Mark Sanford's love letters

Four boys:

Marshall Sanford
Landon Sanford
Bolton Sanford
Blake Sanford

O Lord. The "magnificent parts" bit is winceworthy. So is his itinerary. The guy who jots off to Aspen for a weekend spent all that energy trying to slash education funding to his state?

I've heard worse. Prince Charles was really cringeworthy as I recall. It's interesting to see a politician who, even with his mistress, is like "let's not get into sexual details in writing." Now that's conservative! "I'll cheat on my wife with you, but let's only talk about sophistication and grace not the sex."

Pithy stuff.

This is really becoming all to common, highly visible, powerful, and supposedly successful midlife men having affairs. It makes me wonder exactly what is pressuring these men to do things like this? Midlife crises or something far worse? Is it a mental or psychological problem due to the pressure of their lives?

I won't comment on whether he's worthy of his wife and boys. That will ultimately IMHO be determined by his family and by his sincerity and how he heals himself from this disaster. Having gone through something similar (my ex wasn't/isn't famous but did the whole midlife affair with a far-out situation and deceit to not only me but everyone of his friends and family and employers), I am seeing so many parallels in men who are becoming of a certain age and really struggling. I think these affairs are often a sign of lashing out against some struggling they are involved in...most likely a spiritual or psychological struggle.

Observer: Why run this crazy risk? Something isn't adding up.

Yeah, my guess is that he ran to her arms for comfort after his legislative defeat. And that today is the first she's heard about "breaking it off."

Geez, I'm ever so glad I didn't waste my capacity for tawdry intrigue on that Jon & Cate family...

This is really becoming all to common, highly visible, powerful, and supposedly successful midlife men having affairs.

It has always been all too common, it is just that we are more likely to find out about it in the media these days.

Question for the room - whose betrayal of vows was worse - Governor Sanford's or Father Cutie's?

I agree a bit there. Men drawn to power are not always the most moral men. Although maybe they're not odd.

I think studies indicate up to 37% of men cheat, or have cheated, on their wives. Presumably not all these men are worthless people unworthy of their children. Or that they must atone for their sins publicly to the satisfaction of bloggers. I'm not really defending Sanford, but I don't like the condemnatory vulture stance journalists often take on issues.

He writes better love letters than Jim McGreevey.

Mrs. Sanford has released a classy statement:

I would like to start by saying I love my husband and I believe I have put forth every effort possible to be the best wife I can be during our almost twenty years of marriage. As well, for the last fifteen years my husband has been fully engaged in public service to the citizens and taxpayers of this state and I have faithfully supported him in those efforts to the best of my ability. I have been and remain proud of his accomplishments and his service to this state.

I personally believe that the greatest legacy I will leave behind in this world is not the job I held on Wall Street, or the campaigns I managed for Mark, or the work I have done as First Lady or even the philanthropic activities in which I have been routinely engaged. Instead, the greatest legacy I will leave in this world is the character of the children I, or we, leave behind. It is for that reason that I deeply regret the recent actions of my husband Mark, and their potential damage to our children.

I believe wholeheartedly in the sanctity, dignity and importance of the institution of marriage. I believe that has been consistently reflected in my actions. When I found out about my husband's infidelity I worked immediately to first seek reconciliation through forgiveness, and then to work diligently to repair our marriage. We reached a point where I felt it was important to look my sons in the eyes and maintain my dignity, self-respect, and my basic sense of right and wrong. I therefore asked my husband to leave two weeks ago.

This trial separation was agreed to with the goal of ultimately strengthening our marriage. During this short separation it was agreed that Mark would not contact us. I kept this separation quiet out of respect of his public office and reputation, and in hopes of keeping our children from just this type of public exposure. Because of this separation, I did not know where he was in the past week.

I believe enduring love is primarily a commitment and an act of will, and for a marriage to be successful, that commitment must be reciprocal. I believe Mark has earned a chance to resurrect our marriage.

Psalm 127 states that sons are a gift from the Lord and children a reward from Him. I will continue to pour my energy into raising our sons to be honorable young men. I remain willing to forgive Mark completely for his indiscretions and to welcome him back, in time, if he continues to work toward reconciliation with a true spirit of humility and repentance.

