Sex Scandal? Where?, by Mike Gold – Brainiac On Banjo #301 | @MDWorld
November 19, 2012 Mike Gold 9 Comments
Synchronicity is as close to an outside spiritual force as I get. I don’t buy into the ridiculous übermacho cliché that there’s no such thing as coincidences; of course there are. For example, the very week the brand new James Bond movie opens, we are hit with a “scandal” about America’s spymaster having an extracurricular sex life.
Synchronicity. You gotta love it.
Everybody – in this case, the fame-stream media, the Republican opportunists and the judgmentally superior – acts upset that David Petraeus, the head of the CIA, screwed around on his wife. Holy crap, that never happens… except in the majority of marriages in America. And Europe. And Africa. And most of Asia. Some scientists believe Antarctic penguins mate for life, but we know that some female penguins are prostitutes who exchange their favors for nice rocks. There’s a reason why those dude penguins are kicking those stones towards the red light district.
The headline in The Daily Beast reads “Petraeus Fever Paralyzes Washington as the Media Pounce on Sex Scandal.” Putting aside the fact that The Daily Beast is part of the media and ignoring those members of the media who cheat on their spouses, they really made no attempt to explain to us why this is a scandal.
His paramour, we are told, was in possession of classified information. But if you dig a little deeper you’d discover the General’s inamorata, Paula Broadwell, had top secret level security clearance . Before you start rooting for another scandal, please be aware that Ms. Broadwell is a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve, a West Point graduate and a former military intelligence officer.
So where’s the scandal? Lots of sex and steam, but none of that is anybody else’s business. I’m amazed Fox News hasn’t hired Monica Lewinsky as a special commentator. And, please, don’t start babbling about dishonoring the uniform. Egregious sexual activity has been part and parcel of military service since our ancestors started heaving rocks at each other. If you want a sex scandal and you want to be taken seriously, you’ve got to start with all the raping going on in our now sexually integrated armed forces.
As it turns out, the four-star general had made a lot of enemies during his climb to the top. I asked a few friends of mine who are or were heavily involved in military affairs as well as the spy racket (yes, lunatic radicals can have friends in the CIA and I’ve got three) and I discovered David Petraeus has been one of the most hated military leaders of this century. Evidently, he’s such an arrogant megalomaniac that his attitude would make Julius Caesar say “Woof, dude, lighten up!” So, perhaps, all this starts with the chickens coming home to roost.
This isn’t about sex. It’s about a bunch of spoiled monkeys desperate to throw their feces at the Obama Administration after their pathetic and conclusive losses in the election that immediately predated the story.
Or, in John McCain’s case, his pathetic and conclusive losses for the past four years and one week.
Mike Gold performs the weekly two-hour Weird Sounds Inside The Gold Mind ass-kicking rock, blues and blather radio show on The Point, www.getthepointradio.com , every Sunday at 7:00 PM Eastern, rebroadcast three times during the week (check the website above for times) and available On Demand at the same place. That same venue offers us the weekly Great American Popcast, co-hosted with Mike Raub. Gold also joins Martha Thomases and Michael Davis as a weekly columnist at www.comicmix.com where he pontificates on matters of four-color.
R. Maheras
November 23, 2012 - 12:25 pm
Neil — Virtually everyone in Chicago is a Democrat, yet Chicago remains one of the most segregated cities in the nation to this very day. The problem with partisan Democrats is they talk a good game about racial equality, but in practice, it’s all hype.
Hollywood is no different than Chicago. It is top-heavy with rich Democrats, but how diverse is it really? Hell, it’s been nearly 50 years since the Civil Rights Act of 1964, yet the diversity of the Hollywood elite isn’t all that different than it was 50 years ago. By now, to reflect the nation’s demographics, half the executives, producers, directors and stars should be women, and about 12 percent should be black, and 16 percent should be latino/hispanic.
That sure isn’t the demographic breakdown I see when I mingle with the Hollywood folks. It isn’t even a tiny fraction of that.
