Categorized | Point of View, Politics
In the Spotlight/The Daily Q: American political philandering … why can’t men just keep it in their pants?
by hardybear
Posted on 06 March 2010 | 12:20 pm 
Print This Post
In the Spotlight/The Daily Q: American political philandering … why can’t men just keep it in their pants?
.
In the Spotlight: the great unzipped. As if seeing another New York state Democrat go down because their libido reigned supreme wasn’t enough to bemoan, a quieter headline announced the ‘private’ sale by auction of JFK ephemera for the princely sum of 115,537.50 dollars. Someone’s rather prurient interest in Camelot is fixing to be satiated, the papers are pre-presidential correspondence with his alleged and primarily long distance Swedish mistress. The top bidder garnered eleven billets doux, as well as three telegrams, read them here..
While yet the ambitious young Senator from Massachusetts, Kennedy met 21-year-old Nordic socialite Gunilla von Post a month before he married Jacqueline Bouvier in 1954. After a brief meeting/interlude in the south of France, they corresponded for over two years, and shared a week at a Swedish castle before Kennedy ended the friendship. While essentially still honeymooning with Jackie, he penned this to his absent darling: ‘I thought I might get a boat and sail around the Mediterranean for two weeks with you as crew. What do you think?”
The auctioned letters and telegrams, fourteen pieces in total, reveal a smitten but married Kennedy romancing, then pleading with, the 21 year-old Gunilla von Post to meet him in Paris or the Cote d’Azur. Yet plans went awry when he was hospitalized for back injuries and grave surgery. Then in November of 1954, he wrote to her from his bed at the Hospital for Special Surgery in Manhattan, “I am still in the hospital after two months. I was terribly disappointed that at the last moment I was not able to come to Europe, especially when you were going to be in Paris and we could have had such a good time.” He then jokingly suggested that Miss von Post, then working for the Swedish Automobile Association, come to the States to visit him. “Why do you not suggest to the Swedish Automobile Association that they send you to the US to explain the beauties of driving through Sweden to American tourists,” he suggested.
It was nearly a year before they shared a private, luxe week in Sweden, following which he told her, on official U.S. Senate stationary, that he was torn between his ‘Swedish flicka’ and his new wife. Coincidentally, presidential aspirations were moving openly to the front burner.
The last communication was a telegram saying only “À bientot. – Jack”.
.
.
Certainly, Miss von Post and Marilyn Monroe were possessed of more cachet slash glamour than more modern pop strumpets, documentarians or Congressional staffers. JFK put effort, considerable romance and no small amount of praised panache into his affaires. Compared to airport stalls, illicit quickies, forcing an aide to be your baby’s Daddy and bullying battered women, that is. Maybe the behavior hasn’t worsened, only the percentage who get caught and our media-driven inability to ignore it. (Particularly the involved wives.) Perhaps the already blurred lines between ethics and morality have grown even more challenging to navigate.
Setting aside the debate about whether or not less sordid equals more acceptable, for the moment … why is it that we watch man after man go down in a tabloid blaze of humiliation? It is more nausea-inducing when the philanderer is a Holier-Than-Jesus conservative, but liberals absolutely litter the ranks of the shameful lechers. Why can’t they simply keep it zipped?
With the oft ignored dangers of modern electronic communication combined with Viagra and the voracious morality police, are women soon going to be running the country by default?
Related posts:
If you liked this article,
This post was written by:
 |
hardybear - who has written 518 posts on Free Range Talk.
Life is one long and lusty education. |
Submit your own article via this simple form and we will format it for you for publishing.
Jump to Leave New Comment 
Comments
Recent Comments
- I was thinking "The Price Is Right" might be more apt.
- First of all, Democrats in power aren't liberals. Secondly, and most importantly, they cave, they do...
- Perhaps we all believed in a mirage and through the information age, we are having the wool removed ...
- Nicely done, MsD. I often wonder what happened to the brilliant promise we embraced when Obama was e...
- on MOD ThursdayGood night, y'all.
- All goes along with the corporatist viewpoint.
- on WordsmitheryBeef and venison combined in a dish. Benison
- The Democratic leadership under the Clinton "Third Way" philosophy abandoned the defense of true lib...
Posts
Tags
Authors
Categories
© 2010 Free Range Talk. Powered by your Donations.
