Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Are Sanford's Deeds Worse Because He's a Republican?

Posted by Steve Benen, Washington Monthly at 3:00 PM on June 27, 2009.


Shouldn't the GOP get hit harder when one of its ranks (yet again) fails to live up to the moral standard it espouses?

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Steve Benen in your
mailbox!

 

Patrick Ruffini, a Republican strategist and blogger, had an interesting item Thursday on the GOP and adultery, and the apparent double-standard when it comes to the major political parties and infidelity.

At the core of the Sanford and Ensign episodes is the cloud of "hypocrisy" that hangs over any Republican who strays from the bonds of their marriage. (Quickly forgetting that all who commit adultery are hypocrites, having taken a solemn vow of marriage.) Because Democrats are perceived as more socially libertine, they get off easier.

This is a structural disadvantage that, on the margins, hurts Republican officeholders, forcing them into resignation or disgrace more easily than their equally adulterous Democratic counterparts.

Simply put, it is a strategic error to sanctify the idea that it's worse when Republicans cheat.

 Ruffini's argument, at face value, is not unreasonable. Adultery is, he argues, a "human failing that strikes Democrats and Republicans equally." With that in mind, the GOP should resist the temptation to "purge their ranks based exclusively on a test of personal moral conduct."

I tend to see this differently. For one thing, I'm not at all sure that Republicans are forced into "resignation or disgrace" more easily than unfaithful Dems. In fact, I get the sense that's backwards -- the only recently caught adulterer to resign from office was Eliot Spitzer. Sanford, Ensign, Vitter, Craig, et al were all caught while in office, and each one ignored calls to step down.

But more to the point, shouldn't there be a double standard? I can appreciate why Ruffini would lament a "structural disadvantage" on this, but hasn't the Republican Party invited this disadvantage?

For a few decades, Republican candidates at every level have emphasized the GOP's moral superiority on "family values." If you want to protect the "sanctity" of marriage, the argument went, it's incumbent on you to vote Republican. There's a culture war underway, Americans have been told, and Democrats just aren't as reliable on these issues as the GOP.

All the while, the list of prominent Republican officeholders who cheat on their spouses keeps getting longer.

Ruffini thinks it's a mistake to "sanctify the idea that it's worse when Republicans cheat." The problem is, itis worse. If the party doesn't want to be held to a higher moral standard, the party probably ought to stop lecturing everyone else about higher moral standards.

If you help run Mothers Against Drunk Driving and you're get caught drunk driving, it's going to be a bigger deal than the typical DUI. If you're the local fire chief and you're caught setting a fire, it's going to be a bigger deal than the typical arson.

And if you're part of a party that hails itself as the political arbiter of virtue and morality, it's going to be a bigger deal when some of your party's leading figures get caught in sex scandals.

 

Digg!

Steve Benen is "blogger in chief" of the popular Washington Monthly online blog, Political Animal. His background includes publishing The Carpetbagger Report, and writing for a variety of publications, including Talking Points Memo, The American Prospect, the Huffington Post, and The Guardian. He has also appeared on NPR's "Talk of the Nation," MSNBC's "Rachel Maddow Show," Air America Radio's "Sam Seder Show," and XM Radio's "POTUS '08."


After 5 Weeks, 3 GOP Filibusters and 200,000 Americans Running Out of Bennies, Obama to Sign Unemployment Extension
This is how things work in DC these days.
November 6, 2009.
Olympia Snowe's Strange Definition of 'Mainstream'
Sen. Snowe's opinions on health care policy have taken on quite a bit of significance in recent months. That's a shame.
November 5, 2009.
Conservatives Still Think You're Over-Insured
The problem, according to conservatives, is that you have insurance. And good policy will take it away from you.
November 5, 2009.
Absurd: Joe "You Lie!" Wilson Claims Obama is "Solely Responsible" For Swine Flu
This is despite Wilson's voting down of an appropriations bill that contained special funding to battle H1N1.
November 3, 2009.
Republicans Have Drafted a Health Bill, and It Sucks
The bill is so outlandishly aristocratic, it might just be a gift for Dems.
November 3, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Gov. Sanford complained about Bill Clinton Cheating!
Posted by: Liberalandproudofit on Jun 27, 2009 3:47 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps had Gov. Sanford not LEAD the fight to impeach Bill Clinton for cheating, he might have gotten off easier. But to go public and say this person should be held to a higher moral standard and then get caught doing the same thing!

