(Hope this is in the right forum)

I was just thinking about the Sanford deal and how it effects his ability to hold office. We have come to find out that there were other girls as well. Cheating on your spouse is a huge betrayal of trust. This is done to someone in which they loved enough to marry. It's someone you spend your days with and have children and raise a family with. When they cheat on their spouse you are hurting a lot of people that are very close to you.

Here's the thing...if they (any politician) will betray the trust of their spouse what is to stop them from "cheating" on their voters? What is there to indicate that the will not do something underhanded with their office? A lot of us already know that politicians can't really be trusted. Is something like this a symptom of a pervasive problem of a lack of ethics among those who are suppose to serve? I don't know if getting caught cheating on you spouse should cause you to immediately resign from office but should they just not run when their time is up? Or would you still vote for them?

I'm a conservative and I would not vote for Sanford if he ran again.

__________________
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
- George Bernard Shaw

In gauging his effectiveness or suitability for office, it really would make no difference if Gov. Sanford chose to have sex with goats. However, this particular case has demonstrated that Mark Sanford, who voted to impeach Bill Clinton because that president had "lost the moral authority to lead," is in fact a hypocrite. If he is a hypocrite on this issue, can he be trusted to act consistently when faced with other issues? If he will violate, in pursuit of his own pleasure, a solemn oath made to Jenny Sanford, can he be relied to keep his oath to the people of the State of South Carolina? If he uses state monies in his own pursuit of "sexual happiness," can the people continue to entrust him with their money, even if he repays that portion which he was caught misspending? Can they be sure that he will not misspend again, given an opportunity to conceal his misdeeds? Finally, Gov. Sanford was elected as the effective leader of a particular political party; if he ceases to be able to lead that party, can he actually fulfill the role to which the people elected him, and to which they might reasonably feel entitled?

Frankly, Gov. Sanford has simply compounded one bad decision with a series of additional bad decisions. Can the people of his state be confident, in any way, that further bad decisions will not negatively impact their state, their communities, their own prospects and those of their children? Sanford has dug himself a very deep hole. I do not think that he can effectively fill the role of Chief Executive for his state any longer.

Saw a poll the other day saying tha tmost South Carolinians tought this was common among all polititians, no big deal.

__________________
Socialism doesn't create a rising tide that lifts all boats. It drains the lake and teaches the boat riders not to help themselves by rowing.

Jesus loves you, allah wants you dead

"Every government interference in the economy consists of giving an unearned benefit, extorted by force, to some men at the expense of others."

Ayn Rand

I would argue that the poll almost does not matter but I would like to see the specific question they were asked. If it was just some generic question about people of power running around on their wives then it really missed the chance to bring out how people feel about hypocrites. The issue as far as I am concerned is with character and some level of reasonable assurance that the person in question will act as he/she preaches. (Yeah I know, good luck with that.... but my delusion here is worth holding onto.) The poll probably missed, did not even mention, qualify or otherwise what TheHighForester (who is right) was talking about with...

__________________
- Frustrated Independent

Last I knew, adultery is a court-martial level offense under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

Shouldn't the President, as Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, and Governors, and Commander-in-Chief of the State National Guard, be held to the same standard?

I never thought I be glad that Spitzer was caught doing something illegal, so we could be rid of them.

__________________
January 21, 2013: The End of an ERROR.

"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters."
"When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic."
"The Constitution only gives people the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself."
---Benjamin Franklin

It's not a matter of Sanford or hypocrisy. It's a matter of betraying someone that you care about and oath breaking. This applies to Clinton and Sanford and the numerous others. If they are willing to screw over someone that they care about what will they do to faceless voters? It's a matter of what they think they can get away with. What is a voter compared to how you feel about your wive or kids? It has nothing to do with Sanford. It's a problem that is pervasive across the board and it knows no party lines.

__________________
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
- George Bernard Shaw

The president is not a member of the armed services. The military is under civilian control. The president is the main civilian authority over the military. (I seem to recall Clinton using the same bogus argument in a completely different context. He was wrong, too.)

seeing as how the president is a CIVILIAN in charge of the military, no no i don't. If people want to vote him out, or not vote for him again thats their business. But the president doesn't follow USMJ since he's not in the military

did his oath of office say anything about not cheating on his wife? I didn't think so.
Youre presuming love was there. Its not a requirement for marriage you know.
Youre again presuming that he cared about his wife, which i find doubtful if he was getting him some strange in argentina.

Frankly i'm really only pissed at two things:
1)he farmed it out. What? Good ole american pussy isn't enough for you?
2)he went incognito from the legislature to go get some tail... in argentina.

I don't think you're understanding what I'm saying. His oath of office says nothing about him or any other official cheating on their spouse. It's the fact that he cheated on someone that he cared about and did something harmful to her and their kids. If they can cheat their families they can cheat you, the voter.

You have a pretty cynical view of marriage. The percent of people who get married that don't love or care for each other is very small, imo. Now, they may lose those feelings later but it would be up to them to do the honest thing and get a divorce and not be an oath breaker. Maybe they still do care but got caught up in the moment or let their feelings go down avenues that shouldn't be taken.

Point is, you aren't as important as their family is to them. So what's stopping them from cheating you?

__________________
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
- George Bernard Shaw

That doesn't actually follow. There are plenty of examples of people who have high integrity in either public service or business who also cheat on their spouses. Human feelings aren't that logical. There are also examples of people who are faithful spouses but who exhibit contemptible public behavior. As examples, I give you John F. Kennedy, adulterer extraordinaire but without a hint of scandal in his public life, and Richard Nixon, who resigned one step ahead of the impeachment posse but is never rumored to have strayed sexually.

the first bolded entry is a wild assumption on your part. he couldve married her for political reasons.

50 percent of all marriages end in divorce. and again its YOUR OPINION. Not fact. which means it has no place in a logical argument.

i'm rather important to a politician. I'm his constituient. My friends and i put him in power. so he cheated on his wife, big deal. I'd be more upset if he cheated on his taxes. He hasn't abused his political authority that i can see. Except for haring off to south america to get some split tail.

Greetings and Felicitations,

I don't think its based on a cynical view of marriage but in a cynical view of politics. In common life I would say you are correct with regards to the number of people who get married because they love each other. However, we are talking about politics and the pursuit of power. How many people marry for appearance and connection as opposed to because they actually like the person they married.

To the person walking the paths of power a wife is something you show off to other people and your children are tools to use to your advantage. You don't have to have any deep feelings for any of them.

Sincerely Yours,
C. David Neely

__________________

Well...that they got caught doing anyways.

__________________
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
- George Bernard Shaw

so now you want to accuse with no evidence. great.