Sanford Learns Lesson on Transparency. Sort Of.

Katherine Mangu-Ward | July 8, 2009

Still-Gov. Mark Sanford released his schedule for the week today. There were no public events on it.

“Under the circumstances, the governor clearly understands the need to be more transparent about his schedule then what he has done in the past or then what is required by law,” [spokesman Joel] Sawyer said in a written statement. “You can expect that he will do so.”

And boy-oh-boy is he being transparent about the precise schedule on which he's doing nothing for the citizens of South Carolina this week. Unlike that other week he recently spend doing nothing for the citizen of South Carolina. (He later accounted for the time with the whole "crying in Argentina" explanation.) That's one lesson learned and deployed too little and too late. 

Still, Sanford's staff also seems to have missed the point a bit, if this statement from former Republican gubernatorial spokesman Gary Karr is any clue:

“The Internet has changed everything,"...“There’s much more of an expectation of what you’re doing and why you’re doing it.

The lesson here isn't: Hey, got to watch out for those wacky, inquisitive Internets. Total disclosure Sanford's activities wouldn't have helped matters much. The schedule would have looked like this:

Day 1: Argentina. Cry.

Day 2: Argentina. Cry.

Day 3: Argentina. Cry. 

Day 4: Argentina. Cry. 

Scandal fallout probably would have happened anyway. So, two separate lessons: 1) Transparency and 2) No Argentinian mistress. The latter is probably more important.

Via Best of the Web

Intern Amanda Carey writes about Sanford here. I interviewed him in happier days here. 

Comments

|7.8.09 @ 5:51PM|#

So, two separate lessons: 1) Transparency and 2) No Argentinian mistress. The latter is probably more important.

Important to whom? I want more number 1 from elected officials. Number 2 matters only if I'm paying for it, which is why number 1 matters more.

|7.8.09 @ 6:00PM|#

The mistress matters to me for the same reason it matters with anyone-- blackmail, security, influence, etc. Obviously true transparency would keep that from occurring.

But I would nitpick with you saying he's done nothing for South Carolina-- even the most libertarian leaning of governors can't 'do' anything for peopl really. They less they do, in general, the fewer pages of laws I have to abide by. Obama's doing plenty for the citizens of the US, if being busy is the standard.

|7.8.09 @ 6:04PM|#

It's the idea that politicians have to "do something" about, well, everything that got us into this mess in the first place. The constant stream of massive bills in DC right now is a bad, bad sign.

I've got an issue with Sanford's character, but not so much of one that I think he should resign. In this day and age, a libertarianesque figure at any level is a refreshing change of pace.

|7.8.09 @ 6:51PM|#

It's the idea that politicians have to "do something"

They're doing something all right. Us.

Pedant Pete|7.8.09 @ 7:02PM|#

" ... then what he has done in the past or then what is required by law..."

If your job is professional communicator and you prepare a written statement, at least learn the difference between "then" and "than."

And WTF kind of slippery nonsense is "You can expect that he will do so"? As a flack by profession, I can appreciate the non-answer answer, but that statement translates as "Now go fuck your mother."

Paul|7.8.09 @ 7:14PM|#

And boy-oh-boy is he being transparent about the precise schedule on which he's doing nothing for the citizens of South Carolina this week. Unlike that other week he recently spend doing nothing for the citizen of South Carolina

And this makes him a bad governor why? If only we could get more politicians to do nothing for us, the world would be a better place.

And I mean that.

zoltan|7.8.09 @ 7:14PM|#

Bitch should resign.

Tom Utley|7.8.09 @ 7:14PM|#

Personally, I'd prefer that all politicians "do nothing."

Douglas Gray|7.8.09 @ 7:18PM|#

He is welcome to stay on as long as he:

1. Reimburses the taxpayers for all expenses that did not involve working, but rather playing.

2. Get paid minimum wage on an hourly basis, only for hours actually worked.

|7.8.09 @ 8:20PM|#

No Argentinian mistress. The latter is probably more important.

Amen! It's Brazilian or Bust!

Colin|7.8.09 @ 9:14PM|#

3) Don't spend taxpayer money on Number 2.

X|7.8.09 @ 9:22PM|#

They're doing something all right. Us.

If by "us" you mean Argentinean women. BA dum KSSHHH

Ratdog|7.8.09 @ 9:47PM|#

Most of us appear to agree that the less a politician does the better. For that reason the two party system should be ideal, if only we could coordinate our voting to insure a balance of politicians to effectively create a perpetual stalemate.

Whenever anyone complains to me about a "do nothing congress," I'm puzzled, why complaining when they should be celebrating.

|7.8.09 @ 9:50PM|#

Monday: Hikin' the Appalachian trail.

Tuesday: If ya know what I mean ...

Wednesday: And I think you do!

mark|7.9.09 @ 12:06AM|#

Don't worry, Jon Stewart has it covered. Of course, he's been at it since day one, so I can't blame him on this one. Plenty of other stuff to blame on him.

pippo|7.9.09 @ 7:17AM|#

With those pesky internets polluting our system, how's a philandering governer supposed to service his constituency?

|7.9.09 @ 9:16AM|#

Wow, that guy really is about as dumb as the day is long isnt he!

RT
www.real-anonymity.pro.tc

|7.9.09 @ 9:23AM|#

So much for the Sanford/Anson ticket in 2012.

X|7.9.09 @ 10:37AM|#

how's a philandering governer supposed to service his constituency?

Sanford's constituency includes Argentina? BA dum KSSHHH

Try the veal, folks.

let\'s think about this now|7.9.09 @ 7:03PM|#

I guess I'm alone here is preferring to try the other options first before ditching the Argentinean mistress.