Tag: sex

News from the Legal Frontline – Herman Cain’s New Statistical Defense to Sexual Harassment Claims

Michael MatheronLeave a comment

November 11, 2011

At the GOP debate on Tuesday night, CNBC’s Maria Bartiromo asked Herman Cain about the well-known sexual harassment claims swirling around his campaign and his character like a river around a boulder. Like that boulder, unmovable, Cain answered, in part, and to applause: “I value my character and my integrity more than anything else, and for every one person that comes forward with a false accusation – there are probably – there are thousands who would say, none of that sort of activity came from Herman Cain.”

Well, besides speaking in the 3rd person, media outlets far and wide consider this a weak, even shabby, defense, the “proportionality,” or “statistical” defense. . . For example, “Your Honor, my client presents the well-accepted proportionality defense.  We ask that you take judicial notice of the clear fact that my client has robbed only a very very tiny proportion of the world population of banks and credit unions. Defense rests.”

I Beg To Differ. I disagree with the critics of this defense. In fact, I love the idea. Often, it would have pulled my chestnuts out of the fire: “Your Honor, think of the many times I did not exceed the speed limit by 45 miles per hour in that neighborhood, and that particular neighborhood is only one among millions of neighborhoods in this great country of ours, a country known for the fairness, in statistical terms, of its judicial system.” But, I’m not running for President. (Yet)

Bill Clinton could have used it. “I did not have sexual relations with that woman” could have been expressed in this fashion, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, when one considers how many women there are in the world with whom I also could not have had sexual relations with either.” End of story. If the proportion defense existed then, well, Bill Clinton would still be President of the United States, and Monica Lewinsky would be Chief of Staff (no pun intended).

Newt Gingrich could employ it virtually every day of his life. “I did not say what you just viewed on that video. Just consider for a moment just how many videos are out there where someone is not shown blatantly and outrageously straying from the exact truth. And what is the exact truth anyway? Was it when Bill Clinton said . . .” You get the idea. Gingo’s hopeless.

It would be a boon to Mitt Romney! Imagine this page in his campaign brochure.

Many Have Claimed That I Am A “Flip Flopper,”
Particularly On The Issue Of Abortion. 
However, In Relative Terms, My Stance Is As Solid As Mount Rushmore.
 
 Consider This:
There Are Literally Thousands Of Positions, Highly Nuanced,
That I Might Take On The Abortion Issue.
 
I Chose To Take Only Eight:

  • Have The Abortion,
  • Don’t Have The Abortion,
  • Go To Jail For Having The Abortion,
  • Be Commended For Protecting A Woman’s Right To Choose,
  • The Right To Choose Is A Ticket To Hell,
  • If Men Had Babies, I’d Support Free Abortion Clinics,
  • The Fallopian Tube Is A Legal Person, And
  • Where Is The Vagina, Anyway?

With this defense Rod Blagojevich would today be in the U.S. Senate. Tom DeLay would be making a fine living dancing with rich old ladies at Vegas nightclubs. And Anthony Weiner . . . well, that’s another story altogether. . . And Nixon! “My fellow Americans, the Bureau of Justice Statistics
of the Department of Justice has just informed me that, in statistical terms, I am not a crook.”

So, if you ever think you’re not quite the best Dad or Mom in the world;  if you sometimes claim a little more for charitable deductions than you should;  if you consume three dozen glazed donuts in one sitting as a reward for doing so well during the first week of your diet, just remember this:

Statistics is your friend 

Flaccid House Democratic Leaders Call for Weiner’s Resignation

Michael MatheronLeave a comment

June 12, 2011

The Worms Turn.   Yesterday, congressman Andrew Weiner’s own party began in earnest to push him out. As always, it seems, following the GOP’s lead – the party of David Vitter, John Ensign, Larry Craig, “Perfesser Gingo,” and many other family values paragons – the Democratic House leadership led the party to an embarrassing show of weakness and disloyalty. Moreover, it’s a self-inflicted shot in the foot since the congressman is one of the few democrats who has the voice and the courage to attack the GOP crapola machine. In fact, Weiner’s passion in that regard acts as the supercharger to the disloyalty of a Dem leadership so very into “civility,” despite the GOP’s mystification at the concept. 