238,529 Comments Since March 2009 
-->
(Report comment)
Just as we suspected re: a majority of home schoolers.
http://enews.earthlink.net/article/us?guid=20100306/33545efb-ca30-4a22 -a310-7aaf964d95a3
[Reply]
(Report comment)
just had to share this reply to my comment elsewhere:
“Anonymous said…
kellygirl: “I suppose there is something to be said for the one-mindedness and zero dissent of the Rethuggies”
I strongly suspect your understanding of Sarah is as deep as your grasp of a ‘monolithic’ Right. Do you think Born Again Christians get along with Dominionists? Or Catholics? Do you think anybody likes the Libertarians? Do you think patriot militia groups get along with the Turner Diaries militia groups? Do you think the Bush people get along with the Reagan people? Do you think the Ross Perot types who can format a spreadsheet have long talks with the Meghan McCain types about Redbull versus tea? The Facebook/Twitter era has made Balkanization laughably easy. Everywhere. That’s one reason why Sarah is magic—a mother loves all her children and Sarah’s embrace is wider and warmer than the cold-finger manipulations of the trend-mongers. Sarah’s embrace brings the nation together. When you see that, when you come to understand that in your heart, there will be warmth and togetherness for you, too.”
Gawd! I hope that’s satire. Either way …
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:39 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:53 pm
(Report comment)
sadly, that is actually one of the “smart ones” — extra points for reference to “Balkanization”
I literally LOL’d
second time today I was in a room by myself and Laughed Out Loud hysterically.
Watching the “Modern Family” episode of 16 y/o “Haley” trying to get her license and losing her sh!t on her mom was the absolute highlight of my week.
I soooooooo needed that!
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 9:01 pm
(Report comment)
Oh, wow, that’s almost sort of creepy at the end….
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 9:21 pm
(Report comment)
Almost?
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 9:24 pm
(Report comment)
zaklee
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 9:27 pm
(Report comment)
Their differences are less than their similarities so I believe whoever that was is being disingenuous. The last part is REALLY creepy.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 9:27 pm
(Report comment)
O.K, that IS CREEPY at the end!!!!
[Reply]
March 7th, 2010 at 8:33 am
(Report comment)
So now Sarah is the Second Coming of the Christ.
Or the reincarnation of the Buddha. Major 
[Reply]
(Report comment)
completely off-topic, but as to Sarah and the other Family Values crowd bashing Hollywood … has anyone noticed how really really really good a lot of shows are on teevee lately?
just did some catching up on the DVR and watched a few episodes of “Modern Family” and “Big Love” and “Big Bang Theory” and I’m just amazed how good some of this entertainment is.
so…… SUCK IT, SARAH! I heart Hollywood, and I don’t expect them to give me any free swag!
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:57 pm
(Report comment)
I saw a little bit of that new one called MEN OF A CERTAIN AGE with Ray Romano, Andre Braugher, and can’t think of the other guy. It was really good, I thought.
I think (excepting the new 3-d and big screen ga-ga movies) that TV is really the best there is. Ofcourse, there is ample crap; but the miniseries and historical and science offerings are pretty awesome. If they’re going to do a Hollywood version of a book–it needs to be a miniseries, not a 2 hours movie. LONESOME DOVE comes to mind. MISTS OF AVALON….
[Reply]
March 7th, 2010 at 8:35 am
(Report comment)
MISTS OF AVALON would be great.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:59 pm
(Report comment)
Righto and Sarah could use a few of the family values from Hollywood when I think of Meryl Streep, George Clooney, Brad and Angie, Dustin Hoffman, etc. Except for a very few, for the most part, they are pretty nice people. Much nicer than that Wasillabilly Sarah.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 9:25 pm
(Report comment)
even the crazies like Sean Penn, and the dicks like Bill Maher put Sarah and the rest of these hypocrites to SHAME!!!!!
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Much later, all. Just found out the “Streetcar Named Desire” starts at 8 on Turner Classic.
“STEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA”
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:03 pm
(Report comment)
enjoy. I’ll be reminiscing of Magnin, I. and Joseph
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:04 pm
(Report comment)
Cool, shall tune in following Britcoms.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:09 pm
(Report comment)
We saw Cate Blanchett as Blanche at the Kennedy Center last year. She was amazing, I cried when they took her away at the end.
I was also amazed because the production ran almost three hours without seeming long.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:14 pm
(Report comment)
I totes dig a dude who cries at the theater
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:23 pm
(Report comment)
Seconded.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:41 pm
(Report comment)
The production was so much more explicit than the movie, it was an emotional rollercoaster. Stanley’s rape of Blanche while Stella is in the hospital, Mitch knocking Stanley to the floor when he finds out, all lead up to a heartbreaking ending.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:56 pm
(Report comment)
go on …
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 9:04 pm
(Report comment)
I wish I could remember it all. Cate Blanchett just dominated the stage for the entire time, not that her supporting cast wasn’t great, because they were. The most amazing thing was that most of the first part was very funny in a dark way.