But when someone states reality, partisan Democrats come up with all kinds of reasons why the person stating the facts is biased, scarred, irrational, racist, stupid, etc.
Republicans do it too, but then, most of the folks in the popular culture business or pop culture diehards are not Republicans — like the majority of folks who frequent this site.
But the truth is, if one looks objectively at Chicago — a Democratic-only petrie dish for more more than 75 years, one sees the Democrats not only don’t have all of the answers, they are guilty of most, if not all of the things they excoriate Republicans for.
The problem with many Democratic politicians as well as Republicans is that they get elected based entirely on their party affiliation and not their effectiveness. This will never change as long as politicians feel secure in their perennial re-elections.
No, Neil, it wasn’t my dog that was run over by Democrats, it was my idealistic belief that they would actually practice what they preach.
R. Maheras
November 23, 2012 - 12:41 pm
Rene — Oh, so you’re using the tired old “Southern Democrat” argument.
Funny how for 100 years, the northern and western Democrats were perfectly happy having the southern Democrats in their fold — helping pass legislation, getting their party favorites elected, etc.
And now that most of the former southern Democrat states are in the Republican fold, Democrats have re-written not only their historical complicity partnering with those states when segregation was the norm, they also are attempting to make it seem as if those states today are somehow the same as they were in the dark days before 1960s desegregation.
That takes hubris of monumental proportions, but I guess if the lie eventually works, it’s all good for the Democratic Party.
Rene
November 23, 2012 - 1:06 pm
So, those things Kevin “Southern Strategy” Phillips wrote. What do you think of them? Are they lies somehow fabricated by the Democratic Party in some time travel conspiracy? Maybe they replaced the real Kevin with a robot?
And what do you think of Kevin Phillips’s modern-day books characterizing the Party he helped guide as an Unholy Trinity of Oil Barons, Christian Fundamentalists, and Financers? He was a man that surely knew the GOP, seeing as he was an important part of it.
What do you think of those crazy commies in East Germany that used to claim West Germany was still Nazi-Fascist, because before 1946 that is what they had been? Castigating the Dems for stuff they did before the 1960s, while giving a pass to GOPers for doing the same thing now, sounds remarkably like it.
Rene
November 23, 2012 - 1:38 pm
Russ – This is more in answer to your post to Neil. I wonder, you keep saying that Democrats are all hype when it comes to gender and race equality, that they have done nothing that is effective in helping fostering it, nothing at all.
Yet, women and non-whites keep voting Democrat. Why do you think that happens? Because Democrats are so wonderful at lying that they have them wrapped around their little finger? Or because women and non-whites are stupid, since they keep voting against their own best interests?
Which is it?
George Haberberger
November 25, 2012 - 5:46 pm
I’ve been gone a couple of days so I have to play catch up.
Regarding the assumed position that Republicans are racists:
I make no excuses for Trent Lott. He is an idiot but he is not now a member of the Republican leadership and hasn’t been for 5 years. Trump is also not a member of the Republican leadership and he will be never be.
This thread started about the Petreaus sex scandal but turned into a discussion about the inherent racism in the Republican Party when Mike said:
“Well, maybe we had a better type of Republican back in 1983.
Or maybe they couldn’t find themselves a black Democrat to lynch.”
This was in reference to why there are calls for an investigation into the Benghazi killings.
The three Republicans at the forefront of the calls for a Benghazi investigation are John McCain, Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte. Doug Abramson allowed that he did not believe John McCain was a racist. (“As the person that brought McCain up in the other thread, let me assure you that I don’t think that he is a racist.”) That leaves Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte who must be the ones who have racist motivations for calling for an investigation. If there is anyone who has evidence that these people are racists, I’d like to know what it is. And it should be something other than something like Doug who said, “The current leadership are major league bastards, but I don’t think that they are racists (well, there is one, but I don’t have proof);…” Please, if you have no proof then don’t ask me to buy into your preconceived biases. This thread veered into racism because of the call for Benghazi hearings and those are the people who called for them.
