without telling anyone where he was going, and he misled his staff about where he was. If an emergency had come up in South Carolina, that would have caused problems.

Spending taxpayer dollars to visit your lover is another problem. The trade mission to South America did not originally include a stop in Argentina, but Sanford insisted that they should stop in Argentina too.

I would agree with this comment if a case of adultery, or even multiple cases, comprised the extent of the controversy.

There are other issues which, considering the responsibly inherent to the privilege of holding a high elected office, are more disturbing and speak more to whether he is fit to continue holding office.

He misled his staff and his wife and disappeared for almost 5 days! You can't do that when the nature of the job you were elected to is such that you must always be on call - you might, at any moment, day or night, need to act immediately on some critical situation that develops. You can't indulge the desire to completely escape your known responsibilities for the better part of a week, even to spend time with your 'soulmate'.

Additionally, there is the allegation that he misappropriated public funds and spent state money to travel into South America and meet his mistress. I don't know if it's true or not, but if so, it would constitute a second egregious error in judgment relevant to whether he should continue as governor.

As far as your comment goes, I agree. Adultery is a disappointing, and infuriating, and extreme form of betrayal, and it doesn't speak well of the indulging individual... but it is something a disgraced public figure must deal with primarily personally with all directly involved, and really it speaks nothing of someone's fitness to hold office or their competence.

It is the other facts which rise to the level of, at the least, conclusively demonstrating both his inability to consistently meet AND his potential to exploit the public trust (again, if the issue of improperly spent state funds proves to be true).

But in the end, if dereliction of duty doesn't legally constitute a basis for impeachment, then there's not much anyone can do but him, and it would be his choice whether to remain in office (though the South Carolina legislature might want to revisit the issue for future application).

The misappropriation issue can wait to be argued thoroughly until it's determined whether or not it happened.