Then the third act was just so violent and unexpected if you’ve only seen the movie as I had, it was just overwhelming.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 9:27 pm
(Report comment)
nothing better than a show you wish you could see again.
seeing Hugh Jackman in The Boy from Oz, I couldn’t take my eyes off of him, transfixed, and felt I missed the whole rest of the show and cast
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 9:34 pm
(Report comment)
Do they make and sell DVDs of the stage productions?
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 9:39 pm
(Report comment)
Years ago, I watched Judgment at Nuremberg on tape at home. Whenever Maximilian Schell came on, my dog stopped whatever she was doing and watched him.
I thought, “Now that’s presence, if you’re so powerful that you can get a dog to stop and watch a tape of you on TV, that’s acting”.
BTW: He won Best Actor that year for his performance as the German defense counsel.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 9:53 pm
(Report comment)
Heh–your dog should be a casting director. He knows his stuff.
[Reply]
March 9th, 2010 at 9:12 am
(Report comment)
I used to have a huge crush on Max. What charisma!
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Henry Kissinger famously said “power is the greatest aphrodisiac.”
Politicians philander because they can.
Their mistresses do it to be close to power.
Sex is just the means.
I honestly think affairs by, and with, politicians are on an entirely different plane than the run of the mill affair.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:42 pm
(Report comment)
I thought LEATHER was the most powerful aphrodisiac!
amazing how sexy one feels when acquiring shoes and bags
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:48 pm
(Report comment)
See my post below about Bonwit, Magnin, Garfinckels, …
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:23 pm
(Report comment)
Bonwit … those were the days. At least Holt Renfrew is still alive and well and 2.5 hours north.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
We have women today with power, too; are they bed hopping? I have yet to hear of a scandal involving a female in Congress, for instance.
I really thought we had evolved from women’s attraction to men simply as a primitive response to needing a man’s income and protection. What’s the use of working for women’s rights, if not for further evolution for us toward equality in work, income, and self-worth? There is a hint in some of the comments that it is somehow the woman’s fault, but if they are ethical in their own personal relationship, can’t men turn down the offers?
Yes, some women cheat, too, but what is their motivation? It’s certainly not power and money, because, for most, it usually isn’t there for them; generally it is about the emotional disconnect some men exhibit for both the woman and any children they might have. Many men, having learned to behave this way in their earlier years, simply put sex first (their needs) rather than even seeing the woman as someone with her own particular needs that are not sex related. Sexual liberation need not equate with having as many partners as you desire but having control of your own body. The fact that most prostitutes are disconnected emotionally from paying customers goes against every instinct they have and why so many turn to alcohol and drugs and end up ravaged human beings. High paid “call girls” get their own column in the NY Post giving “relationship advice”, as if she relates to the ordinary concerns of women and plays into the notion that men always pay, so why not have a hooker give advice? Women should no longer need to function under the “madonna/whore” dichotomy, yet there seems to be even more of that in this young century, as if women cannot be autonomous human beings without falling into the male trap of “constant sex” and being sexual objects in order to get anywhere in life or the alternative, being strung up on some “moral” ideology, such as we see in the religious right or in certain other religious cultures. I’ve been a single woman for many years after a divorce (and w/children) and considered attractive. There were many married men with whom I could have cultivated relationships, yet my own ethics prevented me from doing so knowingly, and I stayed out of situations that might have led to that.
Monica Lewinski was a 21 yr old intern with ambition. My question is, why did the much older Clinton take the bait? His own response, which I found appalling and rather insightful was “…because I could.”
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:47 pm
(Report comment)
Enjoyed your comment, Older_Wiser. Good evening.
I thought we were beyond that also, but the Puritans among us keep trying to push us back to the Dark Ages.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:00 pm
(Report comment)
there is a lot going on that I thought we were beyond … like being in a backwards time machine some days. Guess that’s why the “Conservatives” hate PROGRESSives so much.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:17 pm
(Report comment)
You are probably right, there. Also, it might be envy because we know what the score is.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:06 pm
(Report comment)
Biology still plays a role unfortunately. I can attest to that. I am single, but not really by choice, I just never found anyone. This is perhaps, not surprising, thanks to all the wars.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:53 pm
(Report comment)
Yes, Clinton said that and it was shocking; but unfortunately there is a grain of truth in it. It is disconcerting to see shows like WHO WANTS TO MARRY A MILLIONAIRE, and see gorgeous, educated girls parading around like courtesans vying for the attention of some guy whom they don’t even know. But the assumption is that they are “supposed to love him, just BECAUSE.” They are smart in every other category in their lives, but they become fawning little ninnies when vying for one guy who gets to CHOOSE ONE OF THEM! And we get to see their angst and blow to their self-esteem when they are eliminated from the harem.
