The following statement, an unwelcome echo of an oldie but goodie from the Clinton Presidency, sets off an ethics alarm that sounds like fingernails on a blackboard. Kathryn Casey Quigley, an aspiring leader of the Suffolk County Democratic Committee, said that the photos were irrelevant. “They’re his private life,” she said, “and what matters are the policies he will advocate for and how he’ll fight to make life more affordable and fair for Suffolk County residents.” Gallant argued the same position, naturally. He wrote in a text to supporters saying of the photos, “I’m not embarrassed or ashamed — I have always been unapologetically me.” Adding that the photos “don’t make me less qualified to pilot a Blackhawk helicopter” and “don’t affect my ability to safely traffic commercial airliners.”
That text makes me more dubious of Gallant than the photographs: He’s not running for air traffic controller or helicopter pilot, he’s running for Congress. He’s ducking the issue and deflecting. The response is cowardly and dishonest. Is that the kind of weasel voters should want to represent them in Washington DC?
“I have always been unapologetically me” also makes me want to barf.
As for the “private life” refrain that we heard so often when Democrats and Clinton enablers argued that a President lying about getting blow-jobs in the Oval Office from a White House intern while he posed as the champion of feminists was merely engaging in “private personal conduct,” how can any Democrat or progressive or citizen not wearing a paper bag on his or her fool head have the chutzpah to argue that in 2021? Private life choices are as important indicia of character as public life choices (“Ethics is what you do when nobody’s looking”), and character is not only crucial to leadership, it often is leadership. The Left’s main attacks on Donald Trump since he first announced his candidacy in 2015 to this day have been based on his alleged character or lack of it, along with his hair, his skin color, his weight, his romantic life, what he said to Billy Bush backstage at a TV interview…and the list rolls out like Ko-Ko’s “little list” in “The Mikado.”
I might make the argument, if I were on the Democrat defense team, that as when Gallant was a model, what Gallant modeled is no more relevant than the roles Ronald Reagan played in films before he was a politician, and he played some really bad guys. Quigley’s defense, however, reminds me, as did their attempts to rationalize running Graham Platner, of the well-worn retort, “If Democrats didn’t have double standards they would have no standards at all.”
[WordPress suggests that I tag this post “poetry.”]
Well, he’s certainly tied up the gay vote.
This seems to be typical Democrat electoral strategy: secure all the votes of a significant minority. It’s how Somalis and Islamists win elections in Minneapolis and Michigan. A single bloc of voters can deliver a win.
That pun made me want to gag….
Reminds me of the one line in “9 to 5” that made me laugh out loud. When the ex-husband of very square Judy (Jane Fonda) discovers that she has her pig boss wired to the ceiling in her bedroom (because she and Lily Tomlin and Dolly are keeping him prisoner for reasons too complicated to explain, then or here), he is shocked that she is now into sexual kinks and bondage. “Yes!” Judy says. “I’m into M & Ms!”
Dolly Parton’s very catchy song was all I knew about the movie. Yikes! And of course, the movie and song were out during my big firm era and the concept of just working from nine to five was incredibly alluring.
Where has all the normalcy gone! Moral choices, nowadays, always tends one to follow his/her passions. Self satisfaction is the center, societal norms are an intrusion.
Note, on the western end of the island they elected AOC, the bartender. The middle of the island continually re-elects Chuck Shumer, the self hating pro-palestinian Jew.
The third district elected George Santos!
“They’re his private life,” she said, “and what matters are the policies he will advocate for and how he’ll fight to make life more affordable and fair for Suffolk County residents.”
There’s that Democratic Talking point again…affordable (bold was my adjustment).
So, not only are they pulling out the old “personal life doesn’t matter” narrative, but they’re also airing out the “It’s the economy, stupid”, too?
