Sex, Lies & Politicos

All this talk about Anthony Weiner (a democratic state representative from New York) has made me really start to consider the following question: “Can a bad person be a good politician?”

Now, before you insert your dirty politician joke here, I’m being serious.  I think it’s obvious a bad person can be good at many jobs…mean plumbers, rude fashion designers, ungracious stockbrokers.  But can a bad person…an adulterer, a liar, a cheat…be a good politician?

Let’s talk this out.

(Disclaimer: I’m going to use the pronoun “he” for this post.  Please excuse my misandry for the sake of grammar).

First off: sex has nothing to do with most aspects of politicking.  If a state rep or a senator has kinkaliscious, leather bound, spiked collar coitus every day and then goes out to debate the aspects of a series of budget cuts, who cares?  As long as he gets the job done.  That’s why sexual orientation has no bearing on political prowess.  Sex is one thing.  Lying is another.

I am a child of the Clinton/Lewinsky* scandal.  Imagine little Lark, age 12, desperately trying to explain to her much more sexually experienced classmates that the president was being impeached for perjury, not for adultery.  I was unsuccessful and had to endure constant: “You prude!  Gonna impeach a guy for gettin’ some?!”

If a politician is willing to not only lie, but to break the law in order to keep his behavior secret, isn’t that a hallmark of someone you don’t want running the country?

In addition, we live in a time when most of us can choose our marriage partner.  Hypothetically, a politician who is married loves his wife.  If he can lie to his wife and children, whom he cares deeply about, what is to stop him from lying to his constituents who are no more than faces in a crowd?

Then you’ve got people like Eliot Spitzer, who built his career on prosecuting corruption and white collar crime.  But as a client of a high-end prostitute, he was in fact contributing to fraud the whole time (since prostitution isn’t always easy to prove, the upper-crust girls most often get fingered for tax evasion and breaking other financial laws).  So not only was he a cheater; Spitzer was a hypocrite.

Following the money, corruption can also be linked to a political sex scandal.  Spitzer was under investigation for using campaign funds to pay for liaisons with ladies of the night at the Mayflower Hotel.  I’m sure some enterprising reporter in poring over Arnold Schwarzenegger’s financials to see if he used California state funds to offset the cost of his mistress’ breast implants.

In the military, a soldier can be prosecuted for adultery in a military court.  It’s considered “unbecoming,” and a “detriment to the armed forces,” according to Article 134.  Basically if a soldier is willing to ignore the sanctity of his/her wedding vows, he could theoretically be willing to ignore orders from a higher-up.  Ignoring orders would destroy our military.

But then you have droves of successful, beloved politicians who were unfaithful.  I’ve yet to see a dutiful Catholic household in the United States or Ireland without a framed photo of John F. Kennedy placed prominently on display.  FDR had extra-marital affairs before and after his presidency; probably during as well.  And Bill Clinton, for that matter, is considered one of the most productive presidents in recent history.

Personally, I have a serious problem with adultery and cannot abide any person, private or public, cheating on their spouse.  Most of the population isn’t forced into an arranged marriage.  It seems simple enough to me to get a divorce (or never get married in the first place) and spare your spouse and your conscience months or years of infidelity. 

So what does this mean?  I think it means some men can be trusted to separate business and pleasure and some men cannot.  The most important facet of this multi-dimensional issue is how the politician acts after he’s been caught.  Does he immediately fess up and apologize?  Plus one point.  Does he reveal details to staunch the inevitable flow of sordid stories from the other women?  Plus two points.  Does he give his wife the option of not standing mutely by his side as he confesses his sins on a public forum?  Plus three points.  Does he shut up about it after a few weeks and focus on the reasons he’s an elected official?  That’s a win; as much as you can have a win in this sordid situation.

What about the other guy?  The one who denies an affair over and over…or blames a resulting pregnancy on one of his staffers?  How about the man who repeatedly insults magazines and newspapers printing nothing but the truth?  Or the guy who claims he only pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct while trying to solicit sex in an airport bathroom to “make the issue go away” but he’s really innocent?  The guy who refuses multiple calls from his own party to resign and then takes personal time to deal with his “issues”?  Minus a million points.  This guy sucks.

So like many gray-area issues, I think this one can only be judged on a case-by-case basis.  After all, seeing how a man deals with adversity is a much better gauge of his character than seeing how he thrives in prosperity.  Especially when the adversity is a bed of his own making.  With a pro laying in it.

