“The question I continue to have is when will the conversation return to issues? Because when they do, I know Brett will become the next ambassador to Iraq.”
Thus did loyal wife Gina Chon rationalize away Republican objections to the appointment of her husband, Brett McGurk, to be Ambassador to Iraq. Her point, apparently, is that the fact that he carried on an illicit and secret affair with a reporter—her—while on a previous State Department assignment to Iraq and exchanged e-mails “joking” (?) about exchanging intelligence for sex should be an issue in his conformation.
Let’s see, now. One of the gazillion women President Kennedy may have had an affair with while he was in the White House was Ellen Rometsch, an East German spy. (JFK consistently ranks #1 in polls of which Presidents Americans think were the best. Discuss) Imagine that this came to light, that somehow JFK avoided impeachment for it (he would not have), and avoided Oswald’s magic bullet in Dallas. How would Jackie have sounded, if she argued to the press that since Jack didn’t blab state secrets during his pillow talk, his indiscretion jeopardizing U.S. national security was a non-issue?
Like a loyal wife, like a loyal Democrat, and like an idiot.
The man was in a sensitive government position in a war zone and slept with a reporter, whose professional duty would have been to report anything she learned. Some reporters have not been above using faked romantic interludes to loosen a subject’s tongue, and NO, that did not come out the way I intended it. Chon’s argument is the rankest consequentialism: my husband’s lack of professionalism and conflict of interest did no harm, so it’s a non-issue.
This time, Gina. This time. The incident is proof that McGurk did not place his professional duty above his gonadal urges, and that’s the mark of an untrustworthy diplomat. Of course it is an issue. The other issue is why only Republicans are opposing the nomination of an indiscreet diplomat to take a key post with an Administration that is already leaking secrets like a Toon who drinks a glass of water after being shot with a machine gun. Democrats have a duty to block this guy, and the revelation of his affair with a reporter should have prompted Obama to pull his nomination.
Unless they are all as ethically confused as Chon.
Sad to say, they might be.
Source: Washington Post
Ethics Alarms attempts to give proper attribution and credit to all sources of facts, analysis and other assistance that go into its blog posts. If you are aware of one I missed, or believe your own work was used in any way without proper attribution, please contact me, Jack Marshall, at email@example.com.
5 thoughts on “Ethics Dunce: Gina Chon”
I have never understood peoples ranking JFK so high. His numerous short comings and lack of any real accomplishments are ignored. Most the things people attibute to him were accomplished by others, from going to the moon to the Civil Rights Act.
And i hope you are joking about the “magic bullet” comment.
1) I was joking.
2) You do know why they rank JFK so high. They don’t know a thing about him, except that he was cute. You know. Morons.
It reminds me of an episode in a British comedy series where the protagonists go back in time to find themselves right behind Oswald as he’s taking aim. Scared by their appearance, Oswald falls out the window, splatters on the pavement and the assassination never happens. Then they go forward in time a little and find that Dallas is a ghost town, America is in turmoil and that JFK is a prisoner being transported to jail for any number of high crimes. So, to set history right and preserve Jack’s good name, they take him back in time to Dallas and let him shoot his other self… from a grassy knoll!! Only the Brits could come up with something like that!
Thats the TV Red Dwarf. Great show Nd episode.
Correct! I threw that one out just to see who else liked that crazy, but innovative series. I thought Jack would rise to the bait!