# So the governor of South Carolina is MISSING? **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [June 22, 2009, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655 "2009-06-22T22:30:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 12
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2009, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/221 "2009-06-26T20:54:04Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > The same reason I don’t think it’s my business if the guy fixing my car cheats on his wife or cheats with his buddies at poker. It has nothing to do with what I’m paying him for. Again, this is the disconnect that I find strange: That you would assert that a history of unethical behavior has “nothing to do with what you’re paying him for,” when assumably what you’re paying him for includes engaging in ethical behavior (i.e., not using unsafe parts, not overcharging you). But I respect your right to hold that position, of course, even though I find the position itself artificial and naive, and even though I now think your rebuilt transmission is more likely to fall out of your car than mine is. ---
**Author:** ![athelas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5e9695/32.png) [@athelas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/athelas)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2009, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/222 "2009-06-26T20:55:59Z")
Of course **Diogenes** is forthright enough to admit that he doesn’t think there’s anything wrong with (other people) cheating, and in fact militates _against_ having moral expectations for anyone else. This is indeed the logical conclusion of those who militate against hypocrisy more than immorality. However, there are plenty of people who would _oppose_ this amoral worldview, and it behooves them to be sure that their outrage at hypocrisy is directed against Sanford’s immoral behavior, not the fact that Republicans have sexual ethics at all. ---
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2009, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/223 "2009-06-26T21:01:36Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Incidentally, if conservatives think that marital fidelity is so vitally important an indicator of a person’s fitness for office, why did they decide to vote for an adulterer over a faithful husband in the last election? Oh, I don’t know. Maybe because it’s one element of many and neither candidate was perfect in every way? Or maybe – and this might be crazy talk – because on balance they thought the adulterer would be the better president even if he was an adulterer and a hypocrite. The point is, they’re not the ones asserting it doesn’t matter _at all_. > [@](#): > > It seems like maybe they don’t really believe it’s _that_ important. Not the only factor, correct, and no one has asserted it is or should be. But then, as I’ve said multiple times, it’s very easy to overstate the importance of private ethics in the public realm; the oddity is you making the most extreme argument on the other end, which is that they don’t matter _at all_. > [@](#): > > I never hear them giving Dems like Obama or Jimmy Carter any credit for NOT being cheaters. If marital fidelity is a credential for office, why isn’t it ever given any value for Democrats. In what context would they give someon credit for NOT doing something? Wouldn’t that be insulting anyway – “Hey Jimmy, congratulations on not cheating on your wife! Way to go!” And since it’s completely irrelevant to you either way, why would you care if dems were “given value” for fidelity or not? ---
**Author:** ![Frodo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/frodo/32/302_2.png) [@Frodo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frodo)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2009, 9:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/224 "2009-06-26T21:17:47Z")
We always knew you yanks coveted our natural resources 😃 [![](https://www.pagina12.com.ar/fotos/20090626/rudypaz/na01di01.gif) ](https://www.pagina12.com.ar/fotos/20090626/rudypaz/na01di01.gif) Translation: “Nestor is for the defense of our natural resources” “Mr South Carolina Governos, go find girls to other place!”. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2009, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/225 "2009-06-26T21:28:40Z")
> [@athelas](#): > > Of course **Diogenes** is forthright enough to admit that he doesn’t think there’s anything wrong with (other people) cheating, and in fact militates _against_ having moral expectations for anyone else. This is indeed the logical conclusion of those who militate against hypocrisy more than immorality. That’s not what I said at all. I’m not saying there isn’t anything wrong with cheating, I’m only saying that it isn’t any of my _business_. Personally, I’m very much a fan and a supporter of monogamy and fidelity. I haven’t so much as held hands with a woman other than my wife in 20 years. I do think marital infidelity is immoral. But not everything that’s immoral is my personal business. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2009, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/226 "2009-06-26T22:17:49Z")
> [@Jodi](#): > > Again, this is the disconnect that I find strange: That you would assert that a history of unethical behavior has “nothing to do with what you’re paying him for,” when assumably what you’re paying him for includes engaging in ethical behavior (i.e., not using unsafe parts, not overcharging you). But I respect your right to hold that position, of course, even though I find the position itself artificial and naive, and even though I now think your rebuilt transmission is more likely to fall out of your car than mine is. **Jodi** , you of all people, as an attorney, should recognize that just because someone is “unethical” in one way, that is not evidence that they should be considered likely to be unethical in unrelated ways. That’s why we don’t allow you to give evidence that Defendant was a cheating husband when trying to prove he’s also a thieving worker. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [June 26, 2009, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/227 "2009-06-26T22:21:42Z")
