<p>Why does she want people to know this stuff now? Doesn’t she realize it makes her look like a complete fool? The whole Sanford story has been big news here in North Carolina due to our proximity to South Carolina, but up to this point all I really knew was that Sanford referred to his mistress as his “soulmate” and his wife left him - good move, but now all this? Why doesn’t she run down the street naked, screaming “Look at me! Not only am I a fool, but I have been an idiot for 25 years and here is the proof! (read my book!)”</p>
<p>(Hey Jahaba, quick geography lesson: Sanford is governor of SOUTH Carolina. We have our own cast of characters here in NORTH Carolina)</p>
<p>Early on in the interview, she said that she believed in very traditional values-- marriage and children and so after a while in NYC, she wasn’t happy. She said her clock was ticking. (She wasn’t that old.)</p>
<p>It seems to me, that more than in love, she might have been in love with being married. After all, when he said he wanted to leave out fidelity in the vows… WOW!</p>
<p>Actually, I’m glad that she has revealed this aspect. She’s revealed that he was flawed from the “get go.” Many think a man strays because the woman has been distant or too involved with the kids or whatever. She has revealed that he had no intention of remaining faithful from the beginning.</p>
<p>From now on, whenever Mark is interviewed, he’ll be asked about this. I bet he’ll lie and deny, but everyone will know that there would be no reason for Jenny to have made this up. And, women do remember such things. </p>
<p>For a man to say this (what was he, in his 20s), is very odd. Only a man who had already had trouble remaining faithful would say such a thing.</p>
<p>As for her…she may have just thought that he was having “cold feet” or that surely he wouldn’t actually cheat.</p>
<p>If she gets a book out in time, that’s good money. She could put her kids through college and even afford an Internet plan so that she can get an account on CC (“username: SoCarMom”).</p>
<p>Good point. I didn’t even know that South Carolina was a real place; it sounded made up, like “South Dakota” (as if there were enough people in Dakota to justify giving it two separate states). </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, but I think she could have found a better guy than that. There are women sitting in Bedford Hills who could find better men than that, just by posting a badly-written ad on craigslist.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Fair enough. Still, he comes out and tells her about it right before they were married. I mean, that’s a pretty big clue, one that most people never get. She probably had her reasons for letting it slide, but it is pretty shocking.</p>
<p>From Time Magazine’s article about her book:</p>
<p>"If it’s possible to dish with dignity, Jenny Sanford does it. Early in their romance, Mark invited her to fly down and visit him in South Carolina. Instead of picking her up at the airport that evening, he left her a car (a stick shift) and directions to his family’s remote farm 50 miles away. When she got there, he’d already left for a party. She rationalized that he wanted an independent, can-do woman — which, as a vice president at investment bank Lazard, she was…</p>
<p>“If she made a mistake, she seems to conclude, it’s that she was too independent, too capable, and gave her husband too much license. The day after the birth of their fourth son, she had an operation to have her tubes tied. With her consent, he did not accompany her to the hospital, to the consternation of the nursing staff. “I suppose you could say that women are built for sacrifice,” she writes.”</p>
<p>She may be brilliant in some ways, but in terms of having good sense about male and female relations, she’s sadly lacking.</p>
<p>Since when is it noteworthy that some women delude themselves into justifying bad behavior from their husbands? I am pretty sure women have been doing this since the dawn of time.</p>
<p>I’m not up much on Sanford–did he have other affairs throughout their marriage?</p>
<p>I don’t think that Jenny Sanford is writing the book because she is hard up for money. She has family money (Skil Corporation). </p>
<p>I do admire that she never even considered to do the “wifey perp walk,” where the wife stands next to her husband while he publicly admits to cheating on her. I still remember Eliot Spitzer’s wife–she looked like she was drugged! I do hope she is OK.</p>
<p>Why write the book? I think that she is finding it very cathartic–and will be ready to move on with her life after she is done with all the hoopla.</p>
<p>I agree with elle^^^. I think Jenny Sanford wrote the book to close this chapter in her life. I think she wrote it for her kids too. </p>
<p>Although it seems like she acted really wimpy to drop her Wall Street job and follow him, I’m betting she has a strong will. She put up with a lot, no doubt, from the bike and jewelry to the lack of support w/ her tubes and the unwelcome-to-the-family-farm. But, it’s so much clearer now. Up 'til now, she was probably focused on being a mom and the governor’s wife. Day-to-day life activities probably kept her too busy to notice his wandering eyes. And it sounded as if she was totally committed to her marriage. That the scum-bag didn’t buy her an expensive gift didn’t seem “enough” to dissolve the marriage. Fussing about the wording of her wedding vows didn’t faze her because she didn’t think of cheating. These things are often only clear in retrospect.</p>
<p>She showed her strong will by not standing next to the jerk as he babbled on about his affair. (Remember, her tone isn’t “woe-is-me”.) Once the book tour is over, which no doubt included the interview, she’ll move on. Good for her.</p>
<p>That “tubal ligation story” reminds me of a neighbor I had. </p>
