Image 01 Image 03



Some women are getting upset at how Paula Broadwell is being portrayed, A Scarlet Letter—the Monica Lewinsky-ing of Paula Broadwell (h/t Hot Air):

Women have long been unfairly assigned the role of gatekeepers of sexuality morality, a designation that makes them easy to blame when men fall short, said Occidental College professor of politics Caroline Heldman. “The onus should be on Petraeus,” she said. “He has a lot more to lose and he’s a lot more to blame in that breach.”

Instead, said Heldman, media coverage give “the impression that Broadwell’s the bad woman, the slut, manipulative and conniving, a climber.” …

Lewinsky “is shamed to this day. The affair changed the trajectory of her life, made her notorious and limited her life in many ways,” said Heldman. And Broadwell likewise will “wear a scarlet letter on her chest,” Heldman predicted.

Henry Kissinger reportedly coined the phrase “Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac.”  That might explain why women threw themselves at the Generals.

I hear powerful male bloggers have the same problem.  Reportedly.  But I wouldn’t know about that, because I’m not powerful.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.



casualobserver | November 15, 2012 at 8:32 am

I’ve seen Heldman speak as a ‘contributor’ on a variety of Fox News/Business programs. You cannot get more progressive. However, she has a point. It just isn’t novel or unique. And it has less credibility since she has justified other forms of unfair treatment of women. Of course, those women were conservative. I’ve heard her defend some (not all) of the vile critics of Palin and Bachmann, for example.

    Petraeus and Broadwell are equally pathetic and contemptible in all of this in betraying their spouses, children and honor. This was not just a one time screw up (while not good is far more excusable). And while Petraeus broke it off, he also compromised himself in the process.

    But here’s to PJ becoming a “powerful” blogger! Maybe Insti has the women throwing themselves at him, not so sure about the rest? Then again, perhaps what goes on at BlogCon stays at BlogCon?

      IMO it’s an equal opportunity issue. They both should wear large scarlet letters on their chests. His should be an “S”, for “stupid”.

Has it ever been established that there was an “affair” (as in sexual intercourse) between Patraeus and Broadwell…other than in the media, I mean? Patraeus is sixty years old, which in my mind makes the claim…ummm, dare I say…risible?

Worrying about Broadwell? How about her kids? Mom goes MIA during their formative years to chase down a general. Please. She made her bed.

“Women have long been unfairly assigned the role of gatekeepers of sexuality morality…”

Having lower levels of testosterone is a good reason to be a gatekeeper of sexual morality…or at least to refrain from storming the gate.

casualobserver | November 15, 2012 at 9:07 am

My wife just brought up a good point – Heldman should target some of her anger at women who continue to add fuel to the fire. The best current example is the reporter in yesterday’s press conference with the President who absolutely fawned and cooed when he called on her….”….I’ve never seen you lose….”. My wife said it was obvious to her that reporter was more than just “politically” excited. Wow!

    NeoConScum in reply to casualobserver. | November 15, 2012 at 10:42 am

    casualob…Congrats, Sir, you(Like my own VERY lucky self)are married to a truth-telling, non-PC, non-NOW* woman of Adult Persuasion. Ya know, a woman who KNOWS there are basic(duuhhh)differences between the sexes. For nearly all of human history this has been a No Brainer. However, lucky us, in this contemporary western/American culture DENIAL of FACT is a way of life and the complete Basis-Foundation of Political Correctness.

    *Or, The NAGS:National Association of Gals, Rush’s wonderful ‘tweek’ of NOW.*

“Women have long been unfairly assigned the role of gatekeepers of sexuality morality…”

Really? Absent force (physical or mental), I always thought it takes two willing people to engage in the act. Ann Landers said it best over thirty five years ago when she observed that an aspirin tablet was the best birth control pill-when held firmly between the woman’s legs.

Why is it that both can’t be at fault?

    “Why is it that both can’t be at fault?”

    Both share responsibility, but the progressive playbook is to blame men. To do otherwise would be a war on women.

“I hear powerful male bloggers have the same problem. Reportedly. But I wouldn’t know about that, because I’m not powerful.”

From looking at my daily trip through the blogosphere, I’d guess the aphrodisiac of powerful male bloggers is income earned through an affiliation with Amazon. I’m sure some frequently get lucky.

What I find most interesting about the whole situation is the Lebanese Khawam sisters, with:
1. powerful Democratic Party connections,
2. bankruptcy, a messy divorce and lawsuits with her former employer that are very ugly for Natalie; and
3. numerous lawsuits over real estate and unpaid bills for Jill.
4. self-created roles as prominent “socialistites” for the military community in South Florida.

Just who the hell are they? More than meets the eye here.

