Posted on 03/25/2016 8:13:32 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
You may not be interested in the alleged affairs of the presidential candidates, but the affairs of the candidates are very interested in you. Our media flask is now overflowing with smutty stories primed by the forthcoming issue of the National Enquirer, which alleges on its cover that Ted Cruz has had “5 Secret Mistresses.” Only by depositing yourself in a news quarantine this weekend will you escape the story’s heavy breathing.
Cruz denounces the piece, which I’ve not yet obtained, as “utter lies,” and claims it was planted by Donald Trump. (Trump denies it.) But either way, it restarts the journalistic debate over whether the press has any business reporting on the sex lives of politicians. At one time in Washington, politicians—even the president—could have lovers on the side and get away with it as long as they were circumspect about it (Lyndon Johnson, John Kennedy, Dwight Eisenhower, Franklin Roosevelt, and so on back to the founding). But that arrangement changed in 1979, when the Washington Monthly published Suzannah Lessard’s killed New Republic piece about Ted Kennedy’s dalliances. Since then, a dozen major politicians, including Rep. Robert Bauman in 1980; Rep. Dan Crane in 1983; Sen. Gary Hart in 1987; President Bill Clinton in 1998; and Sen. John Edwards in 2008 have been accused in the press for having participated in bedroom rodeo with someone other than their spouse.
Story Continued Below
More of a meta piece than an exposé, the Lessard article presented for public consumption what was widely known within official Washington but was only whispered about elsewhere: Ted Kennedy, who was running for president against Jimmy Carter, was sleeping around. A lot. Titled “Kennedy’s Woman Problem; Women’s Kennedy Problem,” the piece named no names and made no attempt to document his sexual adventures. It merely presented them as a given to argue that Kennedy’s philandering and treatment of women deserved public discussion “as a legitimate issue in the campaign.”
Lessard raised many of the issues we still bat around every time a politician is accused of—or gets caught—having sex outside of marriage. (It should be noted that Kennedy separated from his first wife in 1978, and they divorced in 1982.) In her view, a candidate who campaigns or governs as a family man—especially one who also makes a big deal about being religious—is guilty of credibility-destroying hypocrisy if he or she also has extramarital affairs. Another criticism of office-holding philanderers, especially presidents or officials holding high security clearances, is that they injure the nation by making themselves vulnerable to blackmail by foreign powers or other unscrupulous operators.
Blackmail aside, why do a politician’s dalliances matter? Why do we care? Why do we hunger to read about them even if we don’t care about hypocrisy or the national security implications? It would take an anthropologist to explain that, but who is shtupping whom is of high interest in almost every culture, and has been so ever since we left the trees for the veldt. Even the sex lives of the low-status fascinate us. Whether valid or not, an individual’s sex life has come to stand as a marker of trustworthiness. Once the subject is breached, it takes superhuman powers by the press to avoid talking about it.
Candidates seek extramarital sex for the same reasons civilians do—for adventure, to express status within the group, for love, to obey the command of the selfish gene to throw itself into the next generation. The difference, of course, is that politicians play to a crowd that’s a million times the size of an ordinary civilian, and for that reason the collective judgment is much greater. So is the collective obsession. That’s why we’re all happily gossiping about Ted Cruz’s sex life today: It’s not that he’s sexy (perish the thought), it’s that he’s high profile and high status.
If, as Andrew Marr writes, “Journalism is the industrialization of gossip,” it’s remarkable how little sex-tattling gets published. It was not always so. Sexual gossip can be found in America’s first newspaper, Publick Occurrences Both Forreign And Domestick (1690), which makes mention of the French king’s affair with a prince’s wife. (The publication was shut down after one issue.)
How much damage will the National Enquirer allegations do to the Cruz campaign? According to Gawker, which has read the story, none of the alleged paramours are named, and their photos reproduced in the piece are pixilated, presumably to deter speedy identification. How can we convict on such sketchy evidence, even if that sketchy evidence appears to be more substantial than Lessard’s case against Kennedy? On the other hand, the publication has a pretty good track record catching cheating notables (Hart, Edwards, Tiger Woods, Jesse Jackson). Maybe it has temporarily vagued-out the specifics of Cruz’s alleged affairs because it plans to drip-drip-drip the details into the public over the course of several issues to sell more copies.
If true, the story will be damaging. But even if false, which is entirely possible, the charges will be almost as damaging to Cruz, because he can’t afford to spend scarce time and political capital on the controversy to refute and erase the stain. He’s too busy fighting Trump for the nomination!
Here’s what haunts me most about this story. Today, the cable channels and the Web are filled with high-speed speculation about a story that many of us (including me) have not yet read. What if Cruz is innocent? To borrow a phrase uttered by an exonerated Reagan administration official, where will Cruz go to get his good name back?
now that the “cats” are out of the proverbial bag.... (or the other more unacceptable name used to designate, ahem, cats)
Cruz no longer has to the GOPe’s bidding. The GOPe blackmailers have officially lost their controllable candidate...
As their demise consolidates... watch out for riots, murders and assassination attempts... directed by those who hold the reins of power in their filthy corrupt hands.
Melania never said Donald was the “Face of God” in the race. Big fing difference.
I knew their was something wrong with Cruz—I believe it—he thinks he can do no wrong.
well said.
Can you tell me when God anointed Ted?
I feel like there's a difference between somebody who has acknowledged affairs in the context of an open marriage or some such, versus someone who claims to be devout and subscribes to a moral code which precludes adultery.
That's why, if these allegation are true, the hypocrisy is astounding.
One or two alleged dalliances can be dismissed as "tabloid trash". But FIVE? More?
The Enquirer, as much as they're a tabloid, has a pretty good track record of nailing politicians with these infidelities.
