You know, if South Carolina governor Mark Sanford wants to keep his name in the spotlight, who are we to stand in the way?

At least ...... I'm assuming she's a flatbelly until we get picture proof. Anyway, what a wild story. First the Governor of South Carolina goes "missing." Then there is a period of days where he is staff "thinks" he is hiking in the Appalachian Mountains. Then he shows up yesterday and admits that he has been "clearing his head" in Argentina ...... with his Argentinean lover.

Alright, should we give the guy a pass? As one of my Twitter followers (14,000+ strong) pointed out (and I love this): If Mark Sanford had cheated on his taxes instead of his wife, he would have been a cabinet member by now.

Naturally the media jumped on this story. But Republicans in particular jumped on it, calling Sanford a "bastard" or "scumbag" or any name that would impart their own moral supremacy onto the situation. Give it up, folks. Men are pigs, all men, no exceptions. Not that that is an excuse, but this guy isn't doing anything to his girlfriend that the average politician hasn't done to the average taxpayer. Besides ... don't we have a wonderful history of this sort of stuff? John F. Kennedy comes to mind. Then there's Bill Clinton. The Democrats, you will remember, were telling us that this Clinton thing didn't matter ... it was his private life after all.

I'll tell you what really bothered me. Father's Day. It's Father's Day and this character is nowhere to be found. He has four sons wondering where their daddy is. How sad. Meanwhile .. another step backward for the Republicans. Look ... the Republicans love to parade through town on their moral high horses. When they fall off it's naturally going to make more noise.

Thud.

Since there's still a bit of mystery surrounding South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford's secret trip to South America, here's an open thread to discuss all of your theories.

UPDATE: he admitted to having an affair in his press conference today.

Republican South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford has been saying for a while that he would turn down any stimulus money that comes his way via this economic stimulus bill. And as of yesterday, he made it official ... turning down about a quarter of his state's $2.8 billion share. He says, "Fundamentally, if you boil down what the stimulus means for South Carolina, it means we would go through the process of spending a bunch of money we don't have." Finally, a guy who gets it.

Then, Sanford likened the approach of the Obama administration to that of Robert Mugabe and Zimbabwe. He says, "What you're doing is buying into the notion that if we just print some more money that we don't have and send it to different states, we'll create jobs ... If that's the case, why isn't Zimbabwe a rich place? ... 'Cause they're printing money they don't have and sending it around to their different-- I don't know the towns in Zimbabwe but that same logic is being applied there with little effect."

Now enter James Clyburn, South Carolina Senator and carrier of a huge racial chip on his shoulder. Clyburn thinks that Sanford's comparison of Obama's stimulus package to Zimbabwe's economic policies is "beyond the pale." And according to The Politico, Clyburn suggested that the comment might carry a racial subtext. Clyburn says, "For him to compare the president of this country to Mugabe. ... It's just beyond the pale." For Congressional race whore Clyburn, everything is "beyond the pale." This guy has never seen an issue that didn't have some racial component. His day should be done and his type should be fading into the obscurity he so richly deserves.

Let's set the cast of characters. Mark Sanford is the governor of South Carolina. He is opposed to any sort of bailout for the states. James Clyburn is a Representative from South Carolina. He is the House Democrat Whip, making him the highest ranking black lawmaker in the House. Oh ... and Clyburn is a First Class Race Pimp. So Sanford and Clyburn disagree about what constitutes an earmark. James Clyburn says that any federal money included in the stimulus should be sent back home to lawmakers' districts. Sanford says that this is the same thing as an earmark, but without calling it an earmark.

And then Clyburn came out with this line about Sanford's opposition, "[H]e happens to be a millionaire ... He may not need help for the plantation his family owns, but the people whose grandparents and great-grandparents worked those plantations need the help" in the form of federal money.

Mark Sanford's response? Yeah, that wasn't a rational explanation as to why he is in favor of earmarks. "You're playing the race card as your way of trying to defend stimulus packages and deficit spending out of Washington, D.C."