# 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:** 9
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/161 "2009-06-25T17:08:02Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > Why did Eliot Spitzer resign? > > Why did Jim McGreevey resign? > > Why is John Edwards’ political career over? Spitzer was caught in the hypocrisy. He was prosecuting prostitutes and pimps while he was having sex with them at the same time. Some of us see the hypocrisy. I liked Spitzer and feel badly that he did that. Craig and Vitter are still in office though. They should wear a scarlet letter across their foreheads when they address congress or the senate. It should say “don’t believe me I have shown I will lie to the public and my family and pretend it does not matter”. It is way past time for people to expect good moral actions from their politicians. The list of liars and pervs is so long. ---
**Author:** ![Justin\_Bailey](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/justin_bailey/32/8792_2.png) [@Justin\_Bailey](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Justin_Bailey)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/162 "2009-06-25T17:11:13Z")
[QUOTE=Justin\_Bailey] Patterson loses sight of New York to Spitzer. [/QUOTE] > [@jayjay](#): > > Inadvertent or bad joke? _Very_ bad joke. Sorry. My punning skills ain’t what they used to be. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/163 "2009-06-25T17:22:03Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > Uh huh. But some Democrats condemn greed while maintaining pretty comfortable lifestyles, Can you give some instances of specific contradictions? I’m against ‘greed’, but I’d like to see a world where _everyone_ was able to maintain a pretty comfortable lifestyle. Where’s the problem? > [@](#): > > some preach environmentalism while owning a fleet of cars, boats and planes, Since what most people concerned about climate change are advocating that the carbon generation of such things be _priced_ appropriately, not that people simply shouldn’t _have_ these things, again, I don’t see the problem. Unless you’ve got a specific instance of a specific pol advocating specific individual limits that he’s not willing to live within. > [@](#): > > some condemn other peoples guns while either keeping up their own home arsenal Gotta admit, that would be hypocritical. So who are we talking about here? > [@](#): > > or hiring bodyguards to protect their precious hides. I guess I don’t see the contradiction there. Given the easy availability of guns and plentitude of crazies in the U.S., I’d want bodyguards if I became famous, but kept living here. I wouldn’t feel the same way if I lived north of the border, or in England or Australia or the Netherlands or somewhere like that. IOW, my fame + others’ guns ==\> my need for bodyguards. Take away ‘others’ guns’ and I can get rid of my bodyguards. > [@](#): > > Some go after the tobacco companies tooth and nail while puffing away at the cancer sticks themselves - our own President falls into this category. I don’t get the hypocrisy. Is Obama doing something he’s trying to penalize the tobacco companies for doing? Be specific. > [@](#): > > So Democrats give themselves a pass on sex. Big deal. It doesn’t mean that hypocrisy can’t be easily found within that party. If it’s so easy to find, please find some. Oh, you thought you had. Never mind. > [@](#): > > And since hypocrisy is a far lesser sin anyway than legitimizing vice, I don’t see what the big deal is. Who’s legitimizing vice? But if the GOP moralistas can’t live by the moral rules they’d like to enforce, then maybe they’re unrealistic and shouldn’t be enshrined in law. If they’re disturbed that allowing in Teh Gay would undermine the sanctity of marriage, but can’t maintain the sanctity of their very own marriages, then maybe they should STFU. ---
**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 25, 2009, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/164 "2009-06-25T17:27:48Z")
From [CNN.com](http://CNN.com): \*The problem with Sanford, [Democratic commentator Paul] Begala said, is that he’s been “incredibly judgmental about other people’s sex lives.” As examples, Begala cites Sanford’s opposition to same-sex marriages and civil unions, and his vote in the House of Representatives to impeach Clinton. At the time, Sanford said, “The issue of lying is probably the biggest harm, if you will, to the system of democratic government … because it undermines trust. And if you undermine trust in our system, you undermine everything.” \* ---
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 5:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/165 "2009-06-25T17:35:55Z")
