It even made the NPR Diane Reams Show on Wednesday. I listened to "Political Power and Sex Scandals" on Ms Reams home station, WAMU, driving north out of DC.
Not unexpectedly, the view on NPR was that private morality is disconnected from job performance, except for former Speaker Newt Gingrich. The other thing that caught my attention was the discussion of unequal power arrangements between Arnold and his household held, and President Jefferson and his slave, but slid right over the tremendous power differential of the President of the United States and a lowly Intern.
One guest, Eric Pape, calling in from Paris, had an item in Foreign Policy, "Sarkozy's Favorite Sex Scandal: The political suicide of IMF chief Dominique Strauss-Kahn is great news for France's embattled and unpopular president."
The same magazine also had this take on the impact on French politics, by Mr Joshua Keating.
Over at Says Uncle we have a link to a Samizdat quote from Mr Perry de Havilland:
"Arrest Throws France Into Disarray and Disbelief" says the New York Times...Of course it is a long ways to 2012, even in France. And, with their two phase election (an election and then a runoff if no one gets a majority of the votes cast) this small episodes can have more major impacts.
But why 'disbelief'? Now I have no idea as to the merits of this particular case and thus no position on this statist bastard's guilt in this matter, but socialists are people with a profound sense of entitlement to what other people have but are not freely willing to give up without threats of violence.
So is it hard to believe that someone whose entire world view is based on using force to take what is private without prior consent might have used force to take what they wanted from a woman? It is not really so different.
This might be a strait-forward rape case, but then there is the question of if DSK was set up—set up by Sarko or by other Socialists or by Marine Le Pen or by the CIA or by someone else.
Regards — Cliff
4 comments:
I have never sensed the double standard on NPR that seems to be so distinct in the blogger's mind.
Well, the chap who was the former writer of the "Ethicist" column in The New York Times took a swipe at the former California Governor before noting that his "love child" was a private matter. He gave President Clinton a pass (notwithstanding the strong sexual harassment overtones—the first commentator would have found himself in deep trouble for such an unequal relationship in either of his previous jobs), but thought former Speaker Newt Gingrich should be hung out to dry because he was a family values kind of guy. That raised a question in my mind as to if President Clinton, if asked, would come down against family values, if asked. There was a certain "tone" in the Diane Reams program. Now, I for one, think Newt was a jerk, presiding over a House Impeaching President Clinton for lying to the American Public and the courts over adultery while he (Newt) was apparently boinking someone not his wife. But, still, to give one a pass and not the other seems to mix politics and ethics, which strikes me as unethical. Maybe the fault isn't with the Diane Ream Show but with The New York Times.
Maybe it is just in my political orientation, my being a real liberal and all that.
Regards — Cliff
I may not have the timing right but wasn't Newt having affair with a Congressional Staffer (didn't he run Congress for awhile) while he was trying to take down Bill? Maybe I do have the timing right.
In this day an age I think everyone, everyone knows Bill did bad and so maybe it isn't news. If he was running for the Republican nomination then I bet NPR would bring Monica up.
Lance
That is the definition of "boinking". Having an affair.
Regards — Cliff
Post a Comment