what bugs me so much about the sanford coverage...

[Anonymous]

is that people are focusing on whether or not he should resign because of the affair.

while that is open to dicussion, why is there not more attention paid to the fact that he disappeared for five days without his staff knowing his whereabouts? he is the chief executive! what would have happened in the event of an emergency? he should unequivicoblyresign over this fact and this alone. it is simply inexcusable behavior for a public official who holds that kind of power and responsibility.

[jsteele]

I am not sure that your premise is correct. Most of the blogs I read have said that the affair is a personal issue. To the extent that it is a public issue, it is because he has made public issues of others' indiscretions. But, the important issue is, indeed, his dereliction of duty.

[Anonymous]

Plus, wasn't he already legally separated from his wife - I mean 50% of American marriages are now separated or divorced so why is this situation that much different - b/c he's an elected/public official?

I hope he didn't use tax payer $$ to fund his hiatus.

[Anonymous]

Yeah, I think it's the erratic disappearance which would suggest resignation would be preferable. I mean, hypocrites can be quite good at running a government!

Sounds to me like he had already alienated a lot of Republicans so I suppose that that is what may be behind the calls for resignation. If his own party liked him better, they might be more forgiving as long as he ate humble pie.

[Anonymous]

He has already said he intends to pay the state back for last year's Argentina trip, so given that I'd be surprised if he didn't use a lot of South Carolina taxpayer money for this personal stuff. That should be an impeachable offense whether it has to do with an affair or not.

The Obama appointees and their tax problems - that was given a lot of coverage. I make no excuses for them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He has already said he intends to pay the state back for last year's Argentina trip, so given that I'd be surprised if he didn't use a lot of South Carolina taxpayer money for this personal stuff. That should be an impeachable offense whether it has to do with an affair or not.

The Obama appointees and their tax problems - that was given a lot of coverage. I make no excuses for them.

Yeah, that's like the wealthy shoplifter offering to pay the store for the merchandise as an atonement, and expecting not to face charges. Just b/c you can give the money back, doesn't excuse you from misappropriation or embezzlement.

[Anonymous]

It's unequivocally...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Plus, wasn't he already legally separated from his wife - I mean 50% of American marriages are now separated or divorced so why is this situation that much different - b/c he's an elected/public official?

I hope he didn't use tax payer $$ to fund his hiatus.

No he was not legally separated. His wife left him and took the kids two weeks before he went to Argentina because he kept asking his wife if he could go to Argentina and visit this woman!

It is not about the affair...it is about the whacky behavior and leaving his state without any type of plan should a disaster happen in his absence. And he was totally unreachable. This is not how one should govern.