> [@Cat\_Fight](#): > > A politician doesn’t even have to condemn cheating to be a hypocrite upon being caught cheating. He or she need only try to convince voters that allowing gay people to marry will somehow cheapen the moral wonderland of heterosexual marriage and that telling teens not to have sex before their wedding night has zero foreseeable negative consequences. Of course he does. (Or she does.) That’s what “hypocrite” means. I’m all in favor of equal marital rights and I think abstinence-only education is demonstrably worthless, but they are still different issues from marital fidelity. Hypocrisy regarding anyone of them doesn’t automatically translate to hypocrisy for all of them. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 5:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/166 "2009-06-25T17:37:59Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > I hear Obama forgot to tell people that if their doctor died, they wouldn’t be able to keep the same doctor. One can only call that omission a damned lie! If Hillary had said it, it would have been. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/167 "2009-06-25T17:45:40Z")
> [@Jodi](#): > > Of course he does. (Or she does.) That’s what “hypocrite” means. I’m all in favor of equal marital rights and I think abstinence-only education is demonstrably worthless, but they are still different issues from marital fidelity. Hypocrisy regarding anyone of them doesn’t automatically translate to hypocrisy for all of them. You’re right that it doesn’t _automatically_ translate. It needs something extra to enable the translation, like the use of the “we need to defend the sanctity of marriage” trope to justify opposition to gay marriage, or support for abstinence-only education. ---
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/168 "2009-06-25T17:47:54Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > What do you think the word “hypocrisy” means? What are you alleging IS hypocritical about engaging in behaviour you haven’t condemned? Nothing. You’re making my point. These (hypothetical) philandering democrats, unlike their republican counterparts, have never condemned the behavior so they can’t be accused of hypocrisy regarding it. Like I said: Gold star. The focus seems to be on self-congratulation on the lack of hypocrisy as opposed to recognizing that this also points up that _they never condemned the behavior in the first place_. They republicans can only (rightly) be accused of hypocrisy because they have taken a public position that infidelity is immoral and bad. If the democrats can evade similar accusations of hypocrisy, it’s only because they haven’t taken a public position that infidelity is immoral and bad. Why is that an admirable thing? It obviously isn’t, necessarily. This isn’t a “republicans good! / democrats bad!” argument; I’m not defending lying sack-of-shit cheaters of any political stripe. My point is only that I find it odd that people pointing up the acknowledged hypocrisy of the republicans, do not seem to be considering, why, exactly, similarly situated democrats can escape the same charge. **gtgain** probably made the point more clearly, and certainly more succinctly, with his hyperbolic example: “When I run for office I will be ambiguous about my feelings on murder for hire, that was if I ever get caught paying someone to kill my wife, then I can take the moral high road.” ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/169 "2009-06-25T17:53:53Z")
> [@Kolga](#): > > Am I not communicating in English? Republicans (not Democrats) have campaigned for years as the only party interested in upholding traditional family Christian values, including (among other things) straight monogamous relationships, as any other kind would destroy the fabric of our country. So, when Republican political leaders engage in the very behavior that they condemn in others (and in some cases, the very behavior that they have used to deny others equal civil rights), it’s much more hypocritical than when someone engages in the behavior but is NOT a member of the party that’s spent so much time, energy, and political capital in using it as a bludgeon. That’s fair. I read your earlier comment to suggest there were NO negative consequences from Edwards’ own party. But what you’re saying – correctly – is that it’s a matter of degree. And I absolutely agree it’s much more hypocritical for a Republican politician (especially one who has personally engaged in the preachiness) to do such things than it would be for a Democrat. I’m not sure what issue who be a comparable one for Democrats? Enviromental concerns? Public schools? Same-sex marriage? What issue could we point to on the Democratic side that, if publicly supported but privately violated, be equivalent to this one for the Republicans? ---
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/170 "2009-06-25T17:57:04Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > To follow up on what **Captain Carrot** said, nobody is saying Dems who cheat on their spouses deserve any sort of gold star. They’re being jerks. Bill Clinton, John Edwards, Elliot Spitzer, whoever. > > But their cheating doesn’t make them bad _Democrats_, just scummy _people_, nor does it undermine the credibility of Democratic policies. **Their cheating doesn’t run contrary to the principles they’ve espoused and fought for as Democrats. Neither has anything to do with the other.** Yes, I get that. Again, you are making my point. As you yourself say, to at least some democrats, cheating on their wives is in no way contrary to their principles as democrats, because “neither as anything to do with the other.” It is apparently possible, at least according to you, to be “scummy people” yet still “good democrats.” But IMO that’s hardly something to be proud of. My point – and truly my only point – is that taking the _at least we’re not hypocrites!_ democrat argument to its logical conclusion, as you yourself do, does not make the democrats look all that great, either. ---
