Let's Not Talk About Sex

I’m a bit fed up with all of this talk about sex. Have we become a nation fascinated with knowing who’s doing who and how long they have been doing it? What does it mean when the National Enquirer becomes the model for investigative reporting?

What happened to the days when the Enquirer was a joke, and the only people who read it were those suckered into believing Michael Jackson’s chimpanzee is his second cousin from Mars and Janice is a reincarnated elephant. When John Edward’s got busted by the Enquirer it set journalism back 50 years. Why? Because those representing credible journalism are too scared to talk about sex after coming after John McCain.

You may remember how the New York Times crucified McCain for an alleged affair with a lobbyist. The story painted McCain as a hypocrite for advocating for campaign reform while doing the horizontal hooky poky with a lobbyist. The McCain camp lashed back, and the story didn’t stick. Instead of backing out of his presidential bid, McCain was vindicated for what appeared to be a story printed void of the facts.

It didn’t matter that there was the appearance of numerous conflicts of interest. It didn’t matter that people within the McCain camp had approached him about the rumors that were circulating. It didn’t matter that McCain had been caught crossing the line before, and that he had a previous affair after his wife’s automobile accident. The New York Times was forced to apologize while McCain moved closer to securing the nomination.

The Time couldn’t get it right, but the National Enquired did. The most credible news outlet in the nation was slapped on the hand, while the model for tabloid journalism wins the prize for breaking the biggest story of the election year. Something is wrong folks.

Bob Wilson, my former editor at the Herald-Sun, chided the News & Observer for failing to go after the Edwards story. Many have assumed that members of the press knew enough to investigate Edwards. People were talking, and the Enquire was bold enough to go after the story. Maybe the News & Observer, the New York Times and the other reputable news organizations were too scared to come after Edwards after the Times messed up with McCain.

Which brings me back to my original point-I’m fed up with all of this talk about who’s screwing who. I’m pissed at it all because the jerks that get caught should have enough self-control to keep their private parts in their pants. I understand human weakness. I suspect that it gets hard spending all of those hours on the road, and that you need to release every now and then. I’m no prude. I get it. I really do, but isn’t the job important enough to refrain from doing what you desire in the heat of the moment?

Or, has the game of politics all become a game? I brought into the cheesy story of the Edwards going to Wendy’s to celebrate their freaking wedding anniversary. I heard the violins when Elizabeth stood by her man after being diagnosed with cancer. I looked past the $400 haircuts and the big house outside of Chapel Hill. I even forgave Edwards for giving up his Senate seat after we fought hard to get him in office. I forgave the drive that led him to run for President after one term opening the way for Elizabeth Dole to take his place.

I hate this talk about sex because of the lies that come with it all. Tell us the truth about your marriages. Don’t hide the truth! Trust us with your lives so that we can get back to the business of voting for people based on the issues rather than wasting time in an attempt to read between the lines of bull you feed us. Tell us that you have a woman on the side and two or three more on each coast to fill in the gaps when sweet thang can’t show up.

Get past playing games with our emotions! Go ahead. Trust us with your mess! Tell us you stay with her because she’s the mother of your children but the flame has died out. Tell us you desire a younger woman, you are going through a midlife crisis and you have a sports car tucked away in a remote place. Tell us your marriage is a joke, and you’re too scared to take the risk of leaving because you want the freaking job.

It’s a sad day folks. The National Enquirer broke this story because America is tired of all of this talk about sex. It happens so often that we can’t keep up with all the sex scandals, and The New York Times isn’t willing to take the risk.

It sure would be nice to have a conversation about public policy.

I Did Not Have Sex With that Woman!

I didn’t have sex with that woman. Here we go again. John McCain and his devoted wife stood before the world and proclaimed his innocence. This is the fault of the zealous, liberal press. His record speaks for itself. That’s what he wants us to believe

It didn’t take long for Rush Limbaugh to come to McCain’s defense. No one knows like ole Rush the venom of the liberal press. When his addiction to prescription drugs was uncovered he blamed those devils who write for a living for digging into his dirty laundry.

It’s interesting how the press becomes the bad guy when conservatives get caught with their pants down. When Bill Clinton was doing his thing in the oval office the press was credited for exposing the jerk for taking special liberties with an intern. A few good leads led to the exposure of his Clinton’s secret passions: cigars, young women and hanky panky in his office.

Shame on Bill Clinton for destroying our trust in the highest office in the land. Many liberal minded would say it’s only sex, and that what happens between two consenting adults is their own business. They contend that was a matter between Bill and Hillary, and we, the meddling American public, should stay out of their bedroom. They’ll go a step further by assuming everyone does the same thing.

That’s water under the ole bridge. What McCain’s possible indiscretion exposes are the dangers that come with having all that power. The problem isn’t the sex that may have occurred between he and Vicki Iseman, a Washington lobbyist. We shouldn’t be irked that the New York Times exposed all of this eight years after John Weaver, a longtime McCain aide, met with McCain and Iseman to urge her to stay away from McCain.

People in the McCain camp felt there was a serious conflict of interest that needed to be checked. Iseman had business before the Senate Commerce Committee on which McCain served. The Times story alleges that McCain wrote letters and pushed legislation involving television station ownership that would have benefited Iseman’s clients.

It’s not the sex; it’s the appearance of a serious conflict of interest that is at the heart of this discussion. McCain claims a squeaky clean record, while somehow avoiding the controversy of being accused of trying to influence banking regulations on behalf of Charles Keating two decades ago. Keating was later convicted of securities fraud. The Senate Ethics Committee decided that McCain had used poor judgment but his action were not improper and warranted no penalty.

McCain claims that incident spurred his desire to change campaign finance laws in an attempt to reduce the influence of money in politics. This issue is important due to how his come to Jesus moment has validated his drive for the presidency. Sniff, sniff. I did wrong, but I have been converted and promise to preach the good news of what needs to be changed. Can we believe that now?

The day before this story leaked, McCain chided Barack Obama for reneging on his promise to accept public financing rather than using the massive war chest he’s built over the past year. Of course, Obama had no way of knowing he would raise twice as much as his republican counterpart. He knows he will need every penny he has raised to get his “We Can” message across. Obama’s flip/flop is an issue of concern when placed within the context of campaign finance.

It’s not the liberal press that calculatingly came after an innocent man. The people at the Times had to make a tough decision. Should this story be printed, or should they turn their backs on the claims of high-ranking officials in the McCain camp? The press has an obligation to bring to the public information that may influence the way they think about those we elect. This is especially pertinent when the actions are in conflict with the agenda promoted by those we vote for.

This isn’t about sex this time. It’s not about the evils of the liberal press. This time it’s about real change in government. We need to know the truth.