Yes, there are people with poor moral standards in both parties (they are politicians after all, which means they lie all the time!).

In the case of Sen. Craig, he was even homophobic and got caught in the men's room!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Sen. Craig IS Gay Posted by: kettleblack
Are Sanford's Deeds Worse Because He's a Republican?
Posted by: SalB on Jun 27, 2009 4:00 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Emphatically, no. Cheating on a spouse is a personal matter. Doing so while also leaving your publicly important job is irresponsible. If I left my job as a corporate lackey in the same way Gov. Sanford left his, I should be help accountable too.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sanford's failure to resign after voting to impeach Clinton means he is no friend of Jesus
Posted by: pelican beak on Jun 27, 2009 4:22 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The worst is when Xtians fail to live up to the standards they hold others to. Sanford was a leading voice against Clinton following the blue dress episode, who voted for impeachment when he was a member of the House. Now that he's done the same thing, he must take his own advice and resign, if he is a serious follower of Jesus.

Jesus' most important commandment to follow was NOT to judgmentally point your finger at others' failings. It was to love your neighbor as yourself - to treat others how you'd like to be treated. Expecting others to follow one set of rules, and a different more lenient set for yourself, is clear rejection of the Lord Jesus Christ's fundamental instruction how to live IF you want to be a follower of His. Sanford's failure to treat others how he'd like to be treated and immediately resign is a clear kindergarten-level obvious rejection of his commitment to Jesus. For him to have not resigned by now is evidence his guiding star is not his claimed Lord and Savior, but his reading of the political winds. I expect the church he attends is chock-full of fellow fair-weather followers of Jesus, who've learned you get cut many privileges if you simply pretend to be a follower of Jesus. American churches make their living by keeping their parishioners spiritually infantilized this way.

If Sanford expected Clinton to resign, then as a follower of Jesus, he needed to have already done the same before now. Anything else is an insult and affront to the Christ he superficially claims as his friend. Clearly, Sanford has no problem fabricating cheap excuses to justify making his own earthly life cushier and more licentious, at the expense of his afterworld journey. Like so many other neo-pharisees in this faux-spiritual world of American Xtianity, he is too deceived by Satan to realize he has actually sold his soul to Mammon.

When a person claims to be a Xtian, they are claiming to hold a certain set of values as their own. They often expect, when they announce it, to be accorded a certain moral respect - more than they'd expect a non-Xtian to receive. But the non-religious have not made any such claim. So when an avowed Xtian breaks his solemn oath to his wife, he has committed a far worse offense (besides flaming hypocrisy) than a non-Xtian has.

In my experience, when a person wears their claim of Xtian faith on their sleeve (as this pitiful sham of a human has), they are basically admitting they're spiritually sleepwalking through life, and have merely glommed onto Xtianity as an easy way to fake their way through life. When somebody makes a point of telling me they're a Xtian, I presume they're a scumbag until they show me otherwise. I've had greater success guessing people's true motives this way, than I had the other way around.

Forgive him - yes, it's the Xtian thing to do.
But ignore the deep and central insult to Christ that Mark Sanford's ongoing behavior vividly illustrates?
No, we shouldn't do that. And neither will the Lord when he's at those Pearly Gates.

Castigating Clinton, and then behaving like this?
The rest of Mark Sanford's political career will be nothing but confirmation of how little a friend he really is to Jesus.
At least he enjoys the company of many fellow Jesus-mockers in his spiritually-corrupt Repug party.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Here's a link my brother sent me Posted by: pelican beak
It's about Role Models
Posted by: kettleblack on Jun 27, 2009 7:08 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How can the average person know how to behave without the proper role models?
They hold the feet of our so-called sports heroes to the fire, holding them to a higher standard as role models.
Can we not ask the same for the Leaders of the Free World?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's about Role Models Posted by: rob-bot
» RE: It's about Role Models Posted by: kettleblack
» RE: We need Role Models because Posted by: kettleblack
no, they are not worse because he is a republican...
Posted by: undrgrndgirl on Jun 27, 2009 7:58 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
they are worse because of his superiority complex...he claimed "christian family values"...asked for clinton and others to resign, all the while doing the same thing...that's what makes them "worse"...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

vicki
Posted by: victhpooh on Jun 28, 2009 8:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
well thank goodness the Repubs are 'saving' marriage from the gays who will 'ruin it for the rest of us'.
At least we now know that hypocrites are to be honored because 'at least they have values'. Thanks Rush L for setting us straight once again~

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It isn't the fact that he's a Republic...
Posted by: Quannah on Jun 28, 2009 10:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it's the hypocrisy!