Additionally, in the aftermath of the recent Gawker smackdown, you'd think that the National Enquirer would be very careful to have their story pretty well nailed down.
That doesn't bode well for Ted Cruz, and neither does his immediate and predictable accusation that the catch-all boogeyman Donald Trump is behind this.
Evidence seems to point to Rubio wanting to use this story back before Super Tuesday, since we now know there were rumblings from that camp, and also that the media has been sitting on the knowledge of this story for weeks.
Other elements of the Establishment also doesn't like Ted Cruz, so maybe this is from some other GOPe source.
If it is true, Ted Cruz's campaign and career are obliterated. So I hope it's not.
Unfortunately, I've already seen several alarming signs that Ted Cruz is not exactly who he appeared to be before his Presidential campaign started...
Can you tell me when God anointed Ted?
Will Ted get the hint and go back to Canada? Because it appears he has deposited more than one rather permanent stain on his blue dresses...
Having an affair is the ultimate ‘attack’ on a wife.
I knew Cruz was not who he claims he is simply by the fact that he is a natural born Canadian 1st term Jr. Senator from Harvard.
Yep, then Trump will “make a deal” with congres that, “Okay, the good ones don’t have to go home first, they can just stay here.”
...and that he single-handedly balanced the budget ...and the kicker (wait for it) his father was a mailman! Get's 'em everytime.
I was on the wide road in my 30’s. That was the first half of my life.
Ezekial 18:21-32
21 “But if the wicked man turns from all his sins which he has committed and observes all My statutes and practices justice and righteousness, he shall surely live; he shall not die. 22 All his transgressions which he has committed will not be remembered against him; because of his righteousness which he has practiced, he will live. 23 Do I have any pleasure in the death of the wicked,” declares the Lord God, “rather than that he should turn from his ways and live?
24 “But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity and does according to all the abominations that a wicked man does, will he live? All his righteous deeds which he has done will not be remembered for his treachery which he has committed and his sin which he has committed; for them he will die. 25 Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not right.’ Hear now, O house of Israel! Is My way not right? Is it not your ways that are not right? 26 When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, commits iniquity and dies because of it, for his iniquity which he has committed he will die. 27 Again, when a wicked man turns away from his wickedness which he has committed and practices justice and righteousness, he will save his life. 28 Because he considered and turned away from all his transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live; he shall not die. 29 But the house of Israel says, ‘The way of the Lord is not right.’ Are My ways not right, O house of Israel? Is it not your ways that are not right?
30 “Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, each according to his conduct,” declares the Lord God. “Repent and turn away from all your transgressions, so that iniquity may not become a stumbling block to you. 31 Cast away from you all your transgressions which you have committed and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! For why will you die, O house of Israel? 32 For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies,” declares the Lord God. “Therefore, repent and live.”
Ed
“Bill is running for First Lady.”
*****
Nope. Both Bill and Hillary have made it clear that he’s not interested in going back to DC as the President’s spouse.
Instead, Hillary has trial ballooned two names to serve in the role of First Lady: Chelsea and Huma.
You apparently are not yet aware that Trump is in favor of amnesty so long as the amnesty papers are not filed domestically. The amnesty seeker has to leave the country, file for amnesty, and return. Differently sliced, but still amnesty. The only candidate firmly opposed to ANY form of amnesty is Cruz, like it or not.
GQ http://gq-images.condecdn.net/image/xre9XV9B6kg/crop/1620
http://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/donald-trump-melania-trump-knauss-first-lady-erections
Trump’s National Enquirer buddy
http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/25/trump-national-enquirer-ceo-have-been-friends-for-years/
Donald Trump Once Compared Dating Life To Vietnam War https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/02/draft-dodger-donald-trump-compares-dating-life-to-vietnam-war#sthash.9OxQNkUh.dpuf
Photos show Donald Trump in military uniform, with athletic teams before dodging the Vietnam draft with ‘bull-—t’ injury
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/photos-show-trump-military-garb-dodging-draft-article-1.2298248
Trump’s Health Perfect, Except That Day He Got A Military Medical Deferment
http://www.alan.com/2015/12/17/trumps-health-perfect-except-that-day-he-got-a-military-medical-deferment/#
Donald Trump’s Own Secret: Vietnam Draft Records
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trumps-vietnam-draft-records-secret-documents-deferments/story?id=13492639
Trump draft dodger has some nerve going after McCain
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/presidential-campaign/249028-draft-deferred-trump-has-some-nerve-going-after
How Donald Trump Partied During the Vietnam War
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLydb7K6zmY
Deferments Helped Trump Dodge Vietnam
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/trump-draft-deferment
Questions linger about Trump’s draft deferments during Vietnam War
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/questions-linger-about-trumps-draft-deferments-during-vietnam-war/2015/07/21/257677bc-2fdd-11e5-8353-1215475949f4_story.html
Donald Trump set to come under attack over Vietnam deferments
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/12156009/Donald-Trump-set-to-come-under-attack-over-Vietnam-deferments.html
Donald Trump’s Own Secret: Vietnam Draft Records
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trumps-vietnam-draft-records-secret-documents-deferments/story?id=13492639
The Great Mistake was blaming Trump
Cruz has made a demonstrably unpresidential action by blaming the wrong guy. That is, he pushed the nuclear button to obliterate the wrong target. His intelligence was either faulty or he purposely bombed the wrong target.
It is unforgivable for him to have poor intel. He should have staff with nose to the grindstone ferreting out the events of the day and informing him of what is what. His staff failed to gather the correct facts known by many that the Rubio people were peddling the story eventually picked up by the NE.
The decidedly unpresidential response is more important than the screwing around. Cruz lacks the judgement to be President.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.