In other relevant news to the thread :mad:, Mrs. Sanford was interviewed by the AP. During the interview, she stated that her husband had said he needed time away to do some writing (recall that’s what she said to people who were asking about him on Monday), and she specifically told him not to go near the Argentine woman. She claims to have been surprised as a result to find out that’s where he went. Me, I’m guessing she wasn’t shocked at all, but I wouldn’t say “mad” was out of the realm of possibility. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2009, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/228 "2009-06-27T02:20:20Z")
From her reaction over the last few days, I’d say “coldly furious” would fit the bill. ---
**Author:** ![Peanut\_Gallery](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/838e76/32.png) [@Peanut\_Gallery](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peanut_Gallery)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2009, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/229 "2009-06-27T02:34:02Z")
I really wish the guy had not had an affair. Not because of the morality or immorality of affairs … but because I find his AWOL behavior to be a worse offense, and it seems he is going to get a pass on it cuz everyone is so hung up on the affair. Every time I hear his R buddies crying about him resigning, it’s all about his sex life. I guess it’s OK to be shitty and irresponsible at your job, so long as you’re right by Jeebus. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2009, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/230 "2009-06-27T03:39:01Z")
Well, actually, here in South Carolina, the focus of the upset, and the calls for resignation, is the abandonment of the government without telling anyone where you went. Many of the Republican members of the legislature are upset about it, and so are some of the statewide office holders. I think that, if/when he’s forced to face the music on this, it will be the dereliction of duty that sinks him. ---
**Author:** ![Peanut\_Gallery](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/838e76/32.png) [@Peanut\_Gallery](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Peanut_Gallery)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2009, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/231 "2009-06-27T04:41:37Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > Well, actually, here in South Carolina, the focus of the upset, and the calls for resignation, is the abandonment of the government without telling anyone where you went. Many of the Republican members of the legislature are upset about it, and so are some of the statewide office holders. I think that, if/when he’s forced to face the music on this, it will be the dereliction of duty that sinks him. Well that’s encouraging. I guess the media is just having more fun putting the most righteous busybodies on the air/headlines. ---
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2009, 1:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/232 "2009-06-27T13:15:10Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > **Jodi** , you of all people, as an attorney, should recognize that just because someone is “unethical” in one way, that is not evidence that they should be considered likely to be unethical in unrelated ways. That’s why we don’t allow you to give evidence that Defendant was a cheating husband when trying to prove he’s also a thieving worker. **DSYoungEsq** , you, of all people, as an attorney, should recognize that most people don’t conduct their lives as if every evaluation they make must be up to the standards of admissibility in a court of law. As it happens, and _as I’ve already said umpteenth times_, I fully acknoweldge that a lack of ethics in one area does not automatically translate to a lack of ethics in all areas. I am arguing against **Dio’s** assertion of the opposite: That a lack of ethics in one area has _absolutely no relevance_ to a potential lack of ethics in another. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2009, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/233 "2009-06-27T14:37:13Z")
> [@Jodi](#): > > **DSYoungEsq** , you, of all people, as an attorney, should recognize that most people don’t conduct their lives as if every evaluation they make must be up to the standards of admissibility in a court of law. > > As it happens, and _as I’ve already said umpteenth times_, I fully acknoweldge that a lack of ethics in one area does not automatically translate to a lack of ethics in all areas. I am arguing against **Dio’s** assertion of the opposite: That a lack of ethics in one area has _absolutely no relevance_ to a potential lack of ethics in another. Your statement shows that you don’t understand why it is we don’t allow this sort of proof in court. Dio is correct because the fact that a person violates one type of ethical rule simply has no bearing on what sort of moral compass they have elsewhere. There is no actual connection between the two, and there is no ability to say with **any** degree of certainty that there will be a correlation between the two. Since the fact that I’m a cheating bastard has no ability to be correlated with the possibility that I’m a thieving politician, you simply cannot link the two. At all. Which is WHY we don’t let that sort of proof in court. ---
**Author:** ![Estilicon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/848f3c/32.png) [@Estilicon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Estilicon)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2009, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/234 "2009-06-27T14:40:35Z")
Ok, this thread has derailed in a serious argument about the difference, if any, between public and private ethics… pffff Is there any picture of my fellow country woman? I suspect she is hot. ---
