Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Sanford To Hold Cabinet Meeting Tomorrow

South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford (R) will hold a cabinet meeting tomorrow in an attempt to restore some semblance of order to the chaos created by his disappearance and subsequent acknowledgment of an extramarital affair over the past several days.

The cabinet meeting will take place in the South Carolina statehouse and, if past protocol is followed, will be open to the media. Typically, according to a source familiar with past cabinet meetings, the press is allowed to attend the meeting and observe but not ask questions. Sanford does, from time to time, however, allow a few questions from reporters at the end of these gatherings. It is not clear whether he plans to do so tomorrow.

The goal of this press conference seems clearly aimed at re-assuring the people of South Carolina that despite his foibles over the last few days Sanford remains in charge and effective as the state's chief executive.

Sanford allies continued to reiterate that he has no plans to resign and point to the cabinet meeting as a first step toward trying to restore some sense of normalcy to the statehouse.

As we wrote earlier today, it's not a guarantee -- by any means -- that Sanford can re-take control over a story that has drawn national headlines for most of the week. But, tomorrow's cabinet meeting is his attempt to do just that.

By Chris Cillizza  |  June 25, 2009; 6:33 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2012 , Governors  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Portman's Insider Argument
Next: (A Quick) Morning Fix!

Comments

Why is it that crazy euphemisms so often involve food, like nuts, nutbar, crackers and of course, bananas?

Posted by: shrink2

==

Then there are the capacity metaphors .. few bricks shy of a load, not playing with a full deck, not firing on all cylinders ...

Posted by: chrisfox8 | June 28, 2009 10:18 PM | Report abuse

Maureen Dowd of the poison pen skewers Sanford:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/28/opinion/28dowd.html?_r=1

" With Maria, he was no longer the penny-pinching millionaire Mark, who used to sleep on a futon in his Congressional office and once treated two congressmen to movie refreshments by bringing back a Coke and three straws.

No, he was someone altogether more fascinating: Marco, international man of mystery and suave god of sex and tango.

Mark was the self-righteous, Bible-thumping prig who pressed for Bill Clinton’s impeachment; Marco was the un-self-conscious Lothario, canoodling with Maria in Buenos Aires, throwing caution to the e-wind about their “soul-mate feel,” her tan lines, her curves, “the erotic beauty of you holding yourself (or two magnificent parts of yourself) in the faded glow of night’s light.”

Mark is a conservative railing against sinners; Marco sins liberally. Mark opposes gay marriage as a threat to traditional marriage. Marco thinks nothing of risking his own traditional marriage, and celebrates transgressive relationships."

Posted by: chrisfox8 | June 28, 2009 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone think Sanford is going to suddenly get all reliable and responsible? Nobody in SC should trust him with their lunch money after this. He may have gotten knocked off the front page by celebrity deaths but he's still nuts

Posted by: chrisfox8 | June 26, 2009 1:00 PM | Report abuse

Why is it that crazy euphemisms so often involve food, like nuts, nutbar, crackers and of course, bananas?

Posted by: shrink2 | June 26, 2009 12:13 PM | Report abuse

I find it to be sickening how the Governor is protecting the identity of his mistress and her sons and yet he has exposed his wife and sons to the upmost heartbreak and shame. What a guy, but I'm sure the Republicans will still try to push him to run for president, after all, John McCain dumped his first wife for a rich barbie doll and almost became president of our country. I don't understand what the Republican family values mean if they are the examples. It's wrong no matter which party.

Posted by: thegirl119 | June 26, 2009 11:45 AM | Report abuse

Jeez, Sanford wasn't having much luck being in charge of SC's government *before* this personal parade of bad decisions. The legislature actually seemed to enjoy working around him. I doubt his state party or his state legislature or his staff have been inspired to greater confidence and allegiance by the events of the past 8 days.
No one's going to rally round him when he blows the bugle.

Posted by: margaretmeyers | June 26, 2009 8:55 AM | Report abuse

Limbaugh -- always predictably moronic. getting more insane and absurd all the time...