**Author:** ![Defensive\_Indifference](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/defensive_indifference/32/6502_2.png) [@Defensive\_Indifference](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Defensive_Indifference)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/171 "2009-06-25T17:58:14Z")
> [@Jodi](#): > > They republicans can only (rightly) be accused of hypocrisy because they have taken a public position that infidelity is immoral and bad. If the democrats can evade similar accusations of hypocrisy, it’s only because they haven’t taken a public position that infidelity is immoral and bad. Why is that an admirable thing? I’m sure most Democrats would say that adultery is immoral and bad. They just tend not to make it a political position. They don’t typically say that the immorality of adultery should influence public policy. They don’t say that my neighbor’s sex lives have anything to do with me. That’s admirable. (I’m sure someone will be along shortly with an example of a Democrat doing exactly what I say they don’t _typically_ do…) ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/172 "2009-06-25T18:02:14Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I’m not sure what issue who be a comparable one for Democrats? Enviromental concerns? Public schools? Same-sex marriage? What issue could we point to on the Democratic side that, if publicly supported but privately violated, be equivalent to this one for the Republicans? A big, energy-guzzling house if you’re Mr. Global Warming. Or perhaps a pledge to run “the most ethical administration in history” followed by sleaze. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/173 "2009-06-25T18:08:06Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > You’re right that it doesn’t _automatically_ translate. > > It needs something extra to enable the translation, like the use of the “we need to defend the sanctity of marriage” trope to justify opposition to gay marriage, or support for abstinence-only education. Right. IOW, the politician, of either party, needs to be against cheating in order to be accused of hypocrisy when caught cheating. That’s what I said in response to the (IMO incorrect) assertion that " A politician doesn’t even have to condemn cheating to be a hypocrite upon being caught cheating." ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/174 "2009-06-25T18:08:36Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > A big, energy-guzzling house if you’re Mr. Global Warming. Or perhaps a pledge to run “the most ethical administration in history” followed by sleaze. The first deserves some discussion, perhaps. The second does not (in my view) first because it’s not a party position, but the promise of one person, and secondly because it’s not a supportable charge. ALL administrations promise (and wish) ethical behavior from their appointees; all are disappointed to some degree. Try this charge here simply muddies the issue. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/175 "2009-06-25T18:09:33Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > A big, energy-guzzling house if you’re Mr. Global Warming. I see you didn’t read the thread. > [@Shodan](#): > > Or perhaps a pledge to run “the most ethical administration in history” followed by sleaze. What sleaze would this be? The Cabinet appointees who fixed their tax issues before they were voted upon, during the vetting process? ---
**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 25, 2009, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/176 "2009-06-25T18:10:46Z")
> [@Jodi](#): > > Nothing. You’re making my point. These (hypothetical) philandering democrats, unlike their republican counterparts, have never condemned the behavior so they can’t be accused of hypocrisy regarding it. Like I said: Gold star. The focus seems to be on self-congratulation on the lack of hypocrisy as opposed to recognizing that this also points up that _they never condemned the behavior in the first place_. There’s no “self-congratulations,” only a lack of hypocrisy, and yes, they can’t be accused of it because they never condemned it. I don’t see your point. In what other way COULD they be accused of it? > [@](#): > > They republicans can only (rightly) be accused of hypocrisy because they have taken a public position that infidelity is immoral and bad. Correct, but it’s a _little_ more than that. They also push legislation trying to codify some of their moral opinions as law. > [@](#): > > If the democrats can evade similar accusations of hypocrisy, it’s only because they haven’t taken a