Mark Sanford is a hypocrite and an adulterer, but those are not reasons for him to resign or be impeached. However, flaking out and leaving the country without providing for a succession of government is an impeachable offense. The people of South Carolina will have to decide whether they trust Sanford not to flake out again. Actually, the members of the legislature will have to decide that. It isn’t that he lied about an affair that is the real problem. People need to remember that.
It’s always interesting when right-wingers fall short of their own moralizing rhetoric, but the price for that is paid at the ballot box. The price for leaving your state without leadership should be higher.
I was struck by how incoherent and emotionally fragile he was with all of that stammering and crying. That in itself seems to make him unsuited for such a high profile job.
yeah, he definitely needs more vacation time.
Oh, as an emotional person myself, I do take offense at that remark. Just because someone gets emotional does not mean they stop functioning mentally.
I know that’s a standard society adheres to, but I truly beg to differ in a big way.
Having emotions is also a sign of having a heart, and I’d rather have someone in office who has a heart than someone made of stone.
(That said, see my above comment re why he can’t stay Governor, period. And it has nothing to do with his emotional display.)
I have to agree. The patriarchal myth that one always has to hide one’s emotions in order to be “strong” is baloney.
Dear God, did I really just use the expression “patriarchal myth”? Oh well, it is what it is.
I do wish to publicly withdraw my spirited, but now hilarious defense of Sanford. He’s plainly not an introvert, just an asshole. And while having time alone shouldn’t have drawn the attention that it did, using that time to commit adultery, especially as a member of the holier than thou GOP, can’t possibly get enough attention.
I didn’t say that his emotions were bad, just that he seemed emotionally fragile. Like unstable. It seemed like he had no plan for what he was going to say and his stream-of-consciousness news conference magnified that impression, for me anyway.
Well come on, who WOULD have something to say, in such a situation. He wasn’t planning on getting caught.
(Cheaters never do. Even though it happens pretty regularly!)
Unfortunately I am somewhat of an expert in this area…
He is far beyond emotional, he is deranged. He said ‘I just spent five days crying in Argentina’, while CRYING.
That is not ‘just’ emotion. He is having a mental break down. Or had one already.
nalbar
Does Mark Sanford understand the meaning of the word “responsibility”? Seems like a governor and prospective presidential candidate ought to be able to handle that term.
I do not care about Sanford’s private life. I am more concerned about his fitness as Gov. Everything was shady from the get-go and Bauer’s responses underscored that. As I mentioned in my liveblog, the media (once again) fell down on the job of asking the most important questions before Sanford walked off.
with broken-down schools that shake when a train goes by.
I care when stimulus checks aren’t being spent in their direction.
F*ck him and the rich, racist, hypocrite Repubs he rode in with.
I knew it was zipper problems when even his wife didn’t know where he was.
I completely agree. That no one could reach him for an extended period of time is enough to disqualify him for any public office, period.
I sympathize with his personal issues and all concerned. But to me, his abdication of his role as Governor is the serious offense.
HE GOT CAUGHT!
He was not confessing because it was heavy on his heart. He confessed because his lies caught up to him. I don’t care how much you cry. He cheated.
Now someone on MSNBC is trying to say he was brave. What woulda been brave was to RESIST the temptation to cheat…
Sorry this guy ain’t no different than John Edwards in my book
I’m with Jeff Goldberg:
http://jeffreygoldberg.theatlantic.com/archives/2009/06/well_gov_sanford_isnt_sufferin.php
“He’s suffering from something else entirely: Argentine Nookie Syndrome. We’re watching this ridiculous man on TV now. James Bennet: “So he didn’t want the stimulus money but he did want a certain kind of stimulus.”
I have some sympathy for some cheaters. Some really feel they are dying inside, especially when the wife turns off the sex permanently.
Is that right or wrong? Having never been married, I certainly don’t feel qualified to judge!
But some cheaters are just assholes who will chase any piece of ass, and those people I have no respect for.
I hope he falls in the former case. That doesn’t make it right, but it makes it more sympathetic, to me.
I have sympathy for him because he’s so clearly smitten with her and just acted so incredibly stupid.
That said, wives “turn off the sex permanently” for a reason. I guess it’s sort of a chicken/egg thing.
She seems a political powerhouse in her own right. Connections and all that. Sometimes the love goes because power changes the dynamics of the marriage.
On examination, I think he was truly in love with this woman; I don’t think it was a case of simply knocking boots.
Then again, he’s stuck between a political career being this Christian, moral, stick-in-the-ass and just being himself. I know he must be wondering if there is any career left to be had after The State got through with him. Or anything left of himself.