<p>I had to drive her to the hospital for her second baby, because her H refused to give up the first day of hunting season - which was in another state. I had to bring the new mom and baby home, too.</p>
<p>I thought Jenny Sanford presented as a very smart woman, integrated and aware and willing to take her lumps…and she is not the first man or woman to pick a narcissist as a partner and to refuse to leave him or her no matter how many times they are exploited. I don’t judge her for her folly as a woman hoping for children and a home in South Carolina with someone she romanticized. I however, shudder at her continued gussying up of his ridiculously callous and careless and shameful “policies.” His “agenda” was more quirky and irksome and eccentric and harmful than “romantic and thoughtful.” So, she says she has no regrets. I personally think she should regret supporting his stance for instance on refusing the money that South Carolinians desperately needed for their failing public schools and public school physical plants.</p>
<p>She struck me as oddly detached and cold. I don’t think there was ever much passion between the two of them - perhaps explaining why he acted like a love struck 16 year old with the other woman. Was that the first time he had ever felt that way and was it just too intoxicating for him to handle? I’m not making excuses for him. If he wanted something different,he should have been man enough to admit it and divorce first. It seems they married for different but wrong reasons. Her expectation seemed to be that the marriage be like an old shoe but even an old shoe started out as new and exciting at some point and her marriage was never described like that. She seemed to have absolutely no understanding of how he felt about the other woman, but she knew he had never felt that way about her. Their marriage sounded more like an acquisition and a merger.</p>
<p>Can anyone find the comments made by Jenny’s old boss? His comments about Mark and Jenny were very interesting. </p>
<p>Even though the boss didn’t say it, I felt Jenny just wanted to get married and be a mom. She seemed to have a successful career, so it’s too bad she didn’t choose to wait a little longer, until the right man came along.</p>
<p>Anyone familiar with that book that’s out where the author says women should just pick Mr. Good Enough and lower their standards? This reminds me of that. Maybe he seemed good enough. Maybe she hadn’t met someone better. Maybe she wanted a family and maybe she was young and stupid. You can be smart as a whip and “stupid” because you lack life experience and the wisdom that comes with getting older. Lots of people make big mistakes when they are young – it’s just sad when those include a marriage.</p>
<p>I heard she was going to be on The View this morning so she’s making the rounds. I have to think that her sons would prefer that she quit the book tour.</p>
<p>I agree, I would think her sons would prefer containing the public scandal, rather than keeping it alive…saw Jenny Sanford on the View, she said she wrote the book to help other women. she defended going public by saying it was “Mark” Sanford that brought all this out, which of course is accurate, but still. I thought she sounded intelligent but when she was questioned she sounded a little odd, defending and minimizing his lack of support as a husband over the years. if you are exposing additional things about your marriage in your book, by your own choice, then you do open yourself for critique of your knowledge of who he was and what you put up with…</p>
<p>I think the book provides a permanent account of Mark Sanford’s character. It prevents the public and her sons from later having selective memory loss and saying, she should have “stood by her man”. Jenny has made sure Mark couldn’t get elected city dog-catcher. His political career is over and can’t be resurrected in the future.</p>
<p>I have been thinking about Jenny Sanford and her situation. I also had a painful divorce with children involved (younger than hers), but my H was not in a public position. I watched the Barbara Walters interview. I think Jenny is extremely smart and well-spoken. </p>
<p>At first, I thought she should not have written the book and done the interviews. It seems like “airing dirting laundry in public” (love that Victorian-sounding expression) to me. I didn’t think her sons need any more attention drawn to their family situation. She apparently doesn’t need the money from the book, so why give out any more information to the public? It was already quite clear from Sanford’s ridiculous press conference what sort of character he has, and quite clear from her restrained and ladylike behavior what kind she has. The public does not need to know all these details. </p>
<p>And yet…TutuTaxi’s comment #38 hits the nail on the head. Ten years from now, her sons will have a selective memory about this whole deal, because they won’t want to believe their dad was such a jerk. The book will still be there for them to read, or not.</p>
<p>The entire situation is a case study in why a talented, well-educated woman should not subjugate her career to the interests of her H. She quit her very successful career, raised the kids mostly by herself, and served as his unpaid and highly effective campaign manager.</p>
<p>I read the NY Times article, but haven’t seen any interviews. I admire the way she’s dealt with the situation - made some effort to work things out, but moved on quickly when it was clear that there was no hope - EXCEPT for writing the book and going on the talk-show circuit. I see no reason to make all these ugly details public. If she wants her sons to know, she can tell them. In her place, I would not want them to know just how much of a jerk their father is. And I would not want to keep the scandal on the front pages.</p>