In August, when Washington politicians are all somewhere else, news of outrageous behavior by politicians is at a premium. Alberto Gonzales filled the void yesterday with his long-awaited resignation. Today it’s Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho.
Scandal-starved MSM journalists and, even more so, bloggers are feasting on the news that another Republican defender of family values has been caught literally with his pants down. News of Craig’s arrest and guilty plea on charges of lewd conduct in a Minneapolis airline terminal rest room was quickly followed by his resignation as Senate co-chairman of Mitt Romney’s Presidential campaign.
Getting past the familiar gabble at the hypocrisy of Republican defenders of family values, Craig’s downfall (the clamor will almost certainly lead to his departure from the Senate) highlights the persistence of odd public behavior in our supposedly enlightened age.
When Sen. David Vitter was brought low by disclosure of his phone calls to the D. C. Madam, it was another instance of furtive deviant behavior in a private setting. But Craig’s solicitation of sex in a public place is a reminder that anonymous homosexual encounters in “tearooms” are far from a practice of the past.
Moral outrage seems to be the reaction of choice to this kind of behavior. Sadness might be another.
Showing posts with label D. C. Madam. Show all posts
Showing posts with label D. C. Madam. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Saturday, July 21, 2007
Stoning the Sinful Senator
The debate over whether or not David Vitter should go to jail reflects a sad tendency in our society across the political spectrum. When everybody is a social critic and it’s hard to be heard, humane voices are drowned out by scolds and prudes.
How about some muscular moderation? You don’t have to be an advocate for prostitution to feel that, among offenses to decency, the oldest profession is not at the top of the list (check cable TV and the yellow pages), and you don’t have to be an admirer of hypocrisy to observe that what people do is often at odds with what they profess.
That said, the outing of Vitter and those like him is a plus for honesty in politics and public discourse, but it reflects no credit on those who want to send him to prison or the guillotine for being a sad sack and a hypocrite.
Neither should the D.C. Madam be behind bars. In this society, she won’t be. More likely is that she will get a large advance for her memoirs.
When people are dying in a senseless war, there are better targets for moral indignation.
How about some muscular moderation? You don’t have to be an advocate for prostitution to feel that, among offenses to decency, the oldest profession is not at the top of the list (check cable TV and the yellow pages), and you don’t have to be an admirer of hypocrisy to observe that what people do is often at odds with what they profess.
That said, the outing of Vitter and those like him is a plus for honesty in politics and public discourse, but it reflects no credit on those who want to send him to prison or the guillotine for being a sad sack and a hypocrite.
Neither should the D.C. Madam be behind bars. In this society, she won’t be. More likely is that she will get a large advance for her memoirs.
When people are dying in a senseless war, there are better targets for moral indignation.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
D. C. Madam: More Discreet Than the Media
It’s easy to see now why Deborah Jeane Palfrey did so well in her chosen profession. She is a model of sensitivity.
When the so-called D. C. Madam decided to make her phone records available to journalists as a public service, Ms. Palfrey was too trusting and naïve to realize that media people don’t have the scruples of madams.
Sending out 54 discs to news organizations and bloggers, she insisted that the list not be published in its entirety. But Ms. Palfrey’s attorney says “we got calls and e-mails saying there wasn't any security on the coding and the numbers were going to be all over the place.”
Ms. Palfrey, “concerned about manipulation of the database with false and misleading information,” published the list on her own web site to maintain the integrity of her records.
Despite all her precautions, the repercussions have started. Republican Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana issued a statement last night apologizing for "a very serious sin in my past" after his telephone number appeared.
Ms. Palfrey seems befuddled by all the commotion, since she insists she operated a "legal, high-end erotic fantasy service" and that women who worked for her signed contracts in which they promised not to have sex with clients.
You just can’t trust anybody these days.
When the so-called D. C. Madam decided to make her phone records available to journalists as a public service, Ms. Palfrey was too trusting and naïve to realize that media people don’t have the scruples of madams.
Sending out 54 discs to news organizations and bloggers, she insisted that the list not be published in its entirety. But Ms. Palfrey’s attorney says “we got calls and e-mails saying there wasn't any security on the coding and the numbers were going to be all over the place.”
Ms. Palfrey, “concerned about manipulation of the database with false and misleading information,” published the list on her own web site to maintain the integrity of her records.
Despite all her precautions, the repercussions have started. Republican Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana issued a statement last night apologizing for "a very serious sin in my past" after his telephone number appeared.
Ms. Palfrey seems befuddled by all the commotion, since she insists she operated a "legal, high-end erotic fantasy service" and that women who worked for her signed contracts in which they promised not to have sex with clients.
You just can’t trust anybody these days.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)