Sanford is a poor messenger. He is grandstanding to keep his cronies happy.
Well of course Sanford got a chilly reception from his fellow congressmen. He was just another flagrant reminder to the public that the beltway bunch operate on the credo, "do as I say, not as I do"...and when your transgressions are exposed, guilt-out your constituents with the tried and true, "let he who is without sin, cast the first stone."
Rep. Lazarus? Why play into the ego driven narrative of a troubled soul? Figuratively speaking, it would have been better for all concerned (including himself) had Sanford remained politically "dead."
If Sanford is already apologizing to his lady love for her "long-suffering" while he has been on the campaign trail, I suspect the fractures in their relationship are already forming. The only difference from now and the past is perhaps he knows enough to voice a glib apology.
Acknowledging someone who has the guts to step forward and challenge the status quo, someone who has put some plans in writing to get the discussion rolling is lots different then fully endorsing them as a candidate. People have a thirst for the truth and should all these sexual harrassment allegations disqualify this candidate, it's doubtful many including Sanford would stand behind him. We need to encourage a truthful vetting process that rids us of political charlatans without all the sensationalism and partisanship. Unfortunately, sensationalism is a great tool for those with an agenda. I believe Mrs. Sanford mentioned in her piece something about less "rhetoric," "false hope" and more "honest political discourse." That to me was the theme of her piece and her sentiments seem genuine rather than "disconnected from political reality." They are certainly shared by people from both sides of the aisle.
All Comments »
Powered by Foundation
© Copyright 2016,
Charleston City Paper