It's also the fact that the residents of South Carolina also subsidized his philandering. Sure, he says he will pay it back, but the fact remains HE TOOK PUBLIC MONEY TO FUND HIS TRIP, and he would have been silent about it had he not been found out! He offers to pay it back ONLY because he's been busted! It was still an illegal act.

The fact that he disappeared and wasn't available to his staff is indefensible.

The only thing that is clear to me is the fact that men in both parties do this. But Democrats at least have the good sense to resign because of their dalliances! Republics have no shame, and continue on like nothing happened, and continue to embarrass themselves and their constituents. It's pathetic, really. They believe there are no consequences when it's THEM that do this.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What should we tell our CHILDREN about SC's choice for governor?
Posted by: pelican beak on Jun 28, 2009 12:57 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm just aping the inanities the repug party lives by.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Progressives do best when celebrating flawed humans.
Posted by: ABetterFuture on Jun 28, 2009 9:13 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Otherwise, we'd all behave in a moral fashion, eh?

If another's hypocrisy is the best you can aspire to celebrate, I'm sad for you.

No doubt, damn the republicans and democrats for perpetual wars and perpetual debtor status, but this guy is going to die in another 20 years, long before the wages of war and debt written today are paid.

Have you no priorities? Or is this simply a matter of payback for select members of your Tribe Of Ridiculousnes (read: Democrat).

Enjoy your shitheap. I'm sure it's delicious, given a certain mindset.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Big problems when the objective is profit from flim-flam
Posted by: luzmejor on Jun 29, 2009 4:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How can we criticize political figures when our own skirts are so muddy? Touch any critic of politicians' fall from grace and you will find his sins are at least as monstrous as the person he pillories.

In fact, everyone who boasts that s/he is without sin is telling lies and smearing his own religion with hypocrisy.

It is an American obsession to choose for loud public outrage some particular fall from grace that has never been tempting for themselves. Christians know that the proper reaction would be to confront the sinners, help them to admit their wrongdoing and then to actually stop sinning against themselves and their communities.

I am awaiting the day that we confront moneyed interests for their crimes, which are much more dire for the human race. What I am talking about is greed, war and murder.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sanford and C street
Posted by: lalala on Jun 29, 2009 4:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sanford and that Ensign guy were part of the Christian Fellowship when they were together in Washington back in the day... along with their good buddy Billy Graham and $10,000 a year from the Taiwanese government.

He is despicable. He kept begging his wife to let him see the other woman. He wanted her to be cool with it. Hes a jerk and used his family for his campaign. And where was he on fathers day? This reporter has connections to the Argentinian VP... maybe hes planning to relocate?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"Because Democrats are perceived as more socially libertine.."
Posted by: xvictor on Jun 29, 2009 5:48 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe, however, the Liberal Dems, for all their perceived small faults, never once laid claim to moral superiority or held a monopoly on "family values" like the hypocrite Repugs had advertised themselves ad nauseum for decades.

Of course unfaithful and hypocritical Repugs makes news when scandal breaks out because it's SOOOOOOO funny!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Mirror image
Posted by: Aquinas on Jun 29, 2009 6:24 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The general reluctance of the Dems to make more of the peccadillos of their hapless opponents is not to be chalked up to timidity; it derives from the well practiced habit of not jumping on others for what you might be found guilty of, at a later date. That's all it is! It's called protecting your ass. It's the same reluctance that is shown by all sitting presidents when they consciously shy away from prosecuting their predecessors for small things, like war crimes, lies, false flags, fraud, malfeasance in office etc., etc.. They see themselves, all too easily, in the misfortunes of their cohorts; They have but to look in the mirror.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yes, resign please--
Posted by: bobtr900 on Jun 29, 2009 8:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yes, Sanford should resign among other things. Why? Because he wanted Bill Clinton to resign. And because that would be the decent, reasonable, responsable and Christian thing to do. And because he belongs to the Moral Majority, the party of God, so say his friends the GOP, Pat Robertson and the Pope. Also wouldn't Sarah Palin, the Bush family and Newt Gingrich want him to resign for his very public scandal, and on top of that his very public hypocrisy.