It looks to me like Paula Broadwell’s instincts that Jill was bad news for Petraeus was SPOT ON! She may have had bad judgement in having an affair with Petraeus, but she could see the Khawams were people to avoid being involved with.

When two adults participate in an affair then those two adults share EQUALLY IN THE BLAME.

If Allison Yarrow of the Daily Beast (the author of the article) is upset over Broadwell being called a slut; she needs to realize that if Broadwell knowingly slept with a married man… well that pretty much means she is a slut. Of course the married man himself is an adulterer, and I think those are pretty despicable men.

It is mind boggling how she can compare Broadwell and Lewinsky and not realize that the reason women involved in affairs with powerful men are treated like they are is because of Democrats and NOW. When Clinton’s affair was exposed, the Democratic party and NOW formed ranks to protect Clinton and demonized Starr, Republicans and – yes – Lewinsky (and her friend whose name I cannot recall). Clinton escaped from any downside to the affair, probably actually saw upsides as porn stars giggle and take photos with him; and has become a rock star to the Democrat party. At least Petraus had to resign. Lewinsky became an object of ridicule.

She comes close to realizing this, but veers off at the last moment to blame society for the way women are treated in these scandals. Not Democrats, Democrat-Operatives-With-Bylines (journalists) and the National Organization of Women.

    Linda Tripp. And our very own Lucianne Goldberg. What really got my ire up about Clinton was Lewinsky’s age. That a sitting President could take advantage of a starstruck almost teenager was disgusting. What was even more disgusting was the liberal women’s refusal to see how this tawdry little affair was setting back their cause. Ms. Lewinsky was moved into a job that someone with more experience and time on the job should have had. And the NAGs stubbornly refused to address that.

      Kenshu Ani in reply to JoAnne. | November 15, 2012 at 1:59 pm

      Thank you, I didn’t have time this morning before work to research Ms. Tripp’s name.

      I don’t think that Clinton’s affair set back the cause of liberal women, though. If you assume that NOW wanted women to be treated equally with men, then you are mistaken. That was never their true goal. Their true goal was instead to see women dependant on the government instead of husbands, or standing on their own. They have done a very good job at that.

Apropos of women’s roles in Obama-world…

“You would think it’s kind of hard to ignore Kelly Ayotte at that event, She is tall (she towered over both Senators McCain & Graham) but she is a younger, photogenic woman who had a strong interest in this matter. I’d think that would be something to play up instead of just “two old white guys”.

I suggest that is exactly WHY she is left out.”

Note how chauvinistic Obama was with is fit of pique yesterday…???

Women have been the gate-keepers of sexual morality for how many thousands years? A simple evaluation of the biology of the interaction indicates that males of almost every species have been selected to take every opportunity to reproduce that presents itself. Females, bearing the far greater burden of reproduction, have to be selective. It may not fit the feminists ideology, but you can’t change millions of years of evolution overnight, just because you don’t like it.

So Paula was not a strong aggressive woman, hear her roar? She must now be defended with “leave the little woman alone”?

Obama has used the race and gender cards routinely, but with Susan Rice he moves to more advanced tactics. All are expendable to Obama, but sacrificing women gets him more leverage when he is pointing fingers. With Rice he gets two layers of protection, gender and race, so he sends her out to deliver his “big lie” about the video.

But Obama uses Rice as his human shield. How dare anyone attack this black female for not asking probing questions about the message she was delivering to the world. So if she was just his puppet, why did he send her out to take the heat? So that he could now claim she was just an ignorant front line mouthpiece?

Barack delivers his practiced line to these scripted questions, showing his paternalistic bravery, even as he still hides behind her skirt. If he wants to clear her, tell us who told her the lies to be spread. How could “all evidence so far” point to a spontaneous uprising when there was no evidence of that?

But Obama still won’t reveal where the “stand down” story came from, or other more probing questions. It would take him under oath in impeachment proceedings to get detailed answers, though we would need to relitigate the meaning of the word “is”.

Using Rice to launch his propaganda assault is like Hamas putting its rocket launchers between a mosque and a school. If fire is returned, Obama claims they are attacking the schools or mosques. Poor ignorant ambassador knew nothing about Benghazi, leave her alone, you misogynist racists.

Now, lets move on to this young woman that’s infatuated with me, so she can gush her adoration in the form of a question.

    So, the question is – How do you combat a pc mentality (created in part by the progressive media) among the stupid (Obama voters)?

    After yesterday’s press conference, if the media wanted the truth we would be talking about something entirely different this morning.