Reg announced that Rene and I are delusional, (but not as an insult of course), because apparently we do not acknowledge the “clearly racist over and undertones that are resonant within the GOP…” I have as much justification to say the same about the Democratic Party.
Maybe I should accuse the Democratic Party of being sexist. After all, President Obama said about the call for an investigation: “If Sen. McCain and Sen. Graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. ” He conveniently did not mention Kelly Ayotte. And Eric Holder has been criticized and held in contempt of Congress over the Fast and Furious issue, yet Obama never rode to Holder’s rescue. Why? Does he think Susan Rice needs him to defend her but Holder doesn’t? Seems a bit patronizing.
R. Maheras
November 25, 2012 - 9:10 pm
Rene wrote “Because Democrats are so wonderful at lying that they have them wrapped around their little finger?”
That sums it up pretty well for Chicago. People in Chicago have been conditioned to vote Democratic, regardless of how badly they are treated. In fact, it reminds me of the classic abusive spouse relationship. They stick with the party hoping change will really happen, hoping the promises will someday be kept, and finally, fear — although in this case, not fear of the Democratic Party, but fear of the Republican Party. And that fear is stoked at every turn by the Democratic folks in power.
The reality of the situation is that both parties have pros and cons, and in the long run, holding the Democrats accountable by voting for independents or Republicans may be the only way to break the ugly chain of non-action the party has helping minorities. The fact is, no Republican or independent candidate could possibly have neglected certain minority neighborhoods in Chicago as completely and for as long as the Democrats have.
Doug Abramson
November 26, 2012 - 5:59 am
Hey George,
Sorry to interrupt your rant , but I never said that the Republican in a leadership position that I think was racist, called for an investigation into anything. I made a couple snarky asides, which you seem to use to take offense at my argument that most Republicans aren’t racists. Calling someone a racist, requires some proof; which I don’t have, so I don’t name the person I alluded to. Calling someone a bastard, is an opinion. It doesn’t require back up.
Rene
November 26, 2012 - 1:05 pm
Russ –
You sound like a Liberal complaining about the white and poor that live in the South that supposedly vote against their own interests because they are “conditioned” by the evil Republicans, and made to fear the Liberals. If only they’d vote right… blah, blah, blah.
Perhaps both the poor blacks in Chicago and the poor whites in the South are savier than we give them credit for, perhaps they know better than to vote for parties that, quite frankly, have not made them their priority. Instead of demonizing the other party, perhaps the Republicans should get their game together and come up with a discourse that does not alienate the black, urban poor. Same with the Dems if they want to win over the white, rural poor.
I also have to say I don’t believe in utopias. I don’t believe it’s easy to revert injustices that are centuries old, in some casa millenia old, in a few generations. I say this to both you and Reg. You blame Liberal hypocrisy for Hollywood not having a perfect record of mirroring the general population, while Reg blames “racism” for the enduring economic inequality between blacks and whites. I blame neither. I just say again that I don’t expect big, planned, society-wide changes over a few years, and I’m even wary of such things. Call me a “conservative”. The only way to attain such changes is through mass violence. Real positive change is slow, gradual, and too disappointing considering an individual human lifespan.
Reg
November 26, 2012 - 1:37 pm
George, when I express an opinion, I pretty much (excepting grammatical issues) mean exactly what I say. I’m not emotionally invested in the dialogue to the extent that I’m going to intentionally insult or demean anyone else’s opinion. What’s the benefit of doing that? For me, there’s no value or wisdom in doing so as I fully recognize that people view the world and issues through their personal prisms. Plus, it makes for a poor witness.
So when I stated that my assessment of your and Rene’s responses to just a few snapshots of the current and near term examples of evidence that over/undertones of racism resonate within the GOP rank and file and leadership was delusional (based on the clinical definition of the word), that’s what I meant. I’m sorry if you felt insulted by that but that was not my intent as the facts speak for themselves.
