Sex and the Married Democrat
SEX AND THE MARRIED DEMOCRAT—DOES MARRIAGE REALLY MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE?
by
Ken Eliasberg
I stopped paying close attention to the sexual behavior of our rambunctious politicians soon after Bill Clinton lowered the bar so far that a snake could clear it. Nonetheless, sometimes events make it necessary—or at least fun—to re-examine areas that you had previously tucked away. What caught my eye this time was the popularity ratings of San Francisco’s Mayor, Gavin Newsom. He is running for re-election and is virtually unopposed in this undertaking. And his approval ratings have reached 80% - this for a Mayor who had an affair with the wife of his Chief of Staff (and best friend—some friend!). Consistent with the typical Democratic response to medicalizing any form of bad behavior, he checked into rehab for alcoholism soon after news of his indiscretion was made public. Now again, I understand—boys will be boys and all that—but I found it a bit much to be bedding your best friend’s wife. Isn’t that the stuff of which good country music is made, i.e., my best pal with my best gal? No matter how hard you try to avoid turning our government goings-on into some sort of tabloid saga, these guys just won’t let you do it.
The latest episode in marital meanderings is that of our friendly mayor, Antonio Villaraigosa. As I’m sure all of you know by now, the good mayor has been busy making news with the news, i.e. a Telemundo journalist who was assigned to follow the Mayor’s activities; apparently she followed a bit too close, becoming herself one of those activities. While I don’t mean to make light of infidelity (Democrat or Republican), and I’ll deal with the moral question at greater length later, what both concerns and amuses me is the disparate treatment apparently accorded members of each Party. When a Republican violates his marital vows, he’s typically regarded as a lecher for having engaged in an act of moral degradation (and typically drummed out of the corps). When a Democrat does so, it is a sign of his masculinity—enhanced virility, if you will. Bill Clinton’s having raped at least one woman does not seem to have hurt his reputation at all, but then again, how much damage could you do to a reputation as bad as Clinton’s. That said, Bill Clinton could be re-elected tomorrow afternoon (his wife - his enabler, if you will - is less of a sure thing). When former Senator Bob Packwood misbehaved (by making unwanted advances to certain females, i.e. patting one on the rump and stealing a kiss from a couple of others—he was rousted out of Congress (and, frankly, I did not have any real problem with that; my problem was, again, with the disparate treatment accorded Democrats and Republicans)).
I don’t get it! Does marital fidelity mean anything in the political arena any more? And, if it does, it apparently means different things to different parties, i.e. Livingston and Gingrich resign, and the Dems circle the wagons around Clinton and keep him in office and as a leading spokesman for their Party. And, if it doesn’t, what does that tell us about where we stand, morally speaking, as a society? But, whatever the prevailing moral ethos, doesn’t rape push the envelope a bit over the edge? And, please, don’t tell me that Juanita Broaderrick is lying. Remember, Susan Estrich, Democratic doyenne (not to mention Law Professor and rape victim), has advised us that women don’t lie about rape. And we know that slick Willie lies about everything, particularly his checkered sexual past. He came in with a lie about Jennifer Flowers and went out with one about Monica Lewinsky (under oath, no less).
And, leaving marriage aside for the moment, the double standard is even more striking when applied to homosexual conduct.. Recently, Congressman Foley of Florida was guilty of, in effect, propositioning an under-age male Congressional page (in the form of a suggestive email to the Page). When this action came to light, all hell broke loose. The Dems were outraged, and not only did they want Foley’s scalp (which they got), they went after Denny Hastert. Now some years back, one of their own Congressman Gerry Studds (an interesting name for a homosexual pedophile) from Massachusetts, was found to have had sex with an underage male Page. What happened? Damn little! He was censured by the Congress. And he thought so little of this gesture that he turned his back on his fellow Congressman while they were in the act of censuring him (and let me assure you—this was not a romantic offering). No one even mentioned the Speaker of the House, Tip O’neil, at the time. And then there was Barnney “the bloviator” Frank, who was sharing his Washington flat with a male prosititute, whose traffic tickets Frank fixed for him. Frank found his erstwhile companion by advertising in some journal, using the code name “hot bottom’—now there’s a vision that should turn your stomach.
Apparently, the Dems just get upset with off color sex when a Republican is involved. When one of their own pushes the sexual envelope—no matter how far—it’s perfectly ok.
The interesting part of the current imbroglios is that San Francisco and Los Angeles have finally have found common ground—a couple of old horn dogs for Mayors. This could be the beginning of a geographical reconciliation. After all, the 2 cities have never been on friendly terms. Years ago I recall the comedian Mort Sahl’s commenting on this icy relationship by noting that neither city would warn the other in the event of approaching enemy aircraft. I guess sex heals all wounds.