      NeoConScum in reply to jasond. | November 15, 2012 at 10:56 am

      AMEN, jasond. ‘F-Chuck Todd of NBC-Lapdawg News was ALL about asking The Boy King questions re-working with Repubs, but NOTHING about Benghazi, Broadwell, Security, etc.

      In screenwriting(and snake-oil selling & Grifting),that’s called ‘Watch my hands so you won’t see what I’m saying,’Yo. They’re ALL shucking & jiving for The Princeling. Nicely topped by the fawning-swooning of the young chicklet groupie ‘newsling’.

        ROFLMAO! I wonder if Chuck Toad, Angrier Mitchell, and Souldad O’Brien pull straws to see who gets to pleasure Bathhouse Barry. I wonder if they each have their own pair of kneepads, or if they just share.

          NeoConScum in reply to walls. | November 15, 2012 at 11:34 am

          walls…ROTF’ingFLMF’ingAO, too!!

          Horrified to report that Vasiline Inc. is saying that they are experiencing shelving Sell Outs at DC-Drug Stores to the Lapdawg Newsies of their tried & true Lip Therapy tubes. No longer do the MSM-WH-Lapdawgs even bother to exit the WH Briefing Room to apply said proven ointment.

          Or…Is my post-election cynicism showing,’Yo?

      Midwest Rhino in reply to jasond. | November 15, 2012 at 11:25 am

      Mocking their insincerity and deceptiveness seems like the Breitbart way. Exposing the truth may eventually win out.

      The truth is Obama sided with Zelaya, Chavez, and Castro and against rule of law and “democracy” when Zelaya attempted to become dictator in Honduras.

      The truth is Panetta had some of the same communist friends and opposed Reagan’s efforts against the communist supported Sandinistas. Rev. Wright’s liberation theology supported the Sandinistas as well. And communist Van Jones received gushing praise from V Jarret.

      Exposing Obama’s real radical roots may again seem like a bridge too far, but some long range “truth” bombing may soften the ground for future occupation, if Obama’s blitzkrieg advances past his supply lines. (or something like that :))

      Obama loved the Muslim Brotherhood, and weakened us in Libya in the face of attack. Impeachment, then get Biden declared mentally unstable, and welcome President Boehner. Then Hillary, a woman scorned, in 2016. lol

      Slightly more serious, hypothetically, to those that say impeachment would stop at the House. If truth came out that Obama let them die for his political campaign, and orchestrated a detailed coverup to get reelected, the Senate might very well find 51 votes. If the stand down order came from someone else as Obama slept, (“when I found out I told them to do everything”), then the coverup … it is just as bad.

        Won’t happen in 1,000,000 years. Impeachment originates in the House, and nobody will try it with a black president. Barry could sell our nuclear secrets to Russia and China, and it still won’t happen.

Allison Yarrow, the author of the piece. Which whom none of her subjects have been tempted to dally.

Just saying.

Eve’s apple. The blame game that never ends.

Petraeus and Broadwell are both highly competitive people, both impressively smart and accomplished, both accustomed to achieving or getting what they aim for.

Their successes may have led both to believe they could have whatever they wanted, and without losing their reputations as decent and principled people. Guess not.

Petraeus lost his job. He may also face perjury charges as a result of letting the Obama crowd blackmail him into lying to congress about Benghazi. He will not be running for president after this.

The trajectory of his life has been changed quite a bit more drastically than that idiot woman’s was. Who’s taking the blame here again?

If Ms. Broadwell would prefer not to be ‘Monica’ed’ by the press and public, then perhaps she should not sleep with the person who is the subject of the biography she’s writing.

Just a thought.

A woman cannot be both an A-list tigress wielding influence in the highest circles of power and at the same time a pure maiden who must be protected from being besmirched.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but wasn’t Lewinsky actively suborning perjury and conspiring to suborn perjury?

She’s a stupid girl who was badly used. She’s no victim, however.

    radiofreeca in reply to CalMark. | November 15, 2012 at 5:03 pm

    While I’d love to agree with you that 19-year-olds should always do the right, unfortunately brain research has shown that our brains don’t really finish growing until about 25. But none of the people in the current scandal are under 30.

So I’m supposed to feel sorry for Broadwell, a married woman with kids, who cheats on her husband with her biography subject?

She’s a grown woman and we live in the age of equality right? She’s responsible for her actions.

The only people I have any sympathy for are the cheated on spouses and the kids/family.

I’d also much prefer talking about what actually happened in Benghazi instead of a bunch of white knighting general wusses lead around by their wangs by some really low quality gals. I mean, both Petreaus and Allen signing letters in support of the “crazy” twin sister who had a family court judge take away her kid due to her being a liar and refusing custody visits to the father (among other things)? How often does that happen in family courts? Answer, not often as its usually “mommy knows best”.