so the big news this morning is that john edwards cheated on his wife. eh, here we go again.
let me start by saying i have giant-sized empathy, hell, universe-sized empathy, for elizabeth edwards, and for the hillary clintons and the cindy mccains of the world who get to see their partner's betrayals discussed live, and incessantly, on Color TV. i lived through that kind of betrayal. and oh-my-god, it sucked. the humiliation was horrible enough, and i cannot. begin. to. imagine the scope of it when the entire world learns about and then obsesses over it for days, weeks, months, and in hill's case, years. i could write a whole post on the slow, torturous recovery you have to endure as the partner-who-got-cheated-on. it is deeply painful, grueling, embarrassing, and will take any self-esteem you've managed to amass and obliterate it into millions of tiny, glass-like and dangerously sharp pieces. the re-building of Self takes years, and even when you think you're finally over it, it can rear its ugly head again at any moment and just mess. you. up. for real. my heart just aches for Elizabeth Edwards today. but that is not what i want to write about.
i seem to find myself in a bit of a conundrum. or a paradox. or a catch-22. 'enigma' doesn't seem to fit, but i really like that word so i decided to insert it anyway.
on the one hand, i want to believe that i couldn't give a rat's ass about the gorry details of a candidate or elected official's personal life. i mean damn, if i used that as a threshhold when deciding who to support, well, i might as well stay home and not vote at all. because, come on people, we all have skeletons in our proverbial closets. and when you mix power and prestige with sex, it seems that a whole lot of our "leaders" just cannot. resist. the temptations. call it egoism, call it narcissism, call it whatever you want, but the same great movers and shakers who can manage to deal rather brilliantly with shit like, um, wars or threats of nuclear annihilation or global economies, simply cannot manage their own pitiful libidos. Franklin D. couldn't manage it, JFK couldn't manage it, and the list goes on and on and on.
i mean, lezbe honest, if the current sex-obsessed press had been around in the "olden days", we would likely find out that that since the beginning of our lovely little experiment called The United States, a whole lot of our public servants, from the prez all the way down to the dog-catcher, are, or were, um, knee-deep in extra-marital affairs. this is not a news flash. it's probably a Big-Sized Statement on the whole sanctity-of-marriage BS, which brings me to the um, conundrum part of this post.
that is, on the other hand, the rat's ass that i didn't want to give away earlier quite suddenly appears on my gift list when these same pols are self-righteous and judgemental and all-about-protecting-the-sanctity of something they are secretly (for the time being) smashing to smithereens. this is the stuff that just utterly disgusts me. there are scads of examples, right? toe-tappin' larry craig and diaper-boy david vitter sponsoring the latest federal marriage amendment act. governor charlie crist, who has been dodging gay rumors for-evah and well, if he ain't gay then i ain't, and who wants a shot at the GOP veep spot so badly that he beards himself up good and tight by getting engaged, um, quickly, and announcing his support of florida's marriage amendment. And Johnny My Cheatin' Heart McSame, who said this regarding his support of Arizona's marriage amendment in 2006: "I'm proud to have led an effort in my home state to change our state constitution and to protect the sanctity of marriage as between a man and woman."
and lest i sound too partisan, this kind of a rant would not be complete without citing Bill Clinton and his signing of the Federal DOMA in 1996. the fact that a guy who said "i did. not. have. sexual. relations. with. that. woman" and did (oh how he did), could then put his presidential signature of approval on a law defending marriage from um, people like ME, is just, well, goddamn ridiculous. even this whole john edwards thing has at least some slight undertones of hypocrisy. while i don't think there are any statements by Edward's opposing marriage equality based on a desire to 'protect the sanctity of marriage', he *did* say that his opposition to queers tying the marriage knot was rooted in his religious upbringing. which feels like kinda the same thing. i am just so tired of this "pick-and-choose-which-biblical-reference-suits-your-needs" in the daylight hours and then "let's-toss-that-gideon-bible-out-of-the-hotel-room-window-and-fast" in the nightime.
i don't know what this post is all about it. i'm sure you don't either, and for that, i apologize. these are all barely-caffeinated thoughts. i guess i'm just finding myself in that dreadful place called You Can't Have It Both Ways. even thought i want to say that someone's personal life should be off-limits, i can't, because i think it becomes relevant when that same personal life directly conflicts with their very public statements and actions around their politics. i despise hypocrits, and i especially despise powerful hypocrits who get paid to make decisions about me and for me. in my particular case, their arguments against making me a First Class Citizen almost always have Morality as the showcase talking point. again, it all just reeks with very stinky irony.
maybe the answer is a compromise. if you have a messy, um, bedroom, that's your shit to deal with. but keep the bedroom out of your politics. if you're having affairs on the side, or if you're paying for sex, or if you're finding true lust in airport restrooms, good for you. but maybe you should become a champion for roads and highways and bridges, oh my, or wind-power, or, like, saving your favorite endangered species or something. stay away from stuff like marriage amendments and, for chrissake, don't wax poetic and use phrases like 'i am doing this because i believe in protecting the sanctity of marriage.' it's a bullshit statement that seems to continually come out the mouths of the most self-righteous, morally bankrupt, cheating, lying liars in the world whose own "marriages" are a complete and utter sham. the gay and lesbian couples i know, and there are thousands of 'em, would bring real class, reverence and credibility to this whole marriage thing.
'cause they. get. it. they believe marriage is about stuff like, hmmm, commitment. and monogamy. and family. and love.
what a radical idea.