public position that infidelity is immoral and bad. Why is that an admirable thing? Who says it’s an admirable thing? It’s just _not_ a hypocritical thing. “Admirable” is not the opposite of “hypocritical.” > [@](#): > > I’m not defending lying sack-of-shit cheaters of any political stripe. My point is only that I find it odd that people pointing up the acknowledged hypocrisy of the republicans, do not seem to be considering, why, exactly, similarly situated democrats can escape the same charge. They escape it because they’re not GUILTY of it. I’m really not getting what kind of hypocrisy you think they SHOULD be charged with. > [@](#): > > **gtgain** probably made the point more clearly, and certainly more succinctly, with his hyperbolic example: “When I run for office I will be ambiguous about my feelings on murder for hire, that was if I ever get caught paying someone to kill my wife, then I can take the moral high road.” You’re comparing nookie to murder? I think the crux here is that you seem to believe the sex itself is publicly relevant, or necessarily immoral. I don’t. As long as everyone is a consenting adult, there’s no reason the public should give a shit. In my opinion, the _only_ thing Sanford should be publicly criticized for is hypocrisy. I don’t think the sex itself matters a damn, nor do I think he should have to resign for it. I’ve been consistent on this. I said the same thing about Larry Craig, and just recently, John Ensign. No one should have to resign for getting some strange. The press shouldn’t even cover it unless it involves some sort of illegality. If they’re hypocrites about it, though, why shouldn’t that be pointed out? If they’re NOT hypocrites, then what’s the problem? ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/177 "2009-06-25T18:13:58Z")
> [@Justin\_Bailey](#): > > _Very_ bad joke. Sorry. My punning skills ain’t what they used to be. That’s a shame. It would have been infinitely funnier if it had been inadvertent. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/178 "2009-06-25T18:14:04Z")
> [@Bayard](#): > > I’m sure most Democrats would say that adultery is immoral and bad. They just tend not to make it a political position. They don’t typically say that the immorality of adultery should influence public policy. They don’t say that my neighbor’s sex lives have anything to do with me. That’s admirable. It’s admirable to you, and to me too, actually, being pretty liberatarian in my beliefs about the interface of morality and government. But there are a lot of people who legitimately disagree at a very fundamental level with the assertion that morality should not influence public policy. And there remains something inherently weak, IMO, in an argument that boils down to _yeah, our guys are lying scumbags too, but at least they’re not hypocrites!_ Even granting the last half of that sentence – which I do – it’s odd to me to see people seemingly ignoring the first half of it. Which was my only point, really . . . . ---
**Author:** ![Jodi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/7feea3/32.png) [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)\ **Post date:** [June 25, 2009, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/179 "2009-06-25T18:18:44Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > There’s no “self-congratulations,” only a lack of hypocrisy, and yes, they can’t be accused of it because they never condemned it. I don’t see your point. And I’m strangely okay with that. > [@](#): > > They escape it because they’re not GUILTY of it. I’m really not getting what kind of hypocrisy you think they SHOULD be charged with. NONE. There’s NO HYPOCRISY. There’s only the “still lying scumbags though!” part of it. > [@](#): > > You’re comparing nookie to murder? Yes, **Dio** , that’s exactly what I’m doing. :rolleyes: > [@](#): > > I think the crux here is that you seem to believe the sex itself is publicly relevant, or necessarily immoral. I don’t. As long as everyone is a consenting adult, there’s no reason the public should give a shit. In my opinion, the _only_ thing Sanford should be publicly criticized for is hypocrisy. I don’t think the sex itself matters a damn, nor do I think he should have to resign for it. Super! Now all we need is an acknowledgement that your position isn’t universally held, and we should be all set. I’ve never taken issue with what you personally believe. I don’t actually care what you personally believe. > [@](#): > > If they’re NOT hypocrites, then what’s the problem? That they’re still lying scumbag cheaters. That doesn’t matter to you, apparently, but it is at a minimum unrealistic to act like it doesn’t matter to anyone. ---
**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 25, 2009, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655/180 "2009-06-25T18:20:58Z")
Who cares if they’re lying scumbags in their private lives, as long as they;'re not breaking any laws or being publicly corrupt? How are their sex lives any of our business? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-governor-of-south-carolina-is-missing/500655.md?page=10)