I’ve voted for Republican, Democrat, and Independent candidates over the course of my life based on how closely I felt that they aligned with my personal views and/or interests. I’ve voted for White candidates over Black ones for exactly those reasons.
What I found troubling about both your and Rene’s responses was a seemingly total rejection that racism within the GOP was a major problem or not a supportive factor for the (as viewed through my prism) absolutely disrespectful, virulent and obstructive actions perpetrated by both GOP leadership and voters alike with respect to President Obama.
To my knowledge, there’s not been a lot of evidence reflecting Democrats calling Mia Love, Steele, Jindal or Haley, etc the n-word or any other words or imagery that specifically seeks to denigrate their ethnicity and/cultures as a part of the political process. But Ohhhh Boy, has there been a whole lotta shaking of that tree from the GOP’s camp prior to Obama’s first term and this one.
Does that mean that ALL GOPers oppose Obama and his administration’s policies because they are racists/bigots/prejudiced? Of course not. NO ONE has said that during the course of this conversation. But if anyone rejects or refuses to acknowledge that unfortunate truth in light of the overwhelming evidence supporting same, then…yeah…according to dear old Daniel…that’s being delusional.
Rene
November 26, 2012 - 1:54 pm
Reg –
I repeat. I believe the shit Obama has gone through with the GOPers is more because of a) having a Muslim-sounding name, b) have lived and having family in countries with large Muslim populations, c) belonging to a Christian church that many redneck Americans find strange and alien.
In short, I don’t think Obama’s physical appearance is the crux of the prejudice he suffers from GOPers.
You could say racism is broader than discriminating against skin color, that discrimination over religion and culture is a sort of racism, but I don’t agree.
Has there been a history of GOPers saying nasty things over Herman Cain, Condy Rice, Colin Powell, etc. only because they’re black?
And no, it doesn’t mean I love the GOP. Just that I consider their schtick in the 21th century to be religious intolerance, not racism.
Reg
November 26, 2012 - 2:04 pm
Rene,
I hear what you say, and I respect that this is your belief framed out of your prism. But Bruh…I live here…and have a whole lot of shared life experiences with family, friends, co-workers, etc that probably provides me with a more accurate view of what’s behind the curtain.
George Haberberger
November 26, 2012 - 4:35 pm
Reg,
I live here too and I also have voted for Republicans Democrats and independents. (all in the most recent election actually). Rene cites some excellent examples of black conservatives that have not been scorned for their race. Mia Love however was called the n-word when she spoke at the Republican convention but not by the GOP which invited her to speak, And no, I don’t think it was mainline Democrats who called her names either, but this is an example of racism on the left.
“What I found troubling about both your and Rene’s responses was a seemingly total rejection that racism within the GOP was a major problem or not a supportive factor for the (as viewed through my prism) absolutely disrespectful, virulent and obstructive actions perpetrated by both GOP leadership and voters alike with respect to President Obama.”
There are plenty of reasons to oppose Obama and his race is not one of them. What I find troubling is the automatic assumption of racism as the reason for the opposition. It’s like:
Republicans = racists no question. That is offensive and simplistic. But then you did say it was through your prism so there’s that.
R. Maheras
November 26, 2012 - 4:51 pm
When I was home this Thanksgiving, a Republican relative of mine told me she voted for Obama this past election. When I asked her why, she said that she promised herself she’d vote for whichever party bothered her the least with robocalls.
You can’t argue with logic like that!
At least she had SOME sort of measureable criteria — which is more than can be said for most voters.
Mike Gold
November 26, 2012 - 5:10 pm
I’m with her. Voting for the least annoying candidate is more polite than voting for the lesser of two evils.
Every registered Republican at my family’s Thanksgiving dinner voted for Obama — this was in Detroit, not Chicago. But that’s because they felt the Republican Party to which they belong ceased to exist as such several elections back.
Reg
November 26, 2012 - 5:33 pm
George, I caught the dig. C’est la vie. For whatever reason you just refuse to see EVERY single statement that refutes your continued assertion that “…the automatic assumption of racism as the reason for the opposition.”