His “voluntary” leave of absence announced today – obviously engineered by Pelosi – marks a nearly certain end to the career of a man who took the fight to the enemy with magnificent moxie. And to be sentenced without reflection or rationality by his own political family is shameful. His was a summary execution for offenses of very small consequence, a triumph of “civility” in the face of the shameless and hypocritical party of Vitter/Ensign. Nowhere did Minority Leader Pelosi or DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz call out Louisiana Senator David “Ho’monger” Vitter, nor did Pelosi mention the ethics hearings she had been so charged up about last week.

This new chapter in Weinergate began at 2:00 pm yesterday, when the WaPo reported:

“The top leaders in the Democratic party called on embattled Rep. Anthony Weiner (D) to resign Saturday, a potential tipping point in the two-week long scandal involving the New York Democrat’s online liaisons. ‘Congressman Weiner has the love of his family, the confidence of his constituents, and the recognition that he needs help,’ said House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (Calif.). ‘I urge Congressman Weiner to seek that help without the pressures of being a Member of Congress.’ Of Weiner, Democratic National Committee Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz (Fla.) said ‘the behavior he has exhibited is indefensible and Representative Weiner’s continued service in Congress is untenable.’ Weiner spokeswoman Risa Heller said Saturday afternoon that the Congressman ‘departed this morning to seek professional treatment to focus on becoming a better husband and healthier person.’ She added that he would request ‘a short leave of absence from the House’ after which he would make a decision on his political future.’”

Under The Bus, and Then Off The Bridge. O.K., one can agree that the congressman really stepped in it. One can be disgusted with him, disgruntled, or just mystified. I agree, but I’m not going to waste time with all that. So far, what I’ve read and heard leaves me shaking my head, not much more. In the realm of adult-to-adult behavior, Weiner’s offenses were mild, at best;  I certainly can’t volunteer to throw the first – or any subsequent – stone. I felt the same about Republican Chris “Craigslist” Lee when he resigned last February. Neither man had violated so-called “black letter” law.

Weiner’s behavior does bring Congress under a moral microscope, and that too is understandable. In a philosophical sense, though, the House displays far worse moral behavior than Weiner’s – and it’s not remotely sexual. Witness Republican proposals to impoverish millions for the sake of Ayn Rand and Paul Ryan. Sex, though, is a trump card in scandals; one’s urge to look away is always shellacked by one’s curious glee. We’ve all giggled like fourth graders since the story reared its ugly head. When any behavior, sexual or otherwise, crosses into the area of illegality, like non-sexual misdoings of former House Speakers Gingrich and Wright, sanctions are called for, and resignation plausible. When alleged illegality is absent, though, as with Weiner, then only the moral question remains. And for many years, disagreements over morals have divided our country decisively. And sex scandals? Wow.

Given that national moral paralysis, and the obscene choice of letting Congress decide Weiner’s fate, let’s separate our moral opinions of Weiner’s poor judgment, and put this mess where it belongs, in the hands – and votes – of his constituents. Thus far, they’re in his corner. If they want to rid themselves of him, if they consider him a moral wasteland, they will do so in about 17 months in the 2012 election. Period. Paragraph.

Flaccid House Democratic Leadership Quivers. Speaking of morality, is there a level of moral flaccidity so stultifying that it requires a declaration of time of death? If so, the House Dems are trending that way. You can see the quotes above – Pelosi’s astoundingly insincere concern; Wasserman Schultz’s usual moral certainty and overreaction; and the silent others, most of whom couldn’t deign to throw the man a life preserver. Sadly, by and large, this is the Democratic party today. With some exceptions – like the unabashed partisan Weiner – it’s been that way for years.

If You Can Dodge a Wrench, You Can Dodge a Ball.  Here, the Dems once again allowed the GOP to deploy one of their favored tactics: the cynical use our sense of morality against us. It always works like this:

1. Weiner did as wieners do, and got caught, then lied, and thereby injured his wife, family, supporters, constituents, etc. etc.,

2. GOP cynics quickly jump to roundly condemn him. With long faces, shocked demeanor, and self-righteous falderal they lecture him, the Dems, and us just plain folks on the consequences that ought to befall such moral failings, such sexual “creepiness,” to paraphrase the skeevy GOP Chairman, Reince Prieibus.

3. The hypocritical GOP song and dance goes on to boost the favored position of their own party’s family values, and thereby draw in and rally their base constituency (and I mean “base” in both its senses).