I don’t think when we make our comments about these societal circuses, that we are condoning it. For myself, I am just wondering if we have indeed come that far from our biological, evolutionary roots. We can hope to change things and work to change things; but it seems to me what with all the teen pregnancy “contests,” etc., and the outright insistence of some women to HAVE to have a man to support them, then maybe women aren’t really as evolved as we would have hoped.
As a single Mom, I saw single Moms take up with guys who were just awful to them and their kids.l They would let them live with them after two dates, take care of their kids, and just enter into their lives and suddenly the men were the bosses. I’ve seen it time and time again. These women could NOT live without a man to “take care of them” for anything in the world.
I don’t know who’s to blame; but I can say this: part of women’s rights is to step up to the plate and take our lives into our own hands. I’m not seeing that in pop culture right now. Women must accept some of the blame for this.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:09 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:14 pm
(Report comment)
And, Older-wiser, you are absolutely right about the ethics of the people involved. It does take two to tango. I have always thought it odd that a scorned woman will blame her husband’s girlfriend more than she blames her husband.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:20 pm
(Report comment)
so true … further, why do people (observers) put so much more HATE on the mistress (who is often a young single low-paid woman) than they put on the MARRIED, WEALTHY MAN.
isn’t it only adultery if you’re married?
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:27 pm
(Report comment)
I have never understood that. The way I think it should be, if you are married and don’t want to be anymore, for God’s sake get a divorce before you start dating.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:07 pm
(Report comment)
Very insightful OlderWiser. Several more reasons why the Women’s Movement is by no means a done deal.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Signs You Might be a Latent Heterosexual
http://bradbrown.com/?p=89
If there’s more elastic in your waistband than in your hairnet, you might be a latent heterosexual.
If you spend more time playing fetch with your dog than you do canoodling with your life partner, you might be a latent heterosexual.
If you saw the band Journey in concert in 1981, and then again in 2008, you might be a latent heterosexual. If you were wearing a Styx t-shirt during either concert, there’s no doubt.
If you regularly wear a baseball cap and/or a denim shirt, you might be a latent heterosexual.
If your last glass of wine came from a box instead of a bottle, you might be a latent heterosexual.
If you’re the new Republican vice presidential candidate, you might be a latent heterosexual.
If you’ve ever been told by a random gay guy walking down the sidewalk that the tie you’re wearing doesn’t match your shirt, you’re certifiable hetero and you’re me. True story…
If you know who Lee Greenwood is, you might be a latent heterosexual.
If you dread going to Ikea like you dread going to the proctologist, you might be a latent heterosexual.
If there’s more hair on your back than on your head, you might be a latent heterosexual.
If you’ve ever masturbated to an Emmanuelle movie on late night cable television, you might be a latent heterosexual.
If you’re considering labiaplasty instead of purchasing a new car, you might be a latent heterosexual.
If you can’t see your penis because your stomach gets in the way, and your stomach makes a great TV dinner tray, you might be a latent heterosexual.
If you take the time, to make your blog entries rhyme, then it’s really a tossup.
If you like to watch sweaty men grapple in mixed martial arts fights, you might be a latent heterosexual.
If you turned down a lesbian kiss from your sorority sister, you might be a latent heterosexual. What were you thinking?
If you think size doesn’t matter except when it comes to minivan seating capacity, you might be a latent heterosexual.
If you like to rub up against your life-size poster of Charlton Heston while re-enacting the “Oh Billy” scene from the movie Midnight Express, you might be a latent heterosexual.
If you own a “Home of the Whopper” belt buckle, you might be a latent heterosexual still living in the 80’s.
If you giggle when someone mentions pearl necklaces, you might be a latent heterosexual (and 18 years old).
If your only athletic experience was playing on the shuttlecock team at Wellesley College, don’t tell your wife, because you and I both know the truth.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:38 pm
(Report comment)
“Home of the Whopper Belt Buckle”
Much like those big silver platters rodeo stars wear.
In Texas those are known as “tombstones for a dead dick”
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:41 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:09 pm
(Report comment)
Can’t access the classic Wanda Sykes The Dick is Dead aria, so just imagine it, please. And lmao.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:07 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Using a politician’s dalliances against him is a relatively new game devised by the repubs and a bit of a dodgy one. They are all sitting in their glass houses with baskets of stones and high powered slingshots.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:39 pm
(Report comment)
Republicans first used it publicly against Grover Cleveland, who was alleged to have an extra child running around.
The Republican cheer against Cleveland, at all his campaign rallies, was “Ma, Ma, Where’s my Pa?”
