Sanford, Peeler keep debate moderate, disagree on ads

COLUMBIA - Mark Sanford and Bob Peeler skirmished over familiar themes in a televised debate Monday, but each agreed to support the winner of their June 25th runoff in the fall race against Democrat Gov. Jim Hodges.
     Like the race itself, the debate at times hinged more on the question of campaign tactics than policy substance. Lt. Gov. Peeler continued to press questions about former Congressman Sanford's Capitol Hill voting record as the two fielded questions via e-mail, a moderator and each other during the WIS-TV debate.
     The temperate matchup never turned nasty, but the two did mix it up over the negative ads Peeler has aired since Sanford turned in a surprising, 3,000-vote-margin, first-place finish in the seven-candidate June 11th GOP gubernatorial primary.
     "It's gutter politics," Sanford said of the Peeler ads. "It's grossly unfair. It's grossly inaccurate, and it's wrong."
     The former 1st District congressman from Charleston said Peeler has taken votes that were part of larger measures and turned them against him. Peeler stood by the ads, especially the one that challenges Sanford's support of the military.
     "The ad is accurate. Everything in there is documented," he said.
     Peeler told Sanford about a half-dozen times that he liked the former U.S. House member and that the ads were nothing personal, just Peeler's way of pointing out the differences between the two Republicans.
     "That's not leadership, Mark," Peeler said after one exchange. "But it's just an honest disagreement we have."
     The hottest exchanges came when Peeler asked Sanford why he didn't support a breast cancer stamp or a resolution supporting an airstrike in the Middle East.
     Sanford, who served in the U.S. House for six years, said he voted against the stamp because too much money was diverted from research and against the airstrike resolution because he thought President Clinton ordered the military action to take attention away from his impending impeachment proceedings in early 1999.
     "I think it is grossly misleading to create a political commercial that cherry picks a couple of votes and goes out and creates a completely different picture than the one that really exists," Sanford said.
     Peeler asked Sanford why he cast several votes in Congress counter to the rest of the South Carolina delegation.
     "The notion saying you are wrong to vote alone or you are wrong to vote against the whole of the South Carolina delegation is precisely what's wrong with politics and echoes to me the simple fact that we need leadership in South Carolina," Sanford said.
     "You can be a maverick in Congress," Peeler quickly responded. "But if you are a maverick as governor, as the chief executive of a state, the state would basically shut down."
     "To label me a maverick is wrong," Sanford said.
     In a lighter moment, just after the two finished making statements against gambling of any form in South Carolina, WIS cut to a commercial showing Monday's winning Pick 3 lottery numbers.
     The two laughed.
     They also agreed on a lot of things - prayer in schools, no mandatory seat belt law, posting the Ten Commandments in public places, concealed weapons, a shorter legislative session, no stem cell research, tossing minibottles, reworking the Division of Motor Vehicles, rejecting Powerball lottery games and lowering the DUI limit to .08.
     On a day when both picked up endorsements from congressmen, state lawmakers and local groups, Peeler also began airing his latest attack ad - this one against Sanford's 18-year plan to eliminate state income taxes and replace it with a five-cent-per-gallon gasoline tax.
     Meanwhile, Attorney General Charlie Condon, the third-place finisher in last week's primary race, began airing endorsement ads for Sanford on radio Monday.
     Sanford won endorsements Monday from Congressman Jim DeMint of Greenville, former Congressman Bob Inglis of Greenville, the mayor of Greenville and several Upstate lawmakers.
     Peeler picked up support from the pro-life South Carolina Citizens for Life and Congressman Joe Wilson of Lexington.

Sanford looks like the real deal. I would like to see a comprehensive voting record from his time in Congress just to make sure. We Charleston natives know that Peeler lacks a backbone and has a tendency to talk out of both sides of his mouth. Anyhow, this is a moot point. Gov. Hodges has acted against the wishes of the South Carolinians on more than one occasion and consistently jumped through hoops for the NAACP and other superfluous groups. The GOP could run corpse against Hodges this year and still take the Governer's mansion back.

My post from the SC Announcements list:
gunnedah wrote: "Mark Sanford has been a model citizen-legislator who stood up for taxpayers and was not affraid to vote his conscience "

Then that is completely contradictory of his record. Congress passed the gas tax in 1994 (before he took office) and when it came up for repeal in 1996 (after he took office) he voted NOT to repeal it.

He also "ain't from around here." He grew up in Florida. He's of the same yankee carpet bagger stock that invaded South Carolina during reconstruction.

And what is John McCain's interest in Mark Sanford? McCain is a liberal, anti-gun RINO. The whole lot of them, including Lindsay Graham, is big government establishment types. If it comes to a race between Hodges and Sanford, I will vote for Hodges. At least Hodges has proven himself as a harmless do-nothing governor.

Sanford's 18-year plan to eliminate state income taxes and replace it with a five-cent-per-gallon gasoline tax.

What is Sanford's affection with the gas tax? He had a chance to repeal the gas tax his first term in office and voted NOT to repeal it. Now he wants to replace SC income tax with a gas tax? hmmmmm. What's wrong with downsizing government and eliminating tax? He just wants to shift the tax somewhere else.

He's a big Wall Street investor, grew up in Florida, not South Carolina -- what else do we know about this guy?

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.