4. When it’s pointed out to them that they inexplicably express no concern whatever about the likes of the departed GOP Senator John Ensign, or the (still seated) GOP Senator David Vitter, the GOP en masse goes utterly deaf, and simply pushes aside these questions as irrelevant and improper. 

5. As the aforementioned Reince Priebus told Greta Van Susteren last week, “I’m not here to re-litigate the David Vitter story.” Last night he said the Vitter matter “is a seven year old story.” Wow! A virtuoso. See? Thereafter and forever, as we’ll see, the GOP stays completely on message and cycles it again and again, mentioning God, the dignity of the House, ethics, morals, family values, and all their balderdash.

6. When Democrats – dumbly – think they’re falling behind, that a “morals gap” is opening, they – dumbly – do not fight back, but instead – dumbly – overreact and, in Congressman Weiner’s case, they go for what they believe will be the winning blow, and instead kick themselves in the groin by displaying rank cowardice, and ironically, moral weakness. Isn’t loyalty is a moral act?

Let’s face it, unless it’s revealed that Weiner violated any state or federal law, the likely illegal acts of Vitter and Ensign make Weiner’s bad behavior look like a schoolboy in short pants unleashing a spitball. You see, most of the GOP elite has no interest at all in a definitive set of moral values except as a tool to build a following among their now largely evangelical political base, especially now with the Iowa straw vote approaching. Faking it, however, causes the base to conclude their GOP celebrities are plain folk too, just like them.

Here’s what’s key, though. The Democratic party time and again reacts with a head down long sigh of shame. Do they fight back?  Do they vigorously explain to the American people the Grand Canyon-sized distance between Weiner’s case and Vitter’s or Ensign’s?  Simply put, do they fight for one of their own, regardless of how mixed their feelings are about his abrasive legislative personality? Of course not. Why? To Democrats these days, fighting back with the unvarnished truth about GOP hypocrisy would violate one of their leading principles: don’t look “angry,” or “aggressive,” or, most of all, don’t sink into “incivility.” And that’s how the GOP plays our own values and morals against us, values they do not themselves share, do not even credit.

Sometimes A Cigar Is Just a Cigar – Attributed to Sigmund Freud. This GOP indifference is particularly true of sexual morality – witness David Vitter canoodling with prostitutes as often as his constituents say “Obamacare” on an average day. Look there at Gingo Gingrich, burying his “ethics” in then staffer Callista Bisek (now Callista Gingrich) at the same time he was driving the country insane trying to impeach Bill Clinton. How about Speaker-elect Bob Livingston who was to succeed Gingo after he resigned? This “family values” guy was rabid for Clinton’s impeachment. Oh, and which Louisiana politico replaced Mr. Livingston? Another “family values” guy, David Vitter! This cynical use of moral beliefs held by their constituents pays off at the ballot box, and then, in office they work steadfastly against the needs of the very plain folk who bought their bill of goods and put them in office.

So, by pushing Congressman Weiner to resign, the Democratic party leadership, and the vast majority of the Dem caucus, have as usual fallen headlong and clueless into the GOP trap. They allowed the GOP, that pack of lying hypocrites, to determine Democratic tactics. To avoid at all costs the appearance of having backbones, Pelosi, Wasserman Schultz, and the weasel pack ran sniveling and panicked into the deep hole prepared by the GOP. This will, in its cowardice, as always, cause some more voters to turn away from the “Democrat” party in disgust. Civility in answer to provocation is not a moral victory, it’s a moral failing.

RNC Chairman Reince Priebus Talks Weiner -They Really WILL Say Anything!

Michael MatheronLeave a comment

June 8, 2011

Yesterday, on Greta Van Susteren’s On the Record, Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee got up on his hind legs to discuss wieners.  Anthony Weiner’s wiener, to be exact.  Reince was in high dudgeon, to be sure. A tornado of botheration was he:

“VAN SUSTEREN: All right, you say [Weiner should immediately] resign.

PRIEBUS: Well, yes. Obviously, after all that, the man is a creep and an incessant liar, and I think that’s pretty obvious. You don’t need an investigation to figure that out. What I think is more outrageous, though, Greta, is the fact that Nancy Pelosi, Debbie Wasserman Schultz of the Democratic National Committee is not calling for this guy’s resignation! I mean, the guy is an incessant liar. And listen, it was Nancy Pelosi, you might remember, who said that she was going to drain the swamp in Washington and clear the field of these kind of people. And what does she do? She calls for an ethics investigation. Now, either she condones the behavior or she calls for his resignation. That’s her choice.