After Cleveland won, the Democrats used to taunt Republicans with:
“Ma, Ma, Where’s my Pa? Gone to the White House, HA, HA, HA!”
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:41 pm
(Report comment)
Back when Dems had some spine, I s’pose.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:57 pm
(Report comment)
who was the guy that famously said “My opponent is a confirmed heterosexual” — and the moronic voting public shuddered en masse at the disgusting filthy opponent?
I’m guessing back then “heterosexual” wasn’t a common word
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:06 pm
(Report comment)
George Smathers used it against Claude Paper in Florida.
Also said that a member of Pepper’s family was an avowed thespian.
Interesting side note: Smathers was one of JFK’s best friends and used to go whoring in Europe with him
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:06 pm
(Report comment)
Claude Pepper. Not Paper
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:08 pm
(Report comment)
Just double checked. The complete line was:
“…his father was a heterosexual, and his sister is a well know thespian.”
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:16 pm
(Report comment)
but wasn’t there a candidate in the 50s or 60s in a Presidential election who literally said “My opponent is an admitted heterosexual”
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:18 pm
(Report comment)
Lyndon Johnson used it in his first Senate race in 1948, “my opponent, a confirmed heterosexual”. Johnson counted on his his audience to hear what it wanted to hear rather than what he said.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:23 pm
(Report comment)
that’s the one I was thinking of. Thanks EdV!
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:27 pm
(Report comment)
LBJ also said, of Kennedy, “I’ve had more affairs by accident than he’s had on purpose.”
One of Lady Bird’s biographers actually asked her about Johnson’s affairs.
Lady Bird gave a classic response:
“Lyndon loved people. 50% of people are women.” That’s the closest she ever came to mentioning his affairs.
Will be interesting to see what is contained in her diaries when they are finally released.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:31 pm
(Report comment)
Eeuuuuwwww. That would have had to be a power trip, for sure.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:43 pm
(Report comment)
Oh, my! Maybe his ears contain the same hint as Prince Charles’s!
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:43 pm
(Report comment)
My favorite trivia about Johnson is that he drank two quarts of Cutty Sark a day. When he went on a tour of Europe and Asia as president, he took twenty four cases of it along on Air Force One.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:47 pm
(Report comment)
My favorite about Air Force One:
When it flew he and Lady Bird back to Austin after Nixon’s swearing in, the Johnson aides took everything out of the place.
The Desks, the beds, the seats, the china, everything
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:54 pm
(Report comment)
The Clintons did similar on a minor scale to the WH. Donors complained that objects which they had donated to “the White House” during the ’90s were taken home by Bill and Hillary when they left.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:03 pm
(Report comment)
At least the things Johnson took were put into his library (albeit the closed area)
Should the Air Force want to restore the plane to the way it was for Johnson’s swearing in, the fittings are available.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
would be interesting to see if all the power and control were in the hands of the women, if they would be so “challenged” in the monogamy arena
[Reply]
(Report comment)
My first reaction on hearing about Monica and Bill was that Clinton should resign immediately.
Not for having an affair, but for having an affair when he knew every right wing piece of merde was out to get him.
…and to have an affair with a trollop who stated she was going to Washington to “get her Presidential kneepads.”
Couldn’t he have found an appropriate person with whom to diddle? Georgetown and Chevy Chase are full of people (or both genders) who would do the job discreetly. People who would not have blabbed to Linda Tripp
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:13 pm
(Report comment)
funny how they always say it is women who are Drama Addicts
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:36 pm
(Report comment)
Amen, and again, where are all the respectable whores?
No one was more pissed off at Clinton than the Dems. He KNEW the repugs were laying in wait to catch him
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Politicians have always strayed. The times have changed, though.
One thing to be said in Gunilla’s favor — she never mentioned the affair while Jackie was alive. She first mentioned it in her autobiography, written in 1997, 3 years after Jackie’s death.
What has changed is the quickness with which a mistress or wronged wife runs to Oprah, Larry King or to a book publisher.
I blame this, in part, on the closing of the better stores. In days gone past, a wronged wife was far too busy running up huge revenge charges at Garfinckels, Bonwit Teller, B. Altman and I. Magnin to have time to give interviews. Now that the better stores have closed, time is spent writing tell-alls and going on the talk shows.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:14 pm
(Report comment)
maybe it all goes back to the difference between “old money” and “new money” – the latter being short on taste
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:32 pm
(Report comment)
Good point, that!
Alas, I do miss the respectable mistresses and whores from days of yore. Belle Watling is rolling over in her (fictional) grave at all these ho’s getting their 15 minutes of fame.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:35 pm
(Report comment)
Whores and mistresses used to realize that the first entry in the job description was: Keep your mouth shut
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:45 pm
(Report comment)
The second was :Keep your legs open.
