Over reported, yet not fully understood, the Sanford affair deserves some additional vetting.
As with most prurient stories, the Mark Sanford affair has garnered massive press coverage, much vetting, strong reactions, and multiple opinions. Yet, there are aspects to the story which have not been discussed, reported, or commented on. Perhaps there are some new thoughts which might be considered.
To me, there are actually FOUR parts to this pathetic event: political, religious, legal and human. The first three have been over-discussed, over-reported, and chewed on ad nauseum (part of my complaint as you will see).
Starting with the easy parts, the political aspects of the event have been well defined by both liberals and conservatives. The conservatives "cluck" their disapproval, and quickly attempt to point out that such behavior is "non-partisan". And so it is., But the liberals (and here I must come out of the closet and disclose my liberal leanings) point out rightly that it is not the adultery which is the issue here, it is the hypocrisy. And that is undeniable. You want to preach "Family Values"? Then you better walk the walk, or the fall is greater.
The religious component is less well defined, less discussed, and less controversial. Mostly because it is such a personal thing, thus more murky in its definition. Indeed, affairs are quite well accepted in many places with deep religious traditions; and for many, religion plays little or no part at all in adultery or sex out of marriage.
The legal aspects of the case are really up to the voters of South Carolina and/or the legislature of that state and/or the Attorney General of the state. Whether Sanford remains, resigns, is forced out of office or is charged with some crime or misdemeanor will be up to those entities.
Which brings us to the human factor – and one rarely discussed. My take on this, quite simply, is that this part of the story is sad, pathetic and has been brutally handled by the press and the public. Sanford is obviously in a lot of pain. His statements are somewhat irrational...he has bared his soul when it was not necessary...he has handled his relations with the press, his wife, and all others with incompetence, and has opened himself up to both ridicule and lack of compassion. Having said that, the question then becomes should he be treated with lack of compassion? Does the fact that he has made himself so vulnerable mean we should exploit it?
The media in its relentless effort to give "legs" to such stories is both voracious and vicious when it comes to such stories. Why? Well first, it is voracious because it now has hundreds of hours of news show time to fill, and this is red meat for those shows. It is vicious because it harks back to the old headline: "Man bites dog". That’s what gets listeners, viewers and readers. And the more Sanford prolongs the story and gives his rambling dialogues, the more grist for the media mill. And the more the mill turns out, the deeper Sanford gets into hot water ...and the more hot water...well you get the idea.
Since this is being driven by the media, as noted above, the public is now engaged in perverse way. Sanford is clearly the object of ridicule and marked with a giant red "A" on his shirtfront. Adultery is commonly practiced in the United States, but I recognize that Sanford is not an anonymous person; he is a fairly high profile public figure which set him apart from ordinary folks who go astray. But to savage him the way, and magnitude, as has been done by the mainstream news media and the public, is simply not warranted. And incidentally, it is not only the mainstream media who have perverted this story, Rush Limbaugh had to get his bizarre rants into the mix with a proclamation that Sanford’s indiscretions were somehow the fault of the Obama administration!
My view of this distressed individual is an analogy to that wonderful Mexican tradition of a piñata. Here we have Sanford hanging from the ceiling whilst the press and public beat on him with bats until the goodies fall out. I am not a fan of Sanford; nor do I hew to his political beliefs. But as I stated earlier, one of the aspects of this event is a human one. Clearly, he is sincerely in love with his mistress. He is dealing with all the confusing issues that come with this dilemma in regard to his wife, his life, his kids and his job. The man is in deep pain, and needs space, time, and some sympathy to work out his complex and painful position. That will not happen in our modern media world, and it saddens me.
So what is to be done? Maybe get off this story, give it a rest – how about going back to the indiscretions of John Ensign, John Edwards, Newt Gingrich, Eliot Spitzer, Rudy Guiliani, John McCain, or David Vitters for awhile?