Posted on 03/14/2008 8:11:56 AM PDT by jdm
** EXCERPT **
Once, just once, wouldn’t you love to see the politician up there at the lectern sweating bullets, apologizing for letting down his wife and family …. alone?
Once, just once, wouldn’t you love to see the wife issuing her own statement saying that what he had done was unacceptable and that she was leaving him?
Wouldn’t that be morally correct?
But instead, again and again, we see the pathetic, ravaged faces of these women victims, standing supportively beside their husbands as they allow themselves to be excruciatingly humiliated in front of the whole world.
We really haven’t come a long way baby, have we? Certainly not in the case of women married to elected officials.
For the past few days since the Spitzer scandal broke, all anyone has been talking about is why? Why would a guy with a fabulous education, brilliant career, powerful position, beautiful and brainy wife and a lovely family, risk losing everything for a couple of evenings with a hooker.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsweek.washingtonpost.com ...
Our amusement is not Silda Spitzer’s top priority.
Because its none of our business. He is accountable to the public, but her decisions about the marriage are private, and should be.
I guess she changed her mind.
Yes, I would love to see one of these women stand up for themselves. He’s a very lucky man. If he was my husband the only person at the lecturn would be a minister...giving his euology!
Spitzer really did have all kinds of scheduled travel for work, and his assignations seem to have been timed to coincide with trips out of town.
I don't believe the voodoo notion that "A woman call always tell."
Plenty of women get blindsided by spousal infidelity.
Her marriage of 20 years turned into a nightmare last Sunday.
After three days she was still in shock.
I feel bad for her and I can't condemn her.
I think what Spitzer did was reprehensible and he rightly deserved to loze his position.
That said, none of us has any right to pass judgement on his wife. Knowing, up close and personal, how these things affect families you cannot begin to understand why a woman stands by her man. It IS possible that she loves him and is willing to stand by HER vows.
This type of thing is not about sex. It is about the rush that one gets from “being bad.” This guy as some severe problems that need to be addressed. It is possible that he can get these issues under control.
It IS possible that he and his wife can figure out the problems between them, and make it work. I have seen it happen several times.
Judge him all you want. But it would be wrong to assume her motivations. Dont assume she is getting paid off, or that she is just being a good political wife. She doesn’t NEED him, or his money. His career is over. There is no financial or political reason for her stick around.
It is easy to say what she should do, or what you would do. However, until you have looked into the abyss, you cannot truly know what you would do.
Did I really spell that “loze?” Jeez...spell check is my friend. How about “lose.”
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Any divorce lawyer would tell you that she did the right thing by being there.
She's going to wind up taking him to the cleaners, and rightfully so.
It is our business when she inserts herself into politics. She, as well as Spitzer’s mother, is a strong advocate for infanticide.
I know that many women are supportive of those who stand by their man, for no other stated reason than to keep the family together. Imagine, though, the scars that the children will suffer from getting conflicting messages. Surely they are taught to be honest and to honor their family, but suddenly it is also to do as I say and not what I do.
Hopefully the girls are learning that one does not throw away a twenty-year marriage at the first sign of trouble. Hopefully they are learning that adults take time to think through and talk through their problems before taking irrevocable actions or running off to the Divorce Court. Maybe they will even see their parents seek advice and solace from professional counselors or < gasp! > religious advisors before doing something rash.
They may wind in Divorce Court eventually, but there is no need for Silda Spitzer to throw her husband and marriage away in the first 24 hours of a scandal, even if it would have made for interesting TV for Sally Quinn to watch on a slow Tuesday afternoon.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
This coming from Ben Bradlee’s mistress. I’m all ears. Sarcasm off.
Huh?
What does this have to do with the issue of whether or not she is justified in keeping her marital strife private?
She was thinking, “Eliot, your *behind* is grass, and I’m the lawnmower.”
Of course. And I highly doubt this all started after he became Governor.
There's us "normal" people and there's the politicians, the rich, and Hollywood. They operate on a whole different set of rules -- "don't get caught" and "be discreet" being the two big ones.
I agree that he deserves to be taken to the cleaners, but I don’t see how standing there in the ultimate humiliation is going to affect the outcome of the divorce. It would seem that it would backfire because his lawyer could say that she supported him and was going to stick by him. Here’s evidence of that......now someone obviously convinced her to go after him.
That is easy to say when it is somebody else. Like I might say that I would stand up and fight some 300 pound bad-a$$ biker in a bar, but when the time comes, I might find that talking things out might be the better course!
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.