Resign Sanford, and take with you your brethren, including Vitter, Craig, Foley, Giuliani, Gingrich, McCain, et.al, etc, ad infinitum, ad nauseam. In fact all GOP hypocrites who have soiled themselves in public should and must resign.

In fact all Repubs should resign for the killing of Iraqis and our troops for oil company profits. I know the Religious Right of the Repub party -- the Theocons, the Pope and Pat Robertson, etc -- endorse those actions because they hate all Muslims AND all Americans who do not support Repub party economic policies but those endorsements are from hell, or close by, like the Bush family estates in Texas.

And the beat just keeps on, going on from the party of God. I often wonder if they told God about using His name to heap glory on their death agenda for corporate profits. AND I wonder what He is going to do when He finds out!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hypocrisy,
Posted by: Archie1954 on Jun 29, 2009 8:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
thy name is Republican!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pot calling the kettle BLACK
Posted by: MTguy on Jun 29, 2009 9:42 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Amen, brother! Hypocrisy doesn't play well in today's public relations and political marketplaces and it never has.

When members of the GOP put out the message that their party is the 'good' one while the other is something less when it comes to morality, it makes me want to puke.

Dems and Republicans are human beings and they all have failings. Why can't they start with that and just shut up and let their actions tell us who holds the moral high ground?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Republican, reshmuglican
Posted by: willymack on Jun 29, 2009 10:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sanford's a jerk because he made a promise and broke it.
Unless he had his fingers crossed when he made his wedding vows. If he did that, he's cool.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Evangelical Christianity makes all of Us Hypocrites
Posted by: US Citizen on Jun 29, 2009 10:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With the rise of George W. Bush and the ascension of Evangelical Christian religion and its Taliban-like doctrine, we all become hypocrites.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

CONFUSED
Posted by: on Jun 29, 2009 3:30 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Okay, I admit it –– I'm confused.
Right at the jump (no pun intended),
I always have one question as these
morons & their affairs surface like
an oily, wounded submarine:
Why would anyone WANT or AGREE to
have an affair with a Republican?
Seems so kinda', um, er, desperate. And
dumb as yon rock.
Just askin' ...
m. swof.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We need one "yardstick" for all candidates for public office, but
Posted by: Fempatriot on Jun 29, 2009 3:32 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not as concerned with the S. C. governor's lack of marriage morals as I am his lack of professionalism and dedication to the high office of governor of a state. If this man isn't serious about showing up for work, then he should remove his sorry carcass from the office and let someone else have the perks and the good salary that a governor receives from the taxpayers. I hope that the good people of South Carolina will be angry enough to pressure their state senators and representatives to impeach the man. Actually, they shouldn't have to pressure anyone--the senators and representatives should already have impeachment in the works.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

observer
Posted by: sopomike on Jun 29, 2009 3:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
its like cops caught with drugs .they should be imetetly shot though the head .then there rotting carcuses drug through the streets.ther children sold as slaves,and wives into prostitution

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Just because all us lefties are sluts doesn't mean...
Posted by: chariotdrvr14 on Jun 29, 2009 5:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
we have to hold a double standard of behaviour for the 'guardians of morality'.

We should just sit back and have a good laugh.

P.S.... I really love the 'gone for a hike' cover story.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

RE: bestguccishoes
Posted by: pelican beak on Jun 29, 2009 10:08 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Re: "Our online store now is using McAfee security technology to protect our customers from identity theft, credit card fraud, spam and malicious software."

I don't trust Tiffany or Gucci or any of those companies, as far as I can throw them. They must be pretty shady to have put this post here. More blatant corporate lies to take advantage of the little guy. Their shoddy products fall apart long before they should. What a bunch of shitcrap somebody is trying to sell here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]