VAN SUSTEREN: Well, you know, he’s still — I mean, it still makes sense to go through a process and give him a hearing. I mean, we’ve all pretty much reached our judgment about him. I mean, the pictures are quite damning. But he’s hired by the people in his district, you know?

PRIEBUS: Oh, really? I mean, do we need to really, though, Greta, spend taxpayer dollars on an investigation to determine whether or not Anthony Weiner is a creep? I mean, we know what the story is. We know what he did. The guy lied. He brought reporters back in the hallway when he knew he was lying, came back outside into the hallway, lied again. Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats ought to show a little bit of leadership and get this guy out of town.” 

The Persistence of Memory.  Recall that Priebus, the man with a surname as dead-on a term for wiener as Weiner, launched no righteous indignation at Ex-Senator John Ensign whose skedaddle from the Senate via resignation was a millimeter ahead of the posse he knew was about to expel him summarily. Remember too, Reince Priebus had no particular concerns about then Louisiana’s Congressman David Vitter  whose prominence on the D.C. Madam’s “frequent rider” list might have garnered criminal solicitation charges in D.C. Vitter, for God’s sake, took calls from the Madam on the House floor, during votes! (Vitter, rather than resigning from the House, stayed on, then won his Senate seat in the next election. ) About Vitter, here’s what Priebus told Van Susteren , who, by the way, admirably held his feet to the fire:

VAN SUSTEREN: Is there a difference with Senator David Vitter, I mean, with the whole — with his whole little prostitution — he’s on a prostitution client list. Is that different?

PRIEBUS: Well, I don’t know if it’s different. I mean, this is…

VAN SUSTEREN: Well, nobody called…

PRIEBUS: Frankly, I’m not relitigating the David Vitter situation. We have…

“Relitigating”? The Vitter sex machine was neither litigated, nor prelitigated.  There’s the rub. Weiner, as far as we know today, is not alleged to have violated any law; Vitter, prima facie, many allege, appears to have done so. Priebus has a very selective moral sense – the very “moral relativism” the GOP goes on and on and on railing against. Of course.

Resign, Schmensign!  Earlier yesterday, Priebus began his parade of hypocrisy. He appeared on MSNBC’s Martin Bashir show, calling Weiner a “creep,” as if creepiness were a violation of Senate rules. If that were true, how have Joe Lieberman, Mitch McConnell, and David Vitter remained senators? 

Priebus also rages about Weiner’s lying to the press and the American people as well. That apple doesn’t fall far from the Republican tree either – John Ensign brought the lie to Shakespearean heights. And Newt Gingrich? Who can define the infinite space his lying occupies? John Ensign? Oy!  Yet, of course, Priebus supports them all.

Stand Up For Weiner.  Anthony Weiner appears as of now to have violated no law. He’s likely examining his psychological and moral life overtime. He lied about a sexual peccadillo, involving adults, between adults. He harmed many – principally his wife, Hilary Clinton’s closest aide at State. Yes, he embarrassed Congress, yet, Congress, with few exceptions, is an institutionalized embarrassment.

Anthony Weiner does have some sexual issues (who among us dares throw that first stone?), and he will deal with them; he did not, though, as Ensign did, canoodle with the wife of another man, both of them, mind you, members of his staff. Unlike Ensign, Vitter, Mark Foley, John Edwards, Newt Gingrich, and many others, Weiner never deemed to instruct us about the superiority of his own “family values.” Getting lectured by Ensign, Vitter, and Gingrich, is like getting ethical investment guidelines from Jack Madoff or Goldman Sachs.

Won’t You Stay, Just A Little Bit Longer.  Mr. Weiner ought not to resign. Far worse have remained for more outrageous and potentially illegal acts.  The House banking scandal sent Kentucky Congressman Carroll Hubbard to jail. Illinois’ Dan Rostenkowski went too. Real crimes; real disgrace; real candidates for expulsion.

