Posted on 03/14/2008 8:11:56 AM PDT by jdm
She is in the public eye because she actively inserted herself into the public eye. You can’t have it both ways: privacy and speaking out publically on issues.
Got it?
Their kids are 19, 16, & 14 - old enough to know exactly what Dad’s been up to, without any explanations.
Maybe she was thinking of a prenuptial that says she must stand by her man through thick and thin until the divorce papers are signed or else lose the millions she married him for.
No, standing there is a deliberate action, not showing up at her husbands press conference isn't, unless you consider she has an obligation to be there.
As to it being a public issue, good grief, he's the Governor of New York with Presidential ambitions, resigning over both legal and moral misconduct. It's a public issue irrespective of what his wife does.
LOL!
So did I—— from my family.
My job just reinforced what I already knew ;)
Unless she played an organ or two in a trio.
Read again. I never said his actions were not a public issue, I said her thoughts about her marriage need not be made public.
“Got it?”
Got what, your non-sequitor?
Speaking out on public issues does not mean that you are required to disclose to the public your thoughts about your marriage.
Not suggesting she did, I was simply addressing the propriety of her actions, or potentially lack of, as a public issue. Which it is. I haven't a clue what she does from here. And while Quinn seems to think the message is one condoning male misconduct, it can just as easily be construed as keeping private issues private, as best as you can. Realisticly though, there's also a message of standing by your man, which wouldn't be there if the genders were reversed.
I will have to make a habit of reading Quinn's religion column, if only for the humor value. Kind of like the New York Times Magazine Ethics column, which is written by the most ethically blind person I have ever encountered in print. He gets it wrong, every single time.
All I can say to you is that you are better off without the creep, and so is Silda. Chances are the woman that your husband ran off with, wasn’t the first woman that he cheated with, and she won’t be the last. I’ve seen the type many times.
The first thing that my husband asked me when he heard about Spitzer was, why is she standing there with him? I said that maybe she loves him, either that or she already knew and was glad to have satisfy his kinky sex drive somewhere else.
“No, standing there is a deliberate action, not showing up at her husbands press conference isn’t, unless you consider she has an obligation to be there.”
You honestly believe that the issue of her marriage would be discussed less in public if she had NOT been there? Please.
True it’s sad anyone has something like that happen to them.
Actually, little good comes out of having an affair in the first place. Once that is done, all the options are bad, and one must pick the least bad option.
Kind of like the upcoming Fall election...
She’s not disclosing anything. I have not heard say a thing about her so called “private” life.
What are you smoking?
Obviously, she’s attracted more to power than she is to fidelity. Why else would she have urged him to stay in office and fight the charges?
That said, if she was my mother, the only thing I would have respected on March 10 was if she stayed home with me and my sisters and we threw daddy's stuff out the front door while he was confessing for the cameras.
When are any of these pathetic political wives going to find a spine and become a woman their daughters could admire?
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.