The Trouble with Beinart, Part III - Are our troops fighting for gay marriage? By Mickey?Kaus:
Has Hillary committed any 'intimate transgressions'? We'll soon find out! Hasn't Bernard Kerik performed a huge service for journalism (and the Republican party)? Because of his sacrifice, we now have a dramatically lowered standard for when the New York Times will report the intimate details of public figures' private lives. Kerik was having 'clandestine love affairs' in a Battery Park City apartment he apparently paid for. The Times first reported these 'intimate transgressions'--and named one of Kerik's partners, Titian-tressed titan Judith Regan--even after Kerik had withdrawn from consideration as Homeland Security secretary citing an illegal-nanny problem. ... Somwhere, Jeffrey Toobin is turning over in his grave. Toobin argued absurdly that a politician's sex life is off limits to journalists' because it 'tells you absolutely nothing about their performance in office'. But Kerik wasn't even going to perform in office! He was out. ... The Times, a principled organization, will presumably apply the Kerik precedent in years to come when Democratic figures are involved. I especially look forward to the paper's multiple-reporter investigation of Hillary Clinton's erotic life when she runs for Senate in 2006. All of her housekeepers need to be produced, of course, and if she has any lovers other than her faithful husband we'll find that out too! ... P.S.: Plus, following the Kerik precedent, it will be enough if 'someone who spoke to' Hillary about any relationship can vouch for it. Hearsay evidence about sex is good enough for the Times! ... 2:13 P.M"
Kaus is dead on target even though he's being sarcastic. He knows full well the MSM would never dream of looking into Hillary's wheelings and dealings let alone her personal affairs. This is precisely the reason so many good people stay out of politics. I would never ever run for political office for these very reasons. I doubt I'd even run for a state office let alone national one. I couldn't put my family (nor myself) through the scrutiny.
Public office is no longer viewed as public service. It's viewed as a racket that requires machiavellian scheming to keep yourself clean or at least bury the worst of your record so as to leave only questions.
The shame of it all.
I agree that Kerik should have withdrawn. I wonder, however, why he didn't see this one coming. He had to know the "nanny problem" was going to come out and more than likely the salacious details of his personal life would too. Perhaps he thought the women would keep quiet. He must have deluded himself. Judith Regan has a reputation for having razor sharp claws and a willingness to use them. She is no shrinking violet who would hold her tongue if attacked. Guiliani has to be furious w/ Kerik. He pushed hard for this nomination for his old friend. I cannot imagine that Rudy knew about the skeletons and thought Kerik could get a pass. I surmise that he simply didn't know. Which means either he asked Kerik if there were potential problems and he said no. That makes him a liar or a fool. Or, he said yes and Rudy burned all his political capital in one move that was sure to fail. Which seems more likely?
Has Hillary committed any 'intimate transgressions'? We'll soon find out! Hasn't Bernard Kerik performed a huge service for journalism (and the Republican party)? Because of his sacrifice, we now have a dramatically lowered standard for when the New York Times will report the intimate details of public figures' private lives. Kerik was having 'clandestine love affairs' in a Battery Park City apartment he apparently paid for. The Times first reported these 'intimate transgressions'--and named one of Kerik's partners, Titian-tressed titan Judith Regan--even after Kerik had withdrawn from consideration as Homeland Security secretary citing an illegal-nanny problem. ... Somwhere, Jeffrey Toobin is turning over in his grave. Toobin argued absurdly that a politician's sex life is off limits to journalists' because it 'tells you absolutely nothing about their performance in office'. But Kerik wasn't even going to perform in office! He was out. ... The Times, a principled organization, will presumably apply the Kerik precedent in years to come when Democratic figures are involved. I especially look forward to the paper's multiple-reporter investigation of Hillary Clinton's erotic life when she runs for Senate in 2006. All of her housekeepers need to be produced, of course, and if she has any lovers other than her faithful husband we'll find that out too! ... P.S.: Plus, following the Kerik precedent, it will be enough if 'someone who spoke to' Hillary about any relationship can vouch for it. Hearsay evidence about sex is good enough for the Times! ... 2:13 P.M"
Kaus is dead on target even though he's being sarcastic. He knows full well the MSM would never dream of looking into Hillary's wheelings and dealings let alone her personal affairs. This is precisely the reason so many good people stay out of politics. I would never ever run for political office for these very reasons. I doubt I'd even run for a state office let alone national one. I couldn't put my family (nor myself) through the scrutiny.
Public office is no longer viewed as public service. It's viewed as a racket that requires machiavellian scheming to keep yourself clean or at least bury the worst of your record so as to leave only questions.
The shame of it all.
I agree that Kerik should have withdrawn. I wonder, however, why he didn't see this one coming. He had to know the "nanny problem" was going to come out and more than likely the salacious details of his personal life would too. Perhaps he thought the women would keep quiet. He must have deluded himself. Judith Regan has a reputation for having razor sharp claws and a willingness to use them. She is no shrinking violet who would hold her tongue if attacked. Guiliani has to be furious w/ Kerik. He pushed hard for this nomination for his old friend. I cannot imagine that Rudy knew about the skeletons and thought Kerik could get a pass. I surmise that he simply didn't know. Which means either he asked Kerik if there were potential problems and he said no. That makes him a liar or a fool. Or, he said yes and Rudy burned all his political capital in one move that was sure to fail. Which seems more likely?
Comments