Did I just say that!!!!???? :shame:
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:51 pm
(Report comment)
Don’t do it where one can scare horses and children
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:29 pm
(Report comment)
Psst…. over here it’s “Just don’t do anything to scare the horses and startle the servants, old boy”…….
It’s a whole different world they live in…….
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:18 pm
(Report comment)
There was a time when “Mistress” was a respectable title — I think they even had a unBachelor’s Degree
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:59 pm
(Report comment)
The Bachelor’s Degree for women of good repute in that era was known as an “Mrs.”
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:14 pm
(Report comment)
Most popular major at Vassar, Smith and Barnard. Most common minor: feigning ignorance and disguising intellect.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:43 pm
(Report comment)
“Old Jug Ears” mistress , Horse Face Camilla kept her mouth shut, and hung in there for decades….. but she was playing for high stakes….. she wanted to wear one of them thar sparkly hats they keep in the Tower….. it wasn’t JUST Jug Ears jewels she was after……….
Wouldn’t call her respectable though…. she had half the “Blues and Royals”, and nearly all of the “Household Cavalry”.
Game gel !!!!!!.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:51 pm
(Report comment)
From the photos I’ve seen, she gets a large scepter either way.
Stones the size of the Koh-i-Noor, also too
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:18 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:27 pm
(Report comment)
Really???…… P’rhaps his big ears were a sign of things to come…….
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:36 pm
(Report comment)
He was on vacation in Tuscany years ago and one of the Italian paparazzi was able to get a shot through the open window of his dressing room
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:51 pm
(Report comment)
I remember that….. but our media had the app.end.arge (To quote Bette Midler) covered with a picture of the Crown!!!!!, together with cheesy headlines about the crown jewels!!!! The European mags would have presented it “Au naturelle”…… didn’t know he was well equipped though……. suppose he has to have some saving grace…;-)
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:59 pm
(Report comment)
The photo originally appeared in a German mag.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:22 pm
(Report comment)
and this is the one and only item you did NOT archive
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:39 pm
(Report comment)
Who said I didn’t?
http://freerangetalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/Prince-Charles.jpg
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:45 pm
(Report comment)
and ewwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 8:15 pm
(Report comment)
He’s a keeper.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:19 pm
(Report comment)
she also played a few bad hands in the game along the way
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Personally, I could care less what anyone in public life does sexually. However, that being said, there can be major repercussions to what should be nobody’s business.
When I first heard that Bill Clinton was getting head in the oval office, I was pleased. A stressful job like that deserves some small rewards. When the Religious Right went bonkers and the shit hit the fan, I thought “Francois Mitterand had his wife and her family and his mistress and her family in attendance at his funeral, grow up and shut up”. But, when G. W. Bush came close enough for his dad’s appointees to put him in office, I saw the error of my leniency
This country is morally backward. There is no other way to put it. We condone killing untold thousands of little brown people to ram our system down their throats, but if someone has an orgasm outside of marriage, we’re aghast.
If we have to appease religious bigots to elect national politicians we are no further advanced than Africa or southern Asia. If John Edwards had gotten the Democratic nomination, Sarah Palin would be president by now and the entire world would stand in danger. This is the very definition of idiocy.
The problem is NOT that politicians can’t keep it in their pants, but that anyone should care. Until we discredit the obnoxious, self-righteous Bible thumping bigots, we can never turn this country around into a genuine international leader deserving of respect, blow jobs and all.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 4:12 pm
(Report comment)
Well said, EdV!
And just think John Edwards would have been running against a man who had dumped his ailing wife, flaunted his rich mistress and eventually married her. But it would have been Pretty Boy John who would have been a culprit. The Repugs play a game saying they are the values party. And the public eats it up.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:15 pm
(Report comment)
for me the difference is between the people who are constantly bashing others and trying to pass laws to limit others’ choices and make their actions unlawful, while going out and committing those same “crimes” themselves
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:04 pm
(Report comment)
You are exactly right, sir.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
I think many of the cultural ideas we have about love and sex and relationships run counter to human nature, and that causes problems. Hence the high rates of divorce and cheating.
Sex scandals just seem silly to me. I hate to assume I know what’s going on in a relationship. They may not dare to admit it publicly because of cultural taboos, but for all I know it’s an open relationship or polyamorous arrangement. That’s a lot more common than many people think.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 3:55 pm
(Report comment)
I love the GB Shaw quote, with the exception that if only one of the couple is party to that belief, then it does become a little more a question of hurtfulness and selfishness.