Of course, the wife is saying today that her marriage has a chance. I wonder.
And Fox has once again labeled a cheating Republican as a Democrat: http://mediamatters.org/blog/200906240026
I’m sure it was just an error…:/
Perhaps, it is time for the GOP to just “stand down.”
Any political party that cannot get itself under control, shouldn’t be affecting policy-either nationally-or internationally.
They-are wearing-thin-as a political party.
Enough is enough with these people.
They’re just gonna start running off now, to see girlfriends whenever they feel like it?
WTF?
I think this may help:
http://www.wikihow.com/Stop-a-Zipper-from-Unzipping-Itself
the RepubliCons went on Jihad for far less with Slick Willie….
I’m betting this will quickly disappear from mainstream news….. Already, apparently FauxNews has tagged Sanford with a (D)…showing the leading Republican Propaganda outlet has its priorities in order: disown any embarassment and project it on the opposition ASAP…
l don’t know much about s.c. politics, but l find it hard to believe the lege will impeach a term limited lame duck…he’s gone after 2010…although l think he’s seriously diminished in terms of setting and controlling the agenda. it’s going to be a tough year and a half for little markie, especially if he thinks the stimulus battle was bad.
the list of potential 2012 RATpublicant presidential hopefuls is getting pretty thin.
j. bushcrist
ensignjindahlhuckabee
palin
pawlenty
petraeus
romney
sanfordpalin by default if the loonies still control the GOP after the midterms.
The GOPers are paving the way for Jeb Bush to run in 2012. A little Republican Road-Kill never bothered the Bush Family.
What is it with the hypocritical right wing?
Larry Craig and his “wide stance”,
Mark Foley and his page scandal,
David Vitter and the “diaper escapades” with prostitutes,
John Ensign and his cheating ways (with a friends wife no doubt)
Now the “magical mystery tour” of Mark Sanford which just ends up being another cheating lying right winger doing what they do best;
Cheating on his wife while claiming to represent “family values” …. in reality being hypocrites while preaching to the rest of us about our supposed sinful ways.
….. put a fork in his political career it is done.
Don’t forget about Newt .. and his infidelities .. or McCain .. and how he met Cindy
You forgot Ted “Meth and Male Prostitutes” Haggard. He didn’t hold office but he was still a Rightwing politician.
I think we need to cut the guy a break. After all, he’s a governor. And governors are important people.
The State Newspapaper in South Carolina has emails between Sanford and his honey:
http://www.thestate.com/sanford/story/839350.html
I’m sorry – I don’t think being a public official gives ANYONE the right to air private emails. That’s just so wrong, on every level. His kids will read that.
Unforgiveable.
Agreed. That’s the sort of crap Republican character assassins pull. We should be aiming for a higher standard than that. (Of course, this being SC, the paper is probably run by Republican character assassins. They do eat their own, you know.)
Ick. I don’t need to know that stuff. At least there was no loofah involved.
I just don’t buy this, Booman, though in your case I assume you actually do believe it and aren’t just piling on in the service of partisan opportunism.
Seriously, he’s the governor of South Carolina which, since 1865, has like every other state been just an administrative district in the federal republic. With the legislature out of session and no hurricanes bearing down on the state, what could there possibly be going on in SC that can’t wait a week for the governor’s attention? As far as I can see, the only parts of the executive branch in most states that deal with hour-to-hour, day-to-day emergencies are at the county and municipal level. If the fire or police chiefs in Charleston ran off for a week, that could actually affect people. The governor? Whatever. Aside from their role as organizers for their parties, they haven’t mattered much since the Civil War. Most states would probably be much better off if they just abolished the position and switched to a parliamentary system.
many things can happen. A prison riot or escape. A chemical explosion. An oil spill. There are many things that only the governor is authorized to order, and he must deputize the Lt. Gov. if he is going to be absent.
That seems to me like a problem with the organization of the state government. The governor is supposed to delegate authority all the time, not just when he’s indisposed. The heads of the state corrections agency and safety agencies — for example — should be empowered to act immediately in emergency situations without having to run everything by the governor before acting. If not, what is the point of appointing people to those posts in the first place?
This is analogous to the concept of “too big to fail”. There should be no one in the government without whom the government simply ceases to function. Adultery in Argentina aside, people die, get sick, get stuck in traffic, and end up on the can with a bad case of the runs. If there are things that only one person is authorized to deal with, they had better not be emergency situations. That would be like teaching your kids to stay in the house when it’s on fire until they are explicitly told by you to escape.
If South Carolina’s government is that rigid and inflexible, they have much bigger problems than Mark Sanford.