*To tell you the truth, Clinton messed me up.  I believed him when he said he was innocent of wrongdoing…I thought this was just another case of a woman looking for her 15 minutes front and center.  Then he went and changed the definition of “sex” for me and my peers and everyone to come after us.  When Baby Boomer girls were in 5^th grade, were they being ignored by boys because they refused to put anyone’s penis in their mouths?  I was.  “It’s not sex,” they told me.  “The President even said so.  It’s just like kissing, only better.”

Truth Above All Else

WARNING: The following post contains EXPLICT MATERIAL.  Please be advised.

So New York State Representative Anthony Weiner has admitted that the underwear photo sent from his Twitter account to an unidentified woman's was not only him, but he sent it...his account was not "hacked" and a false photo posted as he previously charged.

These are some of the photos...in one Weiner (has a surname ever been more appropriate?) is shirtless (courtesy of BigGovernment.com) and in another his penis outline is visible under his gray underwear (from abcnews.com).

In other "news," there some growing speculation that not only are the recently released nude cell phone photos of actress Blake Lively genuinely her (she claims they're faked), but she is the one who leaked them in the first place.  Now, the person who's making noises about this is entrepeneur and all-around douchebag Joe Francis (Girls Gone Wild), so it should be taken with a grain of salt.

http://icydk.com/

The idea that photos are really of Lively, despite what she and her reps claim, is bolstered by numerous paparazzi photos of her using the same phone (while fully clothed) as well as tattoos and other markers.  Personally, I think the photos are of her.  If they're not, the forger is exceptional and I'd like to meet him/her.

But it's probably just another instance of someone in the public eye getting caught using technology in a dirty, dirty way and lying about it.  I will NEVER understand why people don't just come clean when they've been caught with their pants down...or their bra off or whatever.

We live in the age of constant paparazzi presence.  We also live in the age of quadrillions of gigabytes flying around in the form of the Internet...and people, what you put online NEVER GOES AWAY.  It cannot be erased, it cannot be hidden.  It's out in the universe for-ehv-verr.

Here's another observation: people only care for a few moments if you do something naughty.  President Obama admitted cocaine use in college.  Vanessa Hudgens acknowledged the naked photos of her were indeed taken by her and were a personal gift for her boyfriend Zac Efron.  These stories were "news" for a millisecond and then the public moved on.

What the public does harp on is trying to cover shit up.  Had President Obama denied ever seeing an ounce of cocaine, some enterprising reporter from the National Enquirer (PS, Enquirer: where can I send my resume?) would have found a photo of him snorting and seventeen alumni who attended the party he got so wasted at.  But he admitted it and people stopped caring.  Because bad behavior is not always a big deal: especially if you're rich, successful, attractive or all of the above.  Does John Edwards ring a bell?  Ass.

The TRUTH, friends.  The TRUTH is what matters, no matter the magnitude or significance of your sins.


Sidenote: As a woman who has spent six years in a long distance relationship, I've taken my share of...ahem...questionable photos.  I will never judge a man or a woman for naughty photos...unless that person is using those photos to be unfaithful, entice underage partners or doesn't accept responsibility for the recording and release of the pictures, even if he was actually hacked and the pics were stolen.  They're still yours. 

But seriously, Blake...using your iPhone and a mirror?  That's Busch League.  Get an awesome camera with a timer (Lord knows you can afford it) and get your Playboy on.  Fool around with lighting and poses.  Edit the photos to your liking and then send them...that way if they do get leaked, at least you can call them artsy.

Papa Don't Preach



Courtesy of http://www.madisonavenuejournal.com/

 So Mr. Mike Huckabee visited radio host Mike Medved on his show March 3rd and proceeded to have an incredibly offensive conversation about single motherhood, something Huckabee and Medved (based on their mutual possession of a Y chromosome) undoubtedly have no firsthand knowledge of.  You can find the bulk of the conversation here.


Anyway, Mike & Mike spent some time lamenting how Natalie Portman "glamorized" having a baby out-of-wedlock when she thanked her soon-to-be-husband from the stage in her Oscar acceptance speech Sunday for giving her "my greatest role ever."  Huckabee said she sets a bad example, since she's minus a husband and has plenty of money for nannies and other such indulgences to help her care for her child.  Obviously he assumes highly impressionable females (Oh, poor lil' ole me!  I seem to be sufferin' from the vay-pehs.) will equate Portman's decades long career with the fact she's having a baby...with the man she's going to marry...at age 29. 

So I'll fight ranting with ranting.  Thank you for your insight, Mike Huckabee!  Before I heard your opinion, I honestly thought if I got knocked up by a dancer I'll automatically become a rich and famous actress and former child star!