There doesn’t seem to be any way to get you to not scratch at that ‘phantom pain’ so have fun with that, man.
Reg
November 26, 2012 - 5:44 pm
George, I caught the dig. It’s cool. For whatever reason you just refuse to see EVERY single statement that refutes your continued assertion that “…the automatic assumption of racism as the reason for the opposition.”
There doesn’t seem to be any way to get you to not scratch at that phantom pain to have fun with that, man.
Reg
November 26, 2012 - 10:07 pm
Jim Greer, the former chair (2006-2010)of the Florida Republican Party, has accused the GOP of engaging in voter suppression, in statements given under sworn testimony in a deposition surrounding a lawsuit he filed over an unpaid severance.
“In the year since I issued a prepared statement regarding President Obama speaking to the Nation’s school children, I have learned a great deal about the party I so deeply loved and served. Unfortunately, I found that many within the GOP have racist views and I apologize to the President for my opposition to his speech last year and my efforts to placate the extremists who dominate our Party today. My children and I look forward to the President’s speech.”
Hmmm. Sworn deposed testimony from the former GOP State Chair proffered that the State of Florida engaged in voter suppression directed against minorities. And then there are the following statements “…MANY within the GOP have racist views…DOMINATE our Party today.”
Naaaw. Can’t be true.
George Haberberger
November 27, 2012 - 6:08 am
Sworn testimony in a deposition from a man who is suing the Republican Party. What possible reason could he have to lie?
“Unfortunately, I found that many within the GOP have racist views…” Does he have any actual documentation or is this just his opinion?
Reg, I understand that you have repeatedly said that opposition to Obama is not necessarily based on his race. I get that and I appreciate it. But wedded to that claim is the automatic assertion that racism is common in the Republican Party and should be accepted as fact. I refute that and maintain that racism is no more prevalent ion the right than on the left.
http://www.policymic.com/articles/13711/mia-love-wikipedia-page-allegedly-hacked-n-word-insult-is-insulting-to-everyone
Reg
November 27, 2012 - 11:15 am
George. I’m going to stop beating the horse after this, but I totally agree…why would Jim Greer lie about this? I was fully aware of his being embroiled in fraud charges when I posted the info. What possible benefit would he gain by exposing the heartbeat of an environment to which he had unique and deep insight? “The GOP is racist so I couldn’t have committed fraud?” Really? Does that compute to you?
The wiki page smear against Mia Love is reprehensible. But if you think that incident in any way balances out against the innumerable examples of virulently racist emails, imagery, and actions from individuals with GOP leadership credentials(not to mention from within the base) then you’ve clearly chosen to see what you want to see irrespective of countervailing evidence. And that’s entirely your prerogative.
George Haberberger
November 27, 2012 - 11:23 am
What people with GOP leadership credentials have engaged in “virulently racist emails, imagery, and actions”? Really, if I have missed these individuals I need to know who they are.
R. Maheras
November 27, 2012 - 11:24 am
Mike — In the case of my relative, I’m not sure the current state of the Republican Party had much to do with her decision to vote for Obama. Of Romney, she basically said that she’d “never vote for that man.” I guess the poll stats that Romney was having trouble appealing to women voters was accurate.
Rene
November 28, 2012 - 12:35 pm
Dissidents and former insiders usually have the truest vision about what happens inside movements and parties. So yeah, I’m inclined to listen to what Jim Greer has to say. But I have read parts of his testimony in Daily Kos, and it reads less like “The GOP is full of racists” and more like “The GOP thinks it will never win the vote of minorities, so it just doesn’t care about them.” Just read it on Daily Kos, if I can only find the link…
Another thing I thought about while reading the Daily Kos is the similarities among the accusations that the GOP has a lot of racists, and the accusations that critics of Israel are largely anti-semitic. One accusation targets the Right, the other targets the Left, but they’re similar in that they reduce a complex situation to “those damned racists.”