"I’m not sure what to make of this Limbaugh rant blaming the Sanford affair on… Barack Obama, other than to speculate he is just laying the groundwork for a wingnut defense for when he gets caught again with another fistful of hillbilly heroin or nabbed at the border with a briefcase full of vi*gra. I’m also reminded of the first Republican response to the news that Foley was attempting to bed some pages was to blame it on… the Democrats. These people can’t take responsibility for anything."

The hallmark of people who can't grow up - blame everybody else and never take responsibility for yourself.

Posted by: drindl | June 26, 2009 8:15 AM | Report abuse

while i'll agree with you, paul, that Silliza can indeed be silly, he is young, after all, and not a bad sort. I get annoyed with his glibness at times too--particularly because he so adores th e ossified 'center-right' types like Broder, but he is after all, immersed in the beltway bubble and i know it's very hard for the bubblers to think outside of it. For serious analysis, go to Josh Marshall-- talkingpointsmemo.com or nate538.

But CC is a quick fix, as he says.

Posted by: drindl | June 26, 2009 8:00 AM | Report abuse

Now I've got that Lydian melody from "West Side Story" going through my head .. thanks a lot ...

Posted by: chrisfox8 | June 26, 2009 3:34 AM | Report abuse

If he's known her for 8 years, I seriously doubt this "romance" is something that just recently sparked. I wouldn't be surprised if he has a child with Ms. Maria. Why else would he be in BA on Father's Day?

Posted by: PeixeGato1 | June 26, 2009 2:13 AM | Report abuse

It's not just flagrantly hypocritical and irresponsible behavior, it's crazy behavior. Not Steve Martin crazy, I mean mental institution crazy. Or dope crazy. He's known the woman too long to be in infatuation mode, so there's something else going on, something yet to be revealed.

He could not possibly have believed he'd get away with it.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | June 26, 2009 2:08 AM | Report abuse

I'm still trying to get over the fact that his family knew about this affair 5 months ago (if you can trust what this junkyard dealer tells us) and instead of stopping it when they found out, he CONTINUED the affair. Not only did he continue it, but he LEFT HIS WIFE AND KIDS TO BE WITH HER ON FATHER'S DAY WEEKEND!!! And no, he didn't go around the block or to Myrtle Beach to be with her, he went all the way to Argentina!

And he has the nerve to get up in front of cameras and shed a tear? Like we're supposed to feel sorry for him and his pain or something. I just wonder when the good ol' boys of the GOP are going to give Sanford his standing ovation. Ensign got his.

If these are the "family values" that the Repugs and the "holier than thou" crowd are all about, they can have them.

Sorry for the caps and exclamation points, but my emotions got the best of me....

Posted by: PeixeGato1 | June 26, 2009 1:58 AM | Report abuse

Today, Limbaugh blamed Sanford's affair on Obama.

==

Which means that tomorrow the GOP trolls will have all come to the same conclusion, and will repeat it with unshakable conviction

Posted by: chrisfox8 | June 26, 2009 1:51 AM | Report abuse

Vot? On Obama?

He blamed von Brunn on "The Left."

Posted by: chrisfox8 | June 26, 2009 12:08 AM | Report abuse

Hah! I was waiting for it.

Today, Limbaugh blamed Sanford's affair on Obama.

I kid you not.

Posted by: nodebris | June 25, 2009 10:58 PM | Report abuse

Sanford isn't just a pathetic middle-aged man trying to grab onto his faded youth one last time, he's Republican pond scum, the guy who turned down stimulus money to score points with conservative cretins, a bible-thumping intolerant "social conservative" nutbar who disses women and gays, all the while screwing around on his wife. He so very richly deserves his dilemma, and the fact that another GOP knucklewalker will lose his seat in disgrace makes this hedonists's heart swell with joy.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | June 25, 2009 9:52 PM | Report abuse

Hey, paul65. We like Chris C around here. Like him a lot. We don't LOVE him like we love Dan Froomkin, but he's OK. I'd be the very first to admit he can get carried away, and I no longer get his tweets on my cell phone 'cause the baby and the Bob Dylan aren't what I want to pay extra fees for, but those of us who post here accept the Cizzler, warts and all.