About that Anais Nin–I used to love her writing; but I just can’t get past her complicit affair at the age of 30 with her own father. I think her Dad had left them when they were young, and the Mom had the ordeal of raising the children. Nin writes that one of the reasons her Dad says he left was due to the frigidity of their Mom, and she (Nin) extols the fact that she must be more like her father.
I guess that is where I have to draw the line and say I guess I am a moralist re: an affair with a parent!
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 4:03 pm
(Report comment)
Ha, yeah. That’s a line I’m not prepared to cross.
I agree with your exception. For me, I don’t care how people arrange their relationships as long as everyone involved is aware, consenting, and not coerced.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:08 pm
(Report comment)
Also, there is a biological reason for the prohibition against incest. Genetic things are more likely to pass down. The Royal houses of Europe are the best example.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
(Report comment)
Oh, how I miss Shel Silverstein! He was a real treasure. I could read him all day and never get bored.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:16 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
(Report comment)
How about, simply, testosterone craziness ?
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Men with power and/or wealth have always been philanderers, it goes with the territory. Look at Henry VIII for example. Like SI says, it goes back to our ape ancestors and beyond and the system that works (evolution-wise). The alpha dog in the pack always has the most (if you’ll pardon the expression) bitches. Morality is a relatively new concept that causes a lot of inner conflict for both men and women and keeps headshrinkers in nice houses and Cadillacs.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:25 pm
(Report comment)
Hi you two! (or did Scouser forget to change the log in???).
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:31 pm
(Report comment)
Nah… that’s all his own work!!!
Regarding the above….. a very wise philosopher once told me (Indy)…. “God gave men 2 heads, but only enough blood to operate one at a time!!!”
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:32 pm
(Report comment)
Hey you!
Good to see thee. Great philosopher.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 4:18 pm
(Report comment)
Probably evolutionary-wise, men do tend toward polygamy and women toward monogamy. Biologically, women need to know who fathers their children. I’m generalizing, ofcourse.
They key as to why men with power SEEM to get more women, is because of the availability and willingness of the women. The men with power don’t have any more of a libido than a poor guy. The women in their (instinctual?) quest for secure nest-building, are the key to the distinction.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Bear…..”Seeing another New York democrat go down…..” 8-0
Really!!??…Oooo Auntie Enid, I feel a fit of the vapours coming on… pass the smelling salts……
What sort of a media do you have over there that allows you to see such things???Who the hell do they think they are…..Auntie Beeb???
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:18 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:26 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:37 pm
(Report comment)
Allo allo, you scurvy rogue.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:45 pm
(Report comment)
That was Scouser! She’s getting stuck into my special chili. Sharing a pooter makes for mistakes like that. I have to be careful about the log in if I start flirting!
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:53 pm
(Report comment)
Ya’ll need to remember to “change socks!” Tee-hee
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 3:10 pm
(Report comment)
Ha! Just saw that Scouser. Indeed, who knew our media had such creativity?
[Reply]
(Report comment)
But Georgetown just wiped the floor with Cincinatti, 74 – 47, so
.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:02 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:38 pm
(Report comment)
They don’t have a prayer in the tourney but a victory is enjoyable.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:48 pm
(Report comment)
Mizzou doesn’t either, but I am enjoying them going at Kansas, with hammer and tongs. Right now, Kansas 26, Mizzou 24 with a little more than 4 left in the first half. It is at Mizzou, so I think they have a chance of giving Kansas their second loss in a row.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 3:11 pm
(Report comment)
Oooh, good game!
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 3:32 pm
(Report comment)
They suffered an 18-0 run…just now finished a 16-2 run of their own. 44-40, Kansas.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Well, we can’t leave the women out of the equation. Power, money, & status seem to be quite the aphrodisiac for the gals. Just turn on the TV and see them vying for and cat-fighting for the attention of the latest millionaire–and whether HE will “choose” them or not. We accept that it is just a given that she (the chosen one) will already love him and want to marry him. Makes me want to throw up in my mouth a little.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:39 pm
(Report comment)
So true. Those bachelor shows are gag-worthy.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
I agree with Border’s lady friend that men can (at times) be a bunch of dicks. But what really intrigues me, is how we romanticize(d) JFK, then somewhere along the line started making morality a condition of holding public office. Or, perhaps being smart enough to not get caught is the true measure. Sociologically, it’s fascinating.
