Is Jenny Sanford a Model or a Disaster?

Jenny Sanford would be great if she weren't so perfect

By: lydia_NC | Mon, 07/06/2009 - 00:24

I like Jenny Sanford because she is obviously clever and writes good press releases etc. But it's hard for me to hold her up as a model since her husband, for whom she has sacrificed her career and more, is sort of a cringeworthy disgrace. It's also hard for me to stomach her role-playing as a perfect traditional wife. My final view: at least she has a spine.

Here is a youtube video of Jenny Sanford talking about Spitzers

By: ninjapirate | Fri, 07/03/2009 - 21:50

Jenny Sanford commenting on Eliot Spitzer situation on April 3, 2008

Anyone heard of a little movie called" Primary Colors?

By: Andreya | Wed, 07/01/2009 - 17:32

I'm just saying...So many of these political wife divas get exactly what they tried so desperately to hide, a cheating spouse. These out of touch women, know down deep, that they have married a person without self.

These women, who do not listen to their sixth sense, think they can control everything including him. (I'm speaking from experience)

Needy, insecure man/boy meets strong worldly woman, for whom he latches onto for his selfish gain. Not at all for, "the family" or tradition mind you.

But in the end, she brings it on herself. Most women know when a man is no good and they think they can fix them, smooth it over, make it alright, control them. Another form of selfish don't you think?

The good news for Jenny on the block is Sanford is such an ego maniac train wreck that not even his wife or staff can get a hold of him. Come on...the guy needs a shrink...

Does this make her a strong woman? A strong woman would say to her boys, "What your Daddy did is NOT how to treat a woman"...

Man/boys, should be held accountable for their actions from a young age, not coddled. Let's be real and start bringing up men with a sense of self.

And in turn, her own...

excuse me?

By: lightening | Wed, 07/01/2009 - 17:29

cityrat: she, and those people with 8 brats, and Madonna all willing put themselves in the public eye so it is unreasonable to assert that we should ignore what they do and spy on our neighbors instead. In addition, this woman has been held up as a model of a good Christian woman and been an active part of her husbands campaign. Furthermore, she is talking to the media. So it makes a lot more sense to discuss her than my neighbor. He never talks to the media, and doesn't openly weep to reporters while holding his children's report cards.

Spy on your neighbors instead

By: cityrat | Wed, 07/01/2009 - 16:40

Why add insult to injury? None of us knows her any better than we know those ridiculous people with the 8 brats, or Madonna. Yet we love to wag our fingers and offer our superior moral guidance. Maybe she's a frigid harpy who beat her husband every night. Maybe she's getting it from the pool boy. Do we know? Why do we care? It's more fun to gossip about our friends, spy on the neighbors and eavesdrop on coworkers' phone convos–at least we can get more of the real facts to compare to our own cluelessness about how to deal with shit. So let's go do that now, k?

Harmful Argument

By: Sihaya | Wed, 07/01/2009 - 16:14

This is a harmful argument - trying to declare how people should react at the end of their marriages, how they should be allowed to feel when they find out their spouses have slept around - it's just so so so stupid. This very argument is the ultimate undermining of feminism - The "problem with no name" *does* have a name, and it's called vicious gossip - not everyday, shootin' the breeze gossip, but schadenfreude laden, don't-you-know-how-unworthy-you-are type gossip. It's not constructive. It doesn't tell the next person to get publicly jilted how she will get through to the other side. It mostly seems to argue over whether or not she somehow deserves what she got - a very chilling thought.

Neither

By: ninjapirate | Wed, 07/01/2009 - 15:07

She's not a model for the simple fact that every situation is different and she just didn't find out about the affair... I guarantee she would have been right by his side if this was brought up in january and she didn't know anything about it yet... the reason she reacted the way the way she did is because she had already tried to work hard on her marriage, he was suppose to of said goodbye to the mistress, and he did something really really stupidly embarrassing...

Jenny has done one statement right after his press conference and one clean up interview with the AP the day after IIRC... oh, and cnn ambushed her while she was driving... that really is it and that that is a long while ago(5ish days)... while there is some passive-agressivity in there, I think it's because she's hysterical about the situation...

Jenny helped start this

By: Neffs | Wed, 07/01/2009 - 14:25

Not only is the prolonged passive aggressive (good call there Starling) baloney dispiriting for the children (not to mention the whole state), I think Mrs. Sanford can't cry wounded too loudly because it was her 'I don't know where he is' along with her coconspirator Sen. Knotts that started all the looking for him in the first place. We have a weak executive. The Governor of SC can be gone for quite a while.

keep it private

By: lightening | Wed, 07/01/2009 - 13:57

I agree with Starling. Keep it out of the paper, please. It's all very cringe-worthy. She may feel that given his actions, she is not the one humiliated, it seems to me that she has decided to humiliate herself via statement and interview. You know what your darling, intelligent, high-scoring children would probably appreciate the most? If their parents kept this private.

My vote is for Maureen

By: Starling | Wed, 07/01/2009 - 14:34

The longer this goes on, the more I begin to to feel like the Sanfords are the couple having a loud argument in the middle of the grocery store. The ones who are screaming ,"Well, the sex was never that good for me!" "Oh, yeah? If you didn't watch porn all the time . . . ." while you cover the kids' ears. They seem completely unconcerned about the publicity of it all, but the rest of us feel like our privacy has been violated.

Maureen is right. Passive aggressive feuding in the press is out of bounds, particularly when it involves the kids and the sex life. In the Sanford case, the other woman looks practically saintly, simply by virtue of keeping her mouth shut. Mrs. Sanford started out pretty well, but this business is beginning to resemble the Guiliani divorce, gold standard of political and marital indignity.

And, as Maureen says, "it’s not your husband’s fault if you sacrifice more for the relationship than he does. . . If you make your husband your career and you lose your husband, you lose your career, too." The harder Jenny Sanford spins this story to make herself the hardworking and wronged wife--the PERFECT SPOUSE, you jerk, and all I ever asked was that you not go visit that chippie in Buenos Aires--the more sympathy I have for the governor. In the face of that kind of stage-mother investment in my career, I might be tempted to run off to South America myself.

Of course, Gov, Sanford's repeated, truculent "But we're in luuuuv" isn't any better. Said once, in the middle of a career breakdown, it's almost charmingly human. Continued harping about it is a damned unpleasant slap at your spouse.

All I want is for both parties to be adult enough to realize that, even when the marriage is over, you owe each other and your kids enough loyalty to keep private grievances private instead of tabloid-fodder. If I wanted this kind of repellent detail, I'd follow the Gosselins in Us Weekly.