This is a very painful time for us and I would humbly request now that members of the media respect the privacy of my boys and me as we struggle together to continue on with our lives and as I seek the wisdom of Solomon, the strength and patience of Job and the grace of God in helping to heal my family.

Rod, I apologize but I am going to digress with this comment. I love the back and forth of this blog and you do an amazing job. The digression follows:

Much has been made of the ABC healthcare program at the White House and the lack of opportunity for another side to be presented. Unfortunately, this has been common place on Jake Tapper's political punch blog (blogs.abcnews.com) for a long time. Comments from a conservative point of view are deleted. I do not use fowl language or attack other commenters in my posts, but still my posts are taken down. Many others on the site have experienced this. Jake actually looked into it during the fall campaign and it got slightly better, but the result of his looking into it was not an admission at all of the fact that comments were deleted because of their conservative point of view. Jake is actually one of better reporters we have in Washington. Jake and ABC News should be embarrassed by blatant political censorhip of their moderators, which Jake said is done by a contract company. Free flow of ideas it is not.

I would love it if you would post this email or something about this situation. Perhaps that would embarrass ABC News enough to get a handle on their moderators.

Thanks for your help.

Stevereno

John E-AgnStoic @ 10:03 PM quotes a certain governor's wife, as follows:

"This is a very painful time for us and I would humbly request now that members of the media respect the privacy of my boys and me as we struggle together to continue on with our lives and as I seek the wisdom of Solomon, the strength and patience of Job and the grace of God in helping to heal my family."

Actual Translation: "Butt out, media nosies. I've got some serious strategy sessions with my divorce lawyers to take care of. We're going to take this philandering ba$tard for every dime he's got, and we don't want YOU tampering with our evidence."

"Want a real story ? Go talk to the Attorney General or the Federal prosecutor in Charleston about the corruption and misuse-of-state-funds probes that they should be starting."

Your servant,

Lord Karth

Maeb: You're a cynic. Great statement by Mrs. Sanford. Oremus.

Had tried to stay away from the visuals, but I just watched a tiny clip of his news conference today, and now I'm 99% sure the guy is a conniving sleazebag. I may be a cynic but the world isn't helping!

The media outed Sanford because he's a rival to the Obama nation.

Bah, Sanford did this to himself. By comparison, he made Father Cutie look like a model of discretion.

"Yes adultery is a mortal sin, but in the modern era, alas, it isn't a crime."

I wouldn't be so sure of that. From the South Carolina Code of Laws:

SECTION 16-15-60. Adultery or fornication.

Any man or woman who shall be guilty of the crime of adultery or fornication shall be liable to indictment and, on conviction, shall be severally punished by a fine of not less than one hundred dollars nor more than five hundred dollars or imprisonment for not less than six months nor more than one year or by both fine and imprisonment, at the discretion of the court.

SECTION 16-15-70. "Adultery" defined.

"Adultery" is the living together and carnal intercourse with each other or habitual carnal intercourse with each other without living together of a man and woman when either is lawfully married to some other person.

Source: http://www.scstatehouse.gov/CODE/t16c015.htm

I suppose this would be an inopportune time to mention how Argentines whisper sweetly in Spanish with an Italian accent. (In the frosty nocturnal winter mist of June.)

Y"es adultery is a mortal sin, but in the modern era, alas, it isn't a crime."

Alas?

Cf. John 8:1-11.

Charles,

I don't know what is funnier, that you think the media outed Sanford, or that you think Obama is quaking in fear of an unpopular far right governor. He'd love to run against Sanford or Palin or any of the heroes of the far right base.

"Yes adultery is a mortal sin, but in the modern era, alas, it isn't a crime."

One could say the exact same thing about homosexuality, no?

All this 'god talk' (both Mrs. Sanford's and Mr. referring to "God's laws" - all the while flouting same) - fie on't.

Yet Rod addresses tawdry prose and ignores the blatant hypocrisy and double standards, claiming he 'can't follow the logic'. Correct, Rod, you can't follow it if you continue to ignore it.