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2009, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/235 "2009-06-27T14:56:06Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > Your statement shows that you don’t understand why it is we don’t allow this sort of proof in court. Ha! Right. 🙂 You trying to school me on the rules of evidence – that’s funny. Your statement shows that you don’t understand that the high level of admissibility required in courts of law do not necessarily corrolate to the judgments and evaluations we make in our daily lives – nor necessarily should they. > [@](#): > > Dio is correct because the fact that a person violates one type of ethical rule simply has no bearing on what sort of moral compass they have elsewhere. **Dio** is _not_ correct that ethical violations in one realm have “absolutely no bearing on what sort of moral compass the have elsewhere,” and frankly the disconnect there is pretty obvious. Why on earth would that be so? Why do you and he imagine there is some sort of barrier that would prevent a person who is dishonest, disrespectful, and personally selfish in one area of his life from being dishonest, disrespectufl, and personally selfish in another area? He _might_ do so, but you can’t know with certainty, such that misbehavior in the personal realm should or must in every case be disregarded when considering whether the trust that person in the public realm. > [@](#): > > There is no actual connection between the two, and there is no ability to say with **any** degree of certainty that there will be a correlation between the two. Whether there is an “actual connection between the two” is dependent on the person and the situation; one person may act unethically in his personal life and nevertheless be completely ethical in his public life -but another person might not. Again, I am not syaing there is in _every case_ a correlation, but I am at this point saying that the bald assertion that there is \*never ever \* a corrolation is stupid and naive. I don’t even consider this a terribly controversial position; I think most people with any degree of common sense understand it. > [@](#): > > Which is WHY we don’t let that sort of proof in court. Incorrect. We don’t let that type of evidence in court because it isn’t admissible, not because it isn’t relevant. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2009, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/236 "2009-06-27T16:13:10Z")
It’s not admissable because it’s not probative. ---
**Author:** ![DSYoungEsq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c6cbf5/32.png) [@DSYoungEsq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSYoungEsq)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2009, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/237 "2009-06-27T19:04:56Z")
> [@Jodi](#): > > Incorrect. We don’t let that type of evidence in court because it isn’t admissible, not because it isn’t relevant. This statement made me laugh. :smack: WHY do you think it is “inadmissible?” Do you think we just up and decided one day, “hey, let’s make evidence of prior bad doings inadmissible”? There is a REASON why things that are inadmissible are inadmissible. In this case, it’s because the logic is faulty. As is yours. ETA: Or, what **Dio** said. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2009, 1:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/238 "2009-06-28T13:53:09Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > In other relevant news to the thread :mad:, Mrs. Sanford was interviewed by the AP. During the interview, she stated that her husband had said he needed time away to do some writing (recall that’s what she said to people who were asking about him on Monday), and she specifically told him not to go near the Argentine woman. > > She claims to have been surprised as a result to find out that’s where he went. Me, I’m guessing she wasn’t shocked at all, but I wouldn’t say “mad” was out of the realm of possibility. 😃 [The plot sickens](http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jcQOOTqzeNFNAmoUJG6g4fDAFemQD992SJCO0): > [@](#): > > When South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford disappeared, his wife hoped he was really hiking on the Appalachian Trail as his staff had claimed. Like the rest of America, she was stunned to find out he had dared to go to Argentina to see his mistress, a trip she told him not to take. > > “He was told in no uncertain terms not to see her,” Jenny Sanford said in a strong, steady voice as she sat in her oceanfront living room Friday. “I was hoping he was on the Appalachian Trail. But I was not worried about his safety. I was hoping he was doing some real soul searching somewhere and devastated to find out it was Argentina. It’s tragic.” > > In her first extended comments on the affair, **Sanford recalled how her husband repeatedly sought permission to visit his lover in the months after she discovered his infidelity**. (emphasis added) :eek: :eek: :eek: ---
**Author:** ![MovieMogul](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f08c70/32.png) [@MovieMogul](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MovieMogul)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2009, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/239 "2009-06-28T14:17:23Z")
> [@DSYoungEsq](#): > > This statement made me laugh. :smack: > > WHY do you think it is “inadmissible?” Do you think we just up and decided one day, “hey, let’s make evidence of prior bad doings inadmissible”? There is a REASON why things that are inadmissible are inadmissible. In this case, it’s because the logic is faulty. > > As is yours. What’s disturbing is that, from all appearances, Jodi does see it as somewhat arbitrary, and if s/he had things his/her way, it would be admissible after all. > [@Jodi](#): > > Why on earth would that be so? Why do you and he imagine there is some sort of barrier that would prevent a person who is dishonest, disrespectful, and personally selfish in one area of his life from being dishonest, disrespectufl, and personally selfish in another area? He might do so, but you can’t know with certainty, such that misbehavior in the personal realm should or must in every case be disregarded when considering whether the trust that person in the public realm. Nobody here is saying that he can’t or won’t do so, but the presumption here is clearly different: Dio & co. assume one type of unethical behavior doesn’t automatically translate to other unethical behavior unless proven otherwise, and you clearly assume it does–hardly surprising since the knee-jerk impulse to judge with the broadest brush possible is SOP for the demonstratively self-righteous. ---
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Girl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7bcc69/32.png) [@Mighty\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Girl)\ **Post date:** [June 28, 2009, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/240 "2009-06-28T22:05:03Z")
[QUOTE=Steve] :eek: :eek: :eek: [/QUOTE] “A pubic hair has more pull than plow and oxen” Old Dominican proverb [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655.md?page=11) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655.md?page=13)