The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford
Simply, the tide is rising against him.
His Argentine mistress was his “soul mate,” he claims, but he wants to reconcile with his wife? Okay, but what does his wife think of that? “This was a whole lot more than a simple affair, this was a love story. A forbidden one, a tragic one, but a love story at the end of the day.” Sure, I get that. And, in a way, I feel for him — and I feel sorry for him. It must be difficult to have all this out in the open.
He admits that there were others during his 20 years of marriage: “There were a handful of instances wherein I crossed the lines I shouldn’t have crossed as a married man, but never crossed the ultimate line.” This reminds me of the Seinfeld episode in which Jerry, George, and Elaine talk about when sex happens. Jerry says it’s when the nipple makes its first appearance. That’s obviously meant to be humorous, but it does seem that Sanford is pulling out a variation of the Newt defence. If “the ultimate line” is — what? — vaginal intercourse, is everything else pretty much fair game?
Well, that’s his business, I suppose — his private life should remain private, and he should only be judged by what he did in his capacity as an elected official (like being a moralistic hypocrite), but it does seem that his resignation is imminent. With South Carolina Republicans turning against him, his position may be untenable.
“For the past two days, I have been speaking with Republican leaders across South Carolina,” said state GOP chair Karen Floyd. “There is clearly a growing view that the time may have come for Governor Sanford to remove himself and his family from the limelight, so that he can devote his efforts full-time to repairing the damage in his personal life.”
That sounds like the right thing to do. There is much damage to be repaired, if it is repairable at all. Sanford has no political future left, but perhaps, just perhaps, he can find happiness again in his personal life.
**********
My feeling somewhat sorry for him aside, Sanford is hardly the Shakespearean tragic figure he is making himself out to be. If anything, he is proving himself to be a shameless narcissist caught up in the delusions of romantic love. As Michelle Cottle put it so well at The Plank yesterday:
It’s not simply that he couldn’t choose between Jenny and Maria. We’re talking about a guy who repeatedly asked his wife’s permission to run off for a quick visit with her competition. Sanford not only wanted to have his cake and eat it too–he wanted his legally wed cake to tell him that it’s ok to keep dipping his fork into his extramarital cake–excuse me, extramarital Soul Cake. In theory, of course, he was struggling to gently disentangle everyone from the ridiculous web he had woven. But he didn’t disentangle. He just kept tangling and tangling and tangling. Until he tangled so completely that the entire world found out about his situation–which, in turn, only prompted him to spin more stories on national TV about himself as the tragic slave to love. And then a few days later–even more stories, with more talk about his commitment to his family even as his poor heart is shattered. Oh, boo hoo hoo.
*****
Now, of course, Sanford wants to be cheered, or at least pitied, for buckling down and committing to “falling back in love with” his wife — despite having announced to the entire globe that Maria is his true love. What nobility. What self-sacrifice. What moral fortitude. What utter nonsense. What now happens within the Sanford family should be an entirely private matter (as, indeed, this entire Love Story should have remained, if only the governor could have handled it less absurdly — and without taxpayer funding.) But however it ends, let’s not kid ourselves: Mark Sanford isn’t remotely special. He isn’t even particularly tragic, at least not in the romantic sense. The man isn’t a fool for love so much as he’s just a fool. And his political future now largely depends on how gladly the voters of South Carolina will suffer having a fool as their leader.
Pity this fool as you see fit.
(Cross-posted from The Reaction.)
opinions powered by SendLove.to
12 Responses to “The Tragedy and Narcissism of Mark Sanford”
Since Mark Sanford is so well covered, I thought it might be interesting to give a bit of information on some scandals not so carefully reported.
This is courtesy of Newsbusters.com
? Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY): The Chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, Rangel coughed up $75,000 in unpaid back taxes on rental income last year. The House ethics committee is investigating whether Rangel fulfilled all of his disclosure requirements related to that property, among other issues. In June, the panel launched another investigation of whether a Caribbean trip Rangel and four other Democrats took amounted to an improper gift.
None of these issues were mentioned on ABC, CBS or NBC this year, although Rangel was featured as a talking head in a number of morning and evening news stories. On March 19, the CBS Evening News included a Rangel soundbite in a story on congressional outrage over the AIG bonuses: “Stop the thievery at taxpayers’ expense!” The next night, CBS had another clip of Rangel railing, “Stop the thievery!,” but no mention of the chairman’s ethics problems.
? Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), Rep. Pete Visclosky (D-IN) and Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA): Three top Democrats are linked to the scandal surrounding the PMA Group, a lobbying group that closed its doors earlier this year after being raided by the FBI in February. The New York Times reported then that top lobbyist Paul Magliocchetti was suspected of funneling “bogus” campaign contributions to Murtha, Visclosky and Moran, in exchange for directing more than $100 million to PMA clients. Rep. Visclosky had admitted being subpoenaed in May by a federal grand jury, and temporarily stepped down as Chairman of the House Appropriations subcommittee on energy and water development.
None of the broadcast networks have mentioned Visclosky and Moran’s potential role in the scandal. ABC and NBC have been similarly quiet about Murtha, whom the networks elevated to folk-hero status for his condemnations of the Iraq war in 2005. CBS’s Sharyl Attkisson, however, has produced three investigative pieces digging into Murtha’s ethics, the most recent airing on the June 2 Evening News.
