Why Mark Sanford Has to Resign
Marital mistrust is a reason for some for an elected official to relinquish his post. With the case of Governor Sanford, it goes even further.
The uproar over South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford’s infidelity admission has sent shock waves across the political atmosphere for many reasons. As a former congressman that voted for the impeachment of President Bill Clinton in the 1990s, the irony of a stark conservative that worked against accepting federal stimulus money this year hits home for Americans, stinging Republicans that continue to see their brand name tarnished by personal failures and public relation blunders.
For many, the personal gaff on the part of Sanford is enough for Sanford to be forced to resign in much the same way that former New York Eliot Spitzer did last year. Betrayal of marital trust is a key indicator for some voters that an elected official cannot be trusted with the public’s confidence (and coffers.) However, for others, there is the Clinton comparison to take stock in, noting that a man’s personal failure to his family is not enough to assume automatically that he will fail the people he was elected to serve.
Ironic, again, that some Republicans may be using that argument to support Sanford’s stay in office to this point in light of recent calls for his resignation.
The SHILA (Sanford Hot International Love Affair) hits the fan when it comes to how everything came down, though. There are two key parts with ongoing revelations about this matter that people seem to overlook. These are the reasons, if nothing else, that should make us question Sanford staying in office.
Primarily, for the SHILA to go down, Sanford had to leave the country. He did this unannounced to the people of South Carolina, the people on his staff, and the people closest to him – his family. He disappeared for days, leaving the state of South Carolina wondering about his whereabouts and the chain of command in the state. Abdicating one’s post in such a fashion in the days of kingdoms was enough to not only lose one’s crown, but perhaps one’s life if he ever returned. Losing his “life” may come down to an executive decision made by Jenny Sanford, but regarding losing his “crown”, he must be removed.
Leaders in the best of times can be seen but not heard much. Leaders in the worst of times must be seen and believed. Leaders working in the shadows must be removed from leadership.
Further, Sanford’s statements since returning to the South Carolina has tipped off his focus, showing the people that he serves that his attention is misguided at best. Even as Sanford has worked under the belief that his SHILA “don’t stink”, the very egotism that led to this situation creeps out more. Stating to confidants that his only “chance at redemption” is to stay in office shows a focus on his best interests, not the best interests of the state of South Carolina or the Republican Party.
As well, his continued public admissions only serve to promote more embarrassment and pain for the family. A fair question must be asked: if he already exhibited very poor judgment by leaving the count