So lay the f*ck off.

Thanks in advance.

The Other Chris

Posted by: chrisfox8 | June 25, 2009 9:47 PM | Report abuse

Oh, and he uses state funds to pay for his little trysts. It just keeps getting better. What an entitlement-grasping SOB.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | June 25, 2009 9:44 PM | Report abuse

To paul65:

I was actually about to post a comment on the Sanford press conf. tomorrow, but read your comment and feel I must address it, although I'm sure CC can defend himself without my help.

From reading your other comments, It's clear you're an intelligent, well-educated person, and you are without a doubt entitled to your opinions, but all these viscious personal invectives are really a bit over the top, don't you think?

Especially that last dig was rather outrageous. Surely, it's up to the editors at WaPo to decide on whether CC is 'Post material' or not?

The nature of Twitter, I'll grant you, with its 140 character limit per post is, by its nature rather shallow, but I think 90% of The Fix content is very well-sourced, very well-written, very professional.

As you may have noticed, CC tends to cover domestic politics in the main, especially state races and their backgrounds which I, for one, find perfectly fascinating. AND he does it with that buoyant good humour that has become his trademark--it enliven's the same factual news that you could get by reading the Reuters or AP streams, but gives it a refreshing, personal twist.

Ultimately, if you find it all so trivial, why bother commenting (so rudely) on it at all? Why not just go elsewhere?

Posted by: sverigegrabb | June 25, 2009 9:42 PM | Report abuse

Does he actually think he can just go back to business as usual? If his deed and his press conference / confession weren't evidence enough he's nuts, that presumption certainly nails it.

Toast, he is. Nuts, he is.

Posted by: chrisfox8 | June 25, 2009 9:42 PM | Report abuse

paul65: Politics is the most fascinating, and the most original and varied kind of entertainment, not just imaginable, but beyond anyone's wildest imagination. The only alternative to understanding that it IS entertasinment, regardless the seriousness of the outcomes of its operation, is utter dispair when our politicians are such originals as Sanford, or the Governors Long, Heuy and Earl. There are LOTS of deadly serious commentators and "Journalists" who will analyse this stuff with dour countenance and a shriveling scowl when the irreverent, such as me, don't keep properly awed silence in the presence of greatness. Since you don't want levity, do patronize them more and don't bother to castigate sites where we give politicians the respect they so dearly earn. FTITCTAJ.

Posted by: ceflynline | June 25, 2009 8:56 PM | Report abuse

"Sanford allies continued to reiterate that he has no plans to resign and point to the cabinet meeting as a first step toward trying to restore some sense of normalcy to the statehouse."

This is the same governor who tried to refuse stimulus funds to pay teachers so they wouldn't be laid off?

Define normalcy. It was a dumb word, by the way, when Harding used it. Still, as a minimally competent newspaper editor, he at least should have known its meaning. (But, "Return to Normalcy" suggests he was hazy on its meaning.)

Obviously expecting Sanford to learn ANYTHING from Harding is a bit much.

Posted by: ceflynline | June 25, 2009 8:46 PM | Report abuse

Chris,

This comment has nothing to do with your politics, which I generally agree with.

But based on your participation in several WaPo online chats and on Twitter, I find that I am losing more and more confidence in the quality of your blog, and consequently I am visting it less and less.

It's clear you think of politics primarily as a form of entertainment, and -- typical for "reporters" these days -- you consider yourself a big part of the entertainment.

I don't want to hear about your bathroom habits during Sanford's press briefing. I don't want to be told to get out the popcorn and sit back ever.

Some of us who are seriously concerned about the fact that millions (billions?) of people around the world are suffering under undemocratic and non-transparent regimes take seriously our responsibility to maintain America's civil society.

If you think this is all about you proving how snarky you can be, why don't you try working at a place like dailykos or redstate.

You're not Washington Post material.

Posted by: paul65 | June 25, 2009 8:44 PM | Report abuse

He'd better resign.

All he can do if he stays until forced out is even more and then even more damage to the people around him.

There is no story to control.

His person is what is out of control.

Posted by: shrink2 | June 25, 2009 7:10 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company