It is sometimes possible to forgive infidelity. It's much harder to forgive a man for being a narcissistic ass. Not, mind you, that I'm saying Sanford is an ass. Only that, at this distance, he gives the appearance of being so. I refer you to Robert Graves' poem, "A Slice of Wedding Cake."

"Why have such scores of lovely, gifted girls
Married impossible men?
Simple self-sacrifice may be ruled out,
And missionary endeavour, nine times out of ten.

Repeat 'impossible men': not merely rustic,
Foul-tempered or depraved
(Dramatic foils chosen to show the world
How well women behave, and always have behaved).

Impossible men: idle, illiterate,
Self-pitying, dirty, sly,
For whose appearance even in City parks
Excuses must be made to casual passers-by.

Has God's supply of tolerable husbands
Fallen, in fact, so low?
Or do I always over-value woman
At the expense of man?
Do I?
It might be so."

Except for cases of rape and physical violence, I would be loth to blame marital failure on one party only.

I thought Sanford's email was louche ("magnificent parts"), but I thought his wife's press release was seriously creepy - quoting Psalms (WTF?).

Sigaliris: You don't have much to say about impossible women.

Who in the hell writes a love letter with bullet points to his Argentine squeeze?

Republicans' lack of imagination and competence, alas, extends to adultery as well. If it were Edwin Edwards, for instance, he would have told his mistress that it took him an hour and a half to be a 60-minute man.

No bullet points.

Will no one rid us of these hypocritcal and incompetent clods?

The affair is of public interest because of how he skipped out on his job and because it shows bad character, but do we need to see his lust-letters? That seems to cross the line into voyeurism.

Generally, the public shouldn't demand resignation over an affair. It should be a black mark against the politician--a factor we should weigh casting a vote. But it generally should not be the deciding factor.

Adultery may not be a crime. However, it is UNLAWFUL to leave your governmental post in such a way, and possibly use either campaign funds or government funds in order to do so. He did NOT inform any of his aides in order to leave the country from what I've heard in the media. I would hope this guy is forced to leave the governor's seat for that. In essence, he vacated his governor's seat without communication. I believe I had read somewhere that is was required of him to notify his vice-governor and the appropriate chain of command if he did indeed plan to leave the country. To me, that action of leaving the country without the proper communication shows a severe lack of responsibility on his part. This is an adult, grown man who showed much immaturity through his affair and leaving his post.

There really is no need to publish this man's letter to his mistress. It causes more hurt and pain to the family. While it does give us insight to the character of this man, I don't feel it should have been made public.

MargaretE,
How did you feel about all of Clinton's laundry being aired? Apparently, Sanford never objected to any of that in the 90s. If you live by the sword, you die by the sword.

At what point in the press conference did Sanford actually state that he was breaking things off? Is he being deliberately evasive or did I just miss that part of the statement?

The email is important not for its content - which of us would like all our private correspondence, from all our years, published? - but because it's a judgment issue. Mr. Sanford's sexual behavior is none of our business, but his judgment is.

He has shown appalling judgment. Those of us who were adults back in the days of Nixon learned or should have learned that if it exists in writing or in a recording, it can and will (if expedient to someone) be made public. So you don't write stuff like this down, no, not even in an email. (I'm not sure we Nixon-era folks taught our children well enough.) If you want to murmur this crap into her ear, you do it on a landline telephone (no, Prince Charles, not a mobile, for that too can be captured by strangers). Or you take a leaf from the CIA, and you only say this stuff in person, and only in an environment you're SURE isn't bugged.

Better of course that you don't behave this way at all if you have ambitions as a politician. Make up your mind. Do you want power? Really? Well, what are you willing to give for it? Mr. Clinton was in office as President for eight years. You can't keep it zipped up for eight years? Perhaps you're in the wrong profession.

Unhappily perhaps, the only way to get this lesson across seems to be to publish this kind of thing in the hope that other similarly-situated political persons will take the hint.

Where's Lamont in all of this?

I'm so glad somebody else made that connection! What the governor really needs is for Aunt Esther to show up, call him a "fish-eyed fool," and whop him on the head with her handbag. That'll sort him out. Failing that, I say: GRADY FOR GOVERNOR!

