Very Disillusioning

What is it about politicians that they just can't resist having affairs? Is it the extra testosterone needed to have the urge for power that also causes these lapses in judgment?

I saw today that after denying it all along, John Edwards has now admitted to having an affair with a woman who was producing videos for his campaign. He says he came clean to his wife and family "long ago," but had continued to publicly deny the accusations that kept coming up in the media.

Now, I was not really an Edwards supporter. There has always been something about him that just didn't appeal to me. But I did really believe he and his wife Elizabeth were the real thing. And maybe they are. It's not the affair that bothers me so much (we can all make mistakes) it's the lying.

This is the same pattern as Bill Clinton. I have no doubt Hillary knew about Monica Lewinsky by the time Bill had to admit it in public. But before he ever admitted it, he shook his finger at the American people and said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky." That is what irked me about it.

Similarly, John Edwards had said, "The story is false. It's completely untrue, ridiculous," when reporters questioned him about a National Enquirer story in the fall of 2007.

Now he says that because the story contained "many falsities" that he felt he was being "99% honest" in his denial. Uh, no, John. Saying something is "completely untrue" is not being 99% honest if the core issue - having the affair - was true all along.

This goes with the whole "It depends on what the meaning of 'is,' is" mentality of Bill Clinton.

Now mind you, I don't think it's really anybody's business what people do in their private lives and really don't care if Edwards had an affair or not.

But what bugs me about these guys is they always feel they have to lie. Why don't they just say, "This is a private matter between me and my family, and is none of your business," and change the subject? If Clinton had done that he would have never been impeached. After all, he wasn't impeached for his affair with Lewinsky. He was impeached for the lie.

On top of that, the latest analysis of this story on the Huffington Post also indicates he paid $114,000 to this woman for her alleged documentaries when she had never made documentaries before and the videos she took weren't even used for anything. I'm sure those who donated their hard-earned money to Edwards would not be happy to realize some of it went to pay his lover for work that was obviously just an excuse to keep her near him.

So now we have another Democrat looking bad, another Democratic story the hungry MSM will be all over for the next who knows how long, and once again John McCain can continue to make his gaffes and flip flop on his stands on the issues, and no one will pay any attention to him whatsoever. And the less attention they pay to McCain, the better he does in the polls.

Why do I have this sinking feeling that we are all doomed in November?

Worshiping Work

While we were away I caught up on reading my newspapers, which had been piling up last week. In the Thursday New York Times, Roger Cohen had an Op-Ed piece about the new French finance minister, Christine Lagarde, who is a proponent of moving France to a more "American" way of life.

Nicknamed "The American" by her countrymen, Ms. Lagarde is making an effort to get the French to, basically, work more: “We are trying to change the psyche of the French people in relation to work.”

Her attitude was nurtured by 20+ years in America:

"In an interview, Lagarde says that more than two decades at a U.S. corporation taught her: 'The more hours you worked, the more hours you billed, the more profit you could generate for yourself and your firm. That was the mantra.'" (Ms. Lagarde was the first chairwoman of the Chicago- based law firm Baker & McKenzie).

Ms. Lagarde feels the passing of the legislation for the 35-hour work week in France had "disastrous" effects in her home country. She said the result was that “People did not really talk about their work. They talked about their long weekends.”

(Quelle horreur! Heaven forbid that people should prefer to talk about their real lives instead of work! How dare they? This must stop!)

Ms. Lagarde wants to lower the unemployment rate from 8% to 5%, and raise the percentage of the population that is gainfully employed from 63% to 70%, by the year 2012. How does she plan to accomplish this?

"Tax cuts, the termination of unemployment benefits for those refusing two valid job offers, later retirement, incentives for those working more than 35 hours, a slashing of the bureaucracy associated with job-seeking and improved professional training are among measures enacted or envisaged. Legislation to reverse the 35-hour week is possible."

Hmmm, tax cuts. Terminating unemployment benefits. Longer working hours. Sounds familiar. Sounds very...American.

Cohen supports Lagarde's goals: "Without a dynamic France, Europe cannot be revitalized, and a Europe in a Gallic funk is bad for everyone. If an overbearing America has been a problem, an underperforming Europe has been its complement."