? Ex-Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA): Jefferson lost a run-off election late last year after investigators found $90,000 in cash stuffed in the congressman’s freezer. In January, NBC made brief references to the charges against Jefferson in a profile of his successor, Republican Joseph Cao. Jefferson’s bribery trial — prosecutors say he received $400,000 in bribes to help orchestrate business deals in Africa — began on June 9, but the networks have yet to mention the case.
Mark Sanford’s trouble is of his own making, of course. But the liberal networks seem a lot more excited about airing his dirty laundry than exposing the problems of top Democrats.
All of those have been covered by the “liberal networks” (owned by Microsoft, GE, Disney, NewsCorp and Time-Warner, those liberal stalwarts.) Those scandals are old news. This is current news. Shall we revisit the old news about GOP scandals too? Why? jwest, seems like a diversionary tactic to me, yet another “they're just as bad” comment, laced with an inaccurate suggestion that the biased media didn't cover them. They did.
As Artemus Gordon might have said, “Well, that's not really fair, Jim.” You can't expect Stickings to have come up with the Rangel, Murtha and Jefferson stuff since those items are not on Memeorandum today and that's where Stickings derives his independent insightful analyses from. However, here is what actually is on Memeorandum, but yes, Stickings would never go near this stuff because it does not fit his agenda of Republican = Bad. WaPo influence peddling 9.5% unemployment Misrepresentation of HELP cost/benefit Helen Thomas on Nixon had more intergrity than Obama Barney Frank on let's spend more TARP money before the taxpayers realize Saddam Hussein interview on trumpeting holding WMD Quinnipiac poll on chink's appearing in the Obama numbers. And GreenDreams dares to criticize lean-rights for “circling the wagons”. At least lean-rights dialogue the issues……..lefties just pretend they don't exist.
er, I thought this post was about Sanford… Why don't you two just go ahead and rant about “lefties” for awhile.
guess the King David metaphor is not holding. . . starting to sound a bit like Stanley Kubrick's Eyes Wide Shut. . . with the main difference Tom Cruise managed to not get snuffed but Sanford will likely be sacked politically. . . wonder who the producer of the story really is? Sanford or the media?
You can't expect Stickings to have come up with the Rangel, Murtha and Jefferson stuff since those items are not on Memeorandum today and that's where Stickings derives his independent insightful analyses from.
Did these three run off to a foreign country while Congress was in session? Did they dump their wives for a new 'soulmate”?
Is Tony Perkins on their Christmas card list?
Newsbusters LMAO ROFL
Ooh, ooh, ooh! I had a GREAT idea!
What if Sanford would fall in love with Sarah Palin, and run off with her? At least that will cut down the amount of non-stop blogging about them separately by 50%!
All politicians who have violated the trust of their constituents should go. Some deserve imprisonment. Fox news is reporting in depth on the Sanford scandal. This is not a partisan issue. Sanford moralized on Clinton and Bob Livingston, demanding Livingston's resignation on moral grounds. “He broke God's law” according to Sanford. Now it is time for the Governor to practice what he preaches – get out and leave the Republican Party lone! How can a party dedicated to respect for the family tolerate this man? Not only has Sanford exposed himself as a fool, he is making his own party look like a party to his own sex party. What a narcissist. And what a shame the Republican Party doesn't take quick action. A few words to Livingston from someone highly placed should be enough to remove him. If not, then a public statement of NO CONFIDENCE will show the Party to have some principles.
Geoff,
No one is defending Sanford here.
What we are trying to point out is the ridiculous nature of “The Moderate Voice” posting article after article on this subject while completely ignoring more egregious violations of the public trust from the left.
The hypocrisy is breathtaking.
jwest,
The purpose of this article about Sanford is NOT to excuse the misdeeds of those politicians you label as the “left,” but to point out the fact that the Republican Party says one thing but does something entirely different which makes it look like it provides cover for their politicians when they really shouldn't if their principles mean anything to them. The Democratic Party doesn't bill itself as the keepers of America's morals, Christianity, or family values. The Republican Party does but does not hold its' politicians to these standards. If the party's principles are good enough to be used as standards for all Americans, why aren't they good enough for its' own members? This is do as I say, not as I do behavior, and it stinks like raw sewage, and damages the republican brand. If the Republican Party wants to enforce its' policies by enacting laws regarding morals, family values, Christianity, etc., it must first address these issues within its' own party. To do otherwise turns these talking points into just more hot air.
Leaving aside altogether the clamoring of commenters who want different content here (have they run out of free blog sites or something?) — this made me laugh right out loud:
What if Sanford were to fall in love with Sarah Palin and run off with her? That will cut down the amount of non-stop blogging about them separately by 50%!
Indulge your imaginations for the briefest moment, and imagine the reactions. Funny, AR! Thanks for the giggle.
Mark Sanford is a Narcisistic fool..I am sure his wife is nausated just looking at him and had to move out..Have you seen more recent photos of his girlfriend /soulmate Maria. She truley looks like a female Mark Sanford. He is so self centered and egotistical he is ga ga over a female version of himself. YUCK!