Madeleine Albright once told me that when women started joining the Old Boys Clubs of government/foreign policy, men lost some of the established privilege of having their peccadillos be noted, then abetted and/or ignored. Unless the press got ahold of one and public opinion got involved. Then it was every man for himself. Clinton sure as hell didn’t help, and obviously the digital age of no unrecorded moments changed the game. The Republican horde that saw Clinton’s idiocy as a way to put an end to his agenda struck gold. But we’re still operating with those rules, and I don’t know if we actually think someone should be heaved because of a prurient scandal, or believe that’s what we’re morally or ethically supposed to judge, jury and act upon. Like Paterson. Is it really in NY’s best interest for him to resign? I think what he did is sixteen shades of wrong and punishable, but when it gets to the point where the people suffer because we’ve decided to yank a post due to scandal, it begs the question of the greater good. Then again, deeply flawed can mean eventual disaster anyway. Even if it’s just finishing a term.
Kel is right about the cons having a greater propensity for sleazy behavior, I feel. Yet Edwards got away with his crap because the Enquirer was the only publication with the cajones to print the story. Journalists in DC knew all about it and chose to keep it under wraps.
Maybe it’s just me, but I find it fascinating stuff. And it has to effect how we vote, who we donate to and ultimately who we have in office.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:16 pm
(Report comment)
Great point. But it also seems that Clinton’s little indiscretion allowed the Repugs to hold him hostage. Yes, he got to stay; but he was sort of at their mercy and some mediocre policy was scored out of the deal (Stockholm syndrome?). Clinton was scared shitless of being found guilty in his impeachment proceedings. I often think, had he resigned, Gore would have been Pres. Gore was definitely more liberal than Clinton. Then there would have probably been no Florida recount mess……etc., etc.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:40 pm
(Report comment)
*sigh* I know. They had a choke collar on him, big time.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:49 pm
(Report comment)
And Europe was saying, “What’s the big deal…He’s being a normal man of power. Let him get on with his job.”
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 3:00 pm
(Report comment)
Mmm hmm. It’s really cultural taboos that formed the trap.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:20 pm
(Report comment)
his “job”?
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:52 pm
(Report comment)
Choke collar?? He was into kink??
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 4:39 pm
(Report comment)
Being a chubby chaser is considered kink by some.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:34 pm
(Report comment)
S’pose…… but all cats are grey in the dark (Corridor):;-):
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 5:52 pm
(Report comment)
Even Mrs. Slocombe’s pussy?
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 6:25 pm
(Report comment)
Sure was grey….. but she used to give it a blue rinse…. a la the Tory women who live in the Shires and spend the day making jam and sponge cakes for the local Tory fundraising “Bring and buy”….on their Aga’s natch!!!!!
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 7:03 pm
(Report comment)
Blue rinse when she was being sedate.
I remember her using purple and pink rinses when she was going round the pub
[Reply]
(Report comment)
I think, for a lot of prominent men, their ego is tied up in their pants. They think, “Hey, I can buy anything I want, do anything I want, have anyone i want, and no one dares to mess with me.” Add to that, the idiotic moral system in this country (I think Europe handles this sort of thing far better than we do, Puritanical spawn that we are.) and it is just too much for some to resist.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:02 pm
(Report comment)
Well said, Kit. The ego rules.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
If man decended from apes, our ancient forefathers tried to spread their seed as far and wide as they could.
I think it’s instinctual and when people are reduced to their basic ape self they act in instinctual ways.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
Neuter them as a condition of holding office.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
as to the ultra-conservative gay-bashing CA State Senator arrested this week for DUI after leaving gay club at 2 a.m., it seems clear we can believe there to be truth in the old addage: “Thou doth protest too much”
Nobody in CA would give a rat’s ass if ROY ASSBURN is gay — if he’d just shut his trap and stop obsessing on hating the gays
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 1:59 pm
(Report comment)
dave mentioned that story, I didn’t see it. That is where they screw themselves, the denial.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
putting politicians aside for a moment, and speaking as to “real people,” I have definitely found that the more “conservative” or “religious” a person is, the more likely they are to be philandering and/or obsessively hyperfocused on sex
the Evangelical megachurch in my ‘hood, Calvary Chapel, has many support groups. A client of mine, a member of the church innocently shared with me the other day that the largest support group is the PORN ADDICTION group.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 1:33 pm
(Report comment)
HEH!!!!
As the Republican Senator was saying at C-street, “Pass the extra-small condoms, I talked my page into staying late tonight.”
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 1:58 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 1:48 pm
(Report comment)
I have noticed that as well, KG. Surprised that State Senator from CA didn’t say he was doing “some research.”
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:15 pm
(Report comment)
he may very well still say that. I’d actually be more shocked if he didn’t say that at some point.
[Reply]
(Report comment)
As one lady friend once said, because men are a bunch of dicks.
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 1:27 pm
(Report comment)
[Reply]
March 6th, 2010 at 2:01 pm
(Report comment)
Funny you should say that, Border. My Dad told me the same thing.
[Reply]