MoDo and Political Scandal

I am full of weird dreams lately. I have taken to writing them down in a journal I keep next to my bed, that is, unless I am too tired to motivate myself to write at 3 a.m. Last night I had three dreams. They were pretty vivid, I can remember them all clearly today. One was that the Director of WWU's MBA program told me I wasn't getting in, but that if I work in Burlington for one more year, maybe they will take me next year (okay so this dream was more like a nightmare). The second dream was a bunch of people trying to tell me that the most satisfying relationships are non-physical, I disagreed and got called a hussy, which is ironic because I don't get that much action (I think this came from a story I heard about a blow job last night). The third was a dream that I was waiting in line at a coffee stand, but when I got to the window they had just run out of coffee... weird. I took it as a sign that I needed coffee this morning, which is exactly what I got :)

Good thing I don't really like the coffee/service at the Hound Dog Coffee stand at the bottom of the hill or I would probably go every day. Today I had to make due with Starbucks. Okay although Starbucks does not have the best coffee, I have to say, Starbucks has the best service by far. I always have a good experience when I go there. They are always peppy and friendly and they never rush you. This morning they gave me a bagel with free cream cheese. I love free. To save this morning I even ordered drip coffee (yes Calvin, drip) but with lots of cream and sugar. Bagel + Drip + Free Cream Cheese = $2.95. Good Service = Priceless.

On a side note, as I was reading the paper today I came across an article by my new fav. columnist Maureen Dowd. I love this line from Dowd's column in reference to ex-Governor Spitzer's wife, Silda, and on the duties of politicians' wives in general:

"In modern times, you rarely see any men having to stand ashenly by their women."

So true MoDo, so true. I have read a few other op-ed pieces commenting on the "wifely duties in politcal scandal" phenomenon. Just like Hillary in the wake of Monica, Suzanne Craig after her husband was caught soliciting gay sex in an airport bathroom, and Dina McGreevey after her husband Governor McGreevey of New Jersey resigned upon announcing he was gay and had carried on several extra-marital affairs. It seems strange that the American public expects these wronged spouses to make public appearances which display their solidarity as a family, when in reality, that is far from the truth.

While I agree that couples need to honor their marriage vows and try to make things work, I think that there is also a line. These politicians clearly did not honor their vows, so expecting their wives to make ridiculous gestures of devotion to them at this junction seems terribly unfair. Some might say that the show of support for the wife stands to serve as an example of family values. I say, when you are a political figure who has a wife and three daughters and you are caught soliciting sex in a prostitution ring, it's too little too late for family values. Why is it then the wife's responsibility to be the example?

Call me cruel, but cheating is one thing that should not, in my opinion, be tolerated. Perhaps these couples will try to work things out privately, but in the meantime why the fake show of support? It seems that having the wife stand passively by is a almost a method of condoning what has happened, it's the old 'silence is acceptance' adage. It sucks.

As the Times columnist Foderaro put it, “I think [Spitzer] did enough harm to his wife and children that he didn’t need to take her out there with him. If he was man enough to order a woman as if he were ordering a sandwich off a deli menu, he should have been man enough to go out there and take it on his own.”

Amen Foderaro.