by Matthew Williams

Created on: June 30, 2009

Republican governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina should not resign his post solely based upon his faithfulness to his wife which was brought to light by himself as well as members of the media.

The private affairs of a public figure or any individual with celebrity-like status should have no determination on how that particular individual performs his or her job as a public figure holding their respective status. However, if one penny of tax-payer dollars was spent on Sanford's charade, then he needs to be immediately removed from office and tried in a court of law.

Thought it is unfortunate and shallow in regards to the actions Sanford performed, acting promiscuous does not necessarily show incompetence on the part of his civic duties to the people of South Carolina. Though, it is a valid and logical argument to state that a governor who is dishonest with his family surely will be dishonest to the people he is representing. In contradiction, it is completely plausible that one might be dishonest in private but brutally honest in the public eye, or vice versa; neither is also a valid answer.

As far as the public is aware of right now, Sanford did not violate any laws (except the law of marriage, however, this is limited to religion only and bears no legal status). However, a thorough investigation needs to take place to be sure that Sanford did not violate any laws. As stated above, if it is found that a law was violated, then Mr. Sanford must be removed from office immediately.

Another point that begs to be addressed is that of extortion and espionage. Dennis Krivda has stated that "Mark Sanford has laid open for espionage and exploitation a good portion of America's security measures." This claim is preposterous and baseless at the very least; Krivda provides no evidence for such claims and is creating facts based upon personal opinion. It is brash to state that a promiscuous governor can open up countless doors to espionage and terrorism. What Krivda fails to observe is the fact that thousands of individuals enter and leave this country on a daily basis; it would be statistically and mathematically relevant to state that the odds of Sanford compromising sensitive national security protocols are minimal if not irrelevant seeing as the vast amount of individuals who leave and arrive to our country every second of every day.

The issue that Krivda brings up about Sanford unlocking gateways for foreign intelligence gathering is illogical and pointless on countless grounds. First, Venezuela is an allied nation. Second, perpetuating this claim is equal to the claim that any and all acquaintances that Sanford and any other political figure has outside of the United States is a potential possibility for enemy surveillance, which is clearly asinine. Krivda's statements are false, illogical, misleading, and based upon personal opinion and single-minded viewpoints.

What Sanford did was extremely hurtful to not only his family and children, but to the people of South Carolina and the United States as a whole. Still, as long as Sanford failed to violate the law, there is no reason why he should not remain governor of South Carolina under the premise that personal issues must not affect a political figure's duty to the civics of their representative states.

Learn more about this author, Matthew Williams.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.