Courtesy of http://www.celebuzz.com/

As if pinning a scarlet letter to Portman's Academy Awards dress is not enough, he said (I'll paraphrase) most single mothers are poor and uneducated and their numerous children are one welfare check away from starvation and typhus and dyslexia and communism.  But does he once mention MTV's extremely lucrative 16 and Pregnant or Teen Mom shows?  As My Husband wisely pointed out to me, these shows are much more likely to induce teens to conceive based on the hefty paychecks MTV shells out to the show's participants.

How about Ms. Bristol Palin?  Former governor Sarah Palin's daughter is one of the most famous American single mothers in recent history, but did her turn on Dancing with the Stars or her interviews with E! News about her new life in Arizona make it onto the radio rant as an inappropriate model of solo parenting?  Not so much.

If you'll allow me, I'll close with a little common sense.  I don't think ANY WOMAN in the history of humanity has ever considered raising a child alone to be a cakewalk.  I am sure there are women (and men, for that matter) who've used and abused their children and their place as parents for their own gain (uhh, Joe Jackson, anyone?). 

And as I've recently said: classy, educated and compassionate people like Natalie Portman (she financed a line of vegan shoes) are the people we want to be parents.  I hope she has ten kids and they all turn out like her.

Bottom line, Huckabee's comments about Portman (and the Oscars, for that matter) were completely judgemental and some of the least Christian words I've ever heard from a minister's mouth.



*As always, all photos in this blog are for illustrative purposes only and I am in NO WAY, SHAPE OR FORM profiting from their publication or claiming them as personal property.  Thank you!

It Takes a Village...but What Kind?

I take a hard line on a few things…probation violation, molestation, Welfare reform, drunk driving.  I think rape should be punishable by life in prison (I’ll probably blog about that some other time).  But for the most part, I’m socially liberal.

I also appreciate Christian values.  I was raised Christian (my father is Catholic and my mother is Lutheran) and I have a large number of family members who are Conservative Presbyterians.  So I know that someone can believe absolutely that being gay is a sin.  I don’t believe that, but I know some people gain a lot of comfort from seeing the world in a certain way and as long as they don’t hurt people with said view they should probably just be left alone.

However, there are practicalities to life that need to be addressed, no matter what one’s religious views are.  I think gay men and women should, in every corner of the world, be allowed to adopt children.  According to a recent UNICEF report, there are between 143 million and 210 million orphans worldwide.  That doesn’t count foster kids, who are not technically orphaned but cannot live with their biological parents.  In the United States, Florida and Missouri still have laws banning gay men from adopting.

So anti-gay adoption agencies (oh, they’re out there, people) are basically saying they’d rather kids grow up “in the system” than in loving, if slightly "atypical" homes.  And yet, there are gay couples out there who will do ANYTHING to adopt and are barred at every turn, EVEN WHEN THE CHILD SHARES A BIOLOGICAL LINK WITH ONE OF THE APPLICANTS.  Check out this story to see what I mean:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41800437/ns/world_news-wonderful_world/?GT1=43001

This precious little boy spent two years in limbo because of bureaucratic homophobia.  Madonna adopted a little boy WHO HAS A PARENT and it took her mere months.  Samuel is the biological son of a man who happens to be homosexual and all of a sudden it takes two years and tens of thousands of dollars to get him home?  I think THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WE WANT TO BE PARENTS.  These are the people we want raising our next generation.

Not this guy.  Or the stepmother of this little girl.  Or these two monsters who actually PASSED the adoption application process.

Come on humanity.  You’d rather your youth be tortured by “acceptable” parents than raised by people who’d do anything to bring them home?

Pizza for Protests

Thought I'd share a little story I heard from my mom when she called to catch up this afternoon.  She's a big NPR fan and has it on in the car all the time. 

Here's the link:
http://www.NPR.org/2011/02/21/133932741/global-donations-feed-protesters-in-Wisconsin

Apparently the pizza place across from the green where all the Wisconsin protests are going on brings their leftover pizza at the end of the night to the people congregated there.  Some non-Wisconsians heard about it and started ordering food specifically to be sent to the protesters.  I guess calls are coming in now from all over the world.

Now, I don't know a lot about what's going on in the Cheese State, but I think it has something to do with unions and is an extremely touchy issue.  It seems the whole world is in a state of upheaval.

As a soldier's wife, international and domestic unrest makes me nervous.  I'd rather my husband not be deployed to Libya.  Or to Wisconsin because all the National Guards are in Afghanistan.  Hopefully everyone can just handle their own and leave My Husband out of it.