I assume that since he voted to impeach Bill Clinton for lesser offences, he will resign as governor.

BTW, Faux News is pulling the old trick of identifying a Republican caught with his pants down as a Democrat.

As a love letter, that's pretty poor. His mistress should have dumped him long ago.

Don't politicians need the same sort of life skills workshops that the NHL and other sports leagues require their players to complete?

Matt: Like so many traditional marriage conservatives in the South, Gov. Sanford loved to grind his filthy boot into the face of committed gay relationships.

If that's the way you talk, I sure hope you have a fainting couch nearby. You got th' vapors, bubba.

I don't know Mark Sanford (and nothing I've heard so far makes me want to get to know him), and he may well be a decent, kind man.

However, as it turns out, he's in a very poor position to make moral judgments on other people, be these other people homosexuals or heterosexual adulterers. I bet he wishes he'd kept his mouth shut.

MargaretE, I think you're making a big mistake in believing that a man can be a "decent, kind . . . family man" while lying to those who trust him and cheating on those he supposedly loves best. An affair that goes on for more than a year is not a teensy, weensy mistake like forgetting to take out the garbage. He left his family alone on Father's Day so he could hang out with his girlfriend in Argentina. What about that seems decent to you? Supposedly, his wife found out about this five months ago. If he were a decent, kind man, he could have behaved honestly from that point on and brought this to a discreet resolution--either by admitting he longer wanted to be married and asking for a divorce, or by ending the affair. Instead, he indulged in bizarre behavior that exposed his long-suffering wife to public humiliation. What about that seems kind to you? He had half a year or more to make choices that put his family first. Instead, he put himself first.

It's entirely possible that he has serious personal dysfunctions of some kind that make it impossible for him to exercise good judgment. That isn't a moral failing, but a psychological one. However, if that's true, then the decent, kind thing to do is get himself into therapy and deal with it before he does any more damage to people who unfortunately trusted him to a be a mature, competent human being when he wasn't one. Glossing over his failings by calling for "forgiveness" isn't going to help anyone.

There can be no healing without repentance, and no true repentance without authentic contrition.

Someone should apologize for re-publishing private correspondence.

Puts recent posts about debasing the culture into perspective, doesn't it?

"Is it really our job--as people not connected to the sin--to grant forgiveness?" Michael

TR: Well maybe not, but I think there is something unhealthy in Dreher's need to call people filth or unworthy of their children or whatever. Do people not involved really have an ability to make those kinds of judgments?

The blog of late is becoming a litany of "worst people in the world" which I find potentially unnerving. If he is fasting, I'm tempted to think fasting is making him cranky and he should take a break for awhile.

Hee hee. I rather like BobN's idea of the house provided with many fainting couches, for the sake of convenience. There would have to be one wherever the outside world might intrude--in front of the TV, for sure, but possibly out in the kitchen, if there's a kitchen radio, and perhaps one located in the foyer, for use when the mail or newspapers arrive! To preserve proper gender distinctions and discourage homosexuality and feminism, one would also need gender-specific fainting couches. The patriarchal fainting couch would have to be a stern navy blue, with butch mahogany framing and perhaps a manly monogram, while the ladies' couches could be pink and frilly. The ladies might make their shock and horror known with a treble-pitched "ooh la la," while the patriarchs would faint with a masculine "OOF!" Some enterprising soul could sell family fainting couches through Vision Forum or some similar "family values" online giftshop.

TR: Well maybe not, but I think there is something unhealthy in Dreher's need to call people filth or unworthy of their children or whatever. Do people not involved really have an ability to make those kinds of judgments?

His blog, his judgement. This is what you DO on your blog. You don't have to buy his judgements (I usually don't)

1. How soon before "Evita" turns up in Playboy or Penthouse?

2. How soon before Mark Sanford is a "correspondant" on Faux News? Oh yeah, probably never. They now claim he is a Democrat.

"His blog, his judgement."

TR: My comment, my judgment.

And by the way I'm getting quite weary of people cutting down FOX News, just like I tuned out the people cutting down Michael Jackson years ago. I put them in the same category as the folks in Minnesota who voted for Al Franken.