I disagree with the idea that every country and every culture has to center its efforts on "performance." Why is the American model always held up as the "right" way to live? Why do so many people believe in hard work as some kind of moral imperative? That the correct way to conduct one's life is to work long hours, make more money, provide more profit for the corporations, take as few vacations as possible and live in constant stress?

At one time, there were good reasons to work hard. The purpose of work was to provide food and shelter for one's family. Now it is to hoard money, more money than anyone needs to live. Work, and its goal, profit, have been elevated to a type of religion here in the United States.

And now this sickness is spreading to countries that used to be more sensible about work, who believed life was to be enjoyed and to be lived to the fullest.

The French are not giving up their more leisurely way of life without a fight. Unions protesting reforms in the pension plans paralyzed Paris starting on Thursday and the unrest may continue into November.

But I fear that as time goes by, gradually more and more countries will start to adopt our ways. And if they do, the cafe' life, the intellectual discussions over a glass of wine, the long vacations that other cultures enjoy, will become a thing of the past and eventually every country will be just like us. And that would be a sad day in the world.


Soon to be a thing of the past?
-A scene at La Palette, our favorite cafe' in Paris
(picture courtesy of http://hilton.org.uk/pppp.phtml).

Thoughts on Larry Craig

I realize Larry Craig is so yesterday. But being on vacation for a week without internet access allows more time for thought. And one of the things DH and I thought about was Larry Craig. (Yes, I know, being on vacation, we should have been thinking about much more fun topics. But Larry Craig did come up.) We got into a discussion of whether anyone had asked a simple question: Was what Senator Craig ostensibly did in the men’s room actually illegal?

Why is it that it’s OK for a guy to approach a woman in a bar and say “Hey honey, you want to hook up?” But it’s not OK for two men to signal an interest in the same thing by tapping their feet in a men’s room?

I’m not a big fan of “sting” operations in the first place. There used to be an old commercial on television trying to discourage car thievery that said, “Lock your car. Take your keys. Don’t help a good boy go bad.” The idea behind it was that even good people can be tempted to a commit a crime under the right circumstances; and if you create those circumstances, someone might commit a crime they might not have otherwise. (Of course, it is still the responsibility of the person tempted to resist temptation...but that's a whole other discussion).

So there is something about stings that just rubs me the wrong way in general, since basically they create the circumstances that tempt the target of the sting. Of course, this probably would not have been the first time Larry Craig tried to hook up in the men’s room, so I’ll let that aspect of it go.

But there is an even bigger question in my mind in his case. Was what he was “stung” with actually illegal? And if so, why?

Why would it be illegal to transmit an interest in sex through a few hand and foot signals? I could see it if he were caught with his pants down in flagrante delicto in the men’s room. Sex in a public place where young boys might be coming in to use the facilities is clearly not legal, nor should it be.

But should the simple invitation to have sex be illegal? It’s not the same as prostitution, where the undercover officer waits until the unfortunate john actually offers money for the services of what he thought was a hooker before whipping out the handcuffs. But as far as I know, I don’t believe the hand and foot signals are designed to indicate a desire to pay for sex, just to have it. So what’s the crime?

To me, this case is a very gray area, and I am starting to feel Larry Craig is right to fight the conviction - not by saying he isn’t gay, didn’t know about the signals, or that he had a “wide stance.” Perhaps what he should be fighting is the violation of civil rights that occurs when it is against the law for two consenting adults to simply make signals that they are interested in a sexual liaison. Actually having that liaison in a public place? NO. But for all the cop knew, Mr. Craig might have then suggested they repair to a local hotel room for their rendez-vous, had his signals been returned in kind - rather than by the presentation of a police badge.

So where is the illegality? Am I missing something here?

I’d be interested in hearing others’ thoughts on this. To me it is just another example of discrimination against gays built into our laws, a continued double standard that allows the public to let David Vitter slide and crucify the Larry Craigs of the world.

Although I appreciate the irony of a staunch GOP defender of “family values” being caught trying to hook up with another guy in a men’s room, when I give the whole thing further thought, I start to feel uneasy. What about you?