Indeed, Mr. Weiner, as Congressman Weiner, has lost much of his legislative mojo. His inimitable rants at GOP congressloons may fall silent, although the boxer-tough congressman may fool us. For the progressive cause silencing the congressman would bring more silence to an already mostly passive Democratic House; for the GOP that would be a triumph. They do not happily abide news coverage of Mr. Weiner putting their hypocrisy, their incessant lies, and their simple meanness on display. He’s in trouble now, and he’s a friend of the progressive cause, and thereby a friend of the lost middle class and all those who aspire for small successes and a decent wage. I’ll not abandon him at his neediest hour. Let the Priebuses prattle on.

The French Correction – “Le Grand Séducteur,” IMF’s Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Not So Grand

Michael MatheronLeave a comment

May 20, 2011         

The Back Story.  Sixty-two year old Dominique Strauss-Kahn, retired Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), has not been managing very well lately. A man known not as much for his professional reputation as for his lively, yet often butterfingered, participation in the bataille des sexes. Last Saturday night, however, the Grand Séducteur apparently took a wrong turn at his Manhattan hotel room’s bathroom door and, perhaps accidentally, perhaps not at all, grabbed the 32-year-old African American femme de chambre who was cleaning his $3,000 per day suite. Allegedly, he then forced her into his bedroom and attempted to rape her. When she managed to escape briefly, the gracious Mr. Strauss-Kahn ran her down and then, according to the maid, forced her into the bathroom where he demanded, and received, oral sex. She then successfully fled and called in the police.

Strauss-Kahn also fled, and with high velocity, leaving behind his cellphone, and his job at IMF. The police rounded him up a short time later as he sat on an Air France flight waiting to take off for Paris, and his nation’s patriotic policy of “non-extradition” of French citizens. After the maid identified him in a lineup, he spent the next 24 hours in the slammer. Presently indicted, he has been granted bail, subject to 24/7 surveillance;  $1 million cash bail;  $5 million insurance bond secured by Strauss-Kahn family property; surrendering of all travel documents; and 24-hour confinement in a Manhattan apartment rented by his wife, Anne Sinclair; wearing an electronic monitor; allowing video cameras in the apartment and building entrances; and be under around-the-clock supervision by at least one armed guard, and paying for it to boot.

J’accuse conspirateurs!   Thus, in one fell swoop, Mr. Strauss-Kahn was downgraded from Grand Séducteur to Grand Défenderesse. The IMF, in haste, replaced him with his deputy, John Lipsky, now acting managing director. Strauss-Kahn subsequently resigned, setting off what is considered a crisis at IMF.

Also, in France, a political crisis ensued.  Strauss-Kahn was heretofore considered the Socialist party’s front runner in their race to depose President Sarkozy in next year’s election. Some believe there is a conspiracy still flying beneath the radar, perhaps initiated by rivals of the IMF, or the Sarkozy camp, or his rivals in the Socialist party, or even the New York police and judicial system. Perhaps al-Qu’ida will take responsibility.

J’accuse les puritains américains!  Gilles Savary, a Member of the European Parliament representing Île-de-France, blames the Puritans, and makes some other observations:

“Indeed, everyone knows that Dominique Strauss-Kahn is a libertine, and that he is distinguished from others by the fact that he doesn’t try and hide it. In France, until further notice, the public wisely confines this kind of life to the realm of privacy when it does not involve indecent assault, nor [deny] the free consent of adults. Catholic heritage without doubt tolerates sin as long as we do regularly contrition.

In Puritan America, steeped in rigorous Protestantism, gambling is tolerated infinitely better than the pleasures of the flesh. So, there, it is easy to trap a personality with as little resistance to the attractions of the fairer sex than Dominique Strauss-Kahn. For it would be hallucinatory that he [having endured a number of sex scandals, leaving him dubbed “the Great Seducer”] would rush after a maid.

Of course, as head of the IMF and a  possible center-left Socialist party 2012 presidential candidate, Strauss-Kahn, has many competitors who benefit from his latest – and most serious – pratfall. Conspiracy theorists rise to arms on all sides, within Sarkozy supporters, to IMF rivals, to rivals in his own Socialist party.”

J’accuse tout le monde! The International Business Times reports: “If Strauss-Kahn was indeed set up, the list of beneficiaries is large, including Sarkozy (who would have removed a huge obstacle to his own re-election) as well as other French Socialist politicians seeking to become the party’s presidential candidate. Rivals and enemies within the IMF would also benefit by seeing the haughty Strauss-Kahn embarrassed and deposed.”

And let’s not forget the Housewives of New Jersey.