spat going right now

Well, fight it out in person. My place. Saturday.

dbackjon wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
I too was being sarcastic... (try to keep up)
AZ and I have a totally gay spat going right now

Well, fight it out in person. My place. Saturday.

I'm going to be balls deep in the old lady by Saturday / She just finished her "big project" and is all uppity on her high horse about me taking her to dinner...

AZ is being a total gaywad right now...

GannonFan wrote:Why the shaking head about this?

You know the answer as good as anyone. jon loves being a drama queen.

You didn't see him pitching a hissy fit when Napolitano and Sebelius quit their ELECTED positions as Chief Executives to become middle managers.

Leave it to jon to think that leaving elected office as a public servant to take a much higher paying position as the President of a major think tank is taking a "lower position".

Chizzang wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

He was being sarcastic.

And fly down to Phoenix this weekend for my party. V will be there, showing off her tits to a bunch of gay guys.

I too was being sarcastic... (try to keep up)
AZ and I have a totally gay spat going right now

To both of you.

Baldy wrote:

GannonFan wrote:Why the shaking head about this?

You know the answer as good as anyone. jon loves being a drama queen.

You didn't see him pitching a hissy fit when Napolitano and Sebelius quit their ELECTED positions as Chief Executives to become middle managers.

Leave it to jon to think that leaving elected office as a public servant to take a much higher paying position as the President of a major think tank is taking a "lower position".

I was pissed when Napolitano quit her office. Stuck us with the bitch Brewer.

No, a lobbying job for a bunch of wacko's, even if higher paid, is a step down.