“Affordability” has replaced, among others, “democracy is on the ballot” in the DNC talking points memo. And let us not forget the ridiculously titled, “Inflation Reduction Act.” Personally, I think anyone who willingly and dutifully spouts talking points is a lemming and not a serious candidate or office holder. Leaders don’t spend all their time following instructions.
There’s a couple of things going on here.
First is that some of ya’ll really need to get past your discomfort with kink. This is kind of a continuation of the fella we talked about earlier this year that liked to dress up like a woman with stonking big tits and have people call him names. The number of guys, both gay and straight, who do things like this, is incredible. For the most part, you have no idea what they’re doing, and that works for everyone. It’s a hobby, it’s stress relief, it’s safe, it’s fun. It’s cheaper than buying Lego sets and less likely to cause you to lose digits than woodworking. The more function your job demands, and the higher stress it causes is directly correlated with outlets like this. Jack, you’re a lawyer. I would bet amazing amounts of wealth that there are colleagues that you think very highly of with a fully-stocked toy closet, and you have no idea about it.
Second is that even though everything I just said is true, allowing yourself to be photographed for a leather site is mindbogglingly stupid for anyone, because you never know who might get too icked out by it to get over it. Running for congress knowing that your ass is actively on a leather site is so far past that that it isn’t even funny. It’s like… approaching the level of a legal competency issue… This guy is too fuckin stupid to be trusted with running an Arby’s.
Exactly, HT.
HT, if bondage is like woodworking only safer and we all need to just get over it, why should these photos be evidence of stupidity? Shouldn’t his bondage fetish be admired and celebrated?
Why is it stupid to have pictures taken of someone partaking in this particular hobby? Because it’s sexual, and people have weird hang-ups about sex. It isn’t about the thing itself being bad, it’s about the common reaction of people. It’s kind of like how it’s dumb for a woman to walk home alone from the club at 3AM… Technically, there’s nothing wrong with that, but it’s reckless to do it.
Can you articulate why it shouldn’t be admired or celebrated?
“They’re his private life,” she said, “and what matters are the policies he will advocate for and how he’ll fight to make life more affordable and fair for Suffolk County residents.”
That is all fine of course, however I think that people should keep their private live private. I do not care about a politician’s sex life as long as he is not breaking the law. I do not have the expectation that my senator or representative is a devout family man. Privacy is a double-edged sword: it gives a person leeway in living life as he wants to, but it also entails the duty to keep the details hidden from others. There are plenty of things I would rather not know or be witness off; that is certain doors within the house have locks. Once the secrets of a political candidate are out, he is fair game for the electorate and for the candidate who is challenging him in the election; that is how the game is played.
The invocation of Bill Clinton in this context is a bit off the mark. Bill Clinton committed perjury and obstruction of justice as he was being sued by Paula Jones, and with independent council Ken Starr on his tail.
But the “private life” mantra was the official defense! “Move ON” used it to launch their organization. “It’s just sex!” was another. “That’s how the game is played” glosses over the question for “Everybody does it.” SHOULD the game be played that way? My answer is not just yes, but “of course.” John Edwards having a mistress and fathering a child while running for President (with his wife dying of cancer) may be personal choices, but they are the personal choices of a sociopath, and attention must be paid.
The “private life” defense should only work for acts that are indeed private. Bill Clinton broke the law. Another example is Elliot Spitzer, former governor and attorney general of New York, who in both offices was sworn to uphold the law, and broke the law by visiting a prostitute. His prostitution habit was therefore not a private matter, and so he had to resign. Elon Musk has a non-traditional sex life with thirteen children with five or six women. Barney Frank had a flamboyantly gay sex life. I am entitled to my moral opinions about that, but I consider the sex life of Elon Musk and Barney Frank as private matters, and therefore non of my business. The same is true of somebody’s interest in BDSM and kink; everybody is entitled to his private hobbies as long as they do not break the law. The only think I require is that politicians practice discretion about some of those interest that have a tendency to ick people out.
Maybe Biden was right that they’re going put y’all back in chains.