YAWN: Another Washington Sex Scandal

From NYTimes
Federal Official Resigns in Inquiry of Escort Service

WASHINGTON, April 27 — The head of the Agency for International Development, Randall L. Tobias, resigned abruptly on Friday for what he said were “personal reasons,” but an administration official said Mr. Tobias’s name had come up in an investigation of a suspected Washington prostitution ring.

Mr. Tobias told ABC that he used the service for massages, not sex, according to the network’s Web site.

Mr. Tobias, 65, is a former chairman and chief executive of Eli Lilly & Company and of AT&T International. He served as the chairman of the board of Duke University from 1997 to 2000. He was also a major donor to various Republican campaigns.

He held two federal titles. President Bush nominated him in July 2003 to lead a $15 billion program to fight AIDS worldwide. As director of United States Foreign Assistance, he held the rank of ambassador.

At the time, some AIDS experts said Mr. Tobias did not have much experience with AIDS or Africa. In January 2006, Mr. Bush said he would nominate Mr. Tobias to be the administrator of the Agency for International Development. That position gave him the rank of deputy secretary of state.

It appears that this guy had a real job. Couldn't Bush have made him ambassador to Lichtenstein or something? Granted, being a university chairman implies the man wasn't a complete idiot.

And before everyone decides to bring up Clinton, let me make one distinction. At least Democrats don't have to pay for it.:doit:

richlevy;338499 wrote:

And before everyone decides to bring up Clinton, let me make one distinction. At least Democrats don't have to pay for it.:doit:

Good one. :D

richlevy;338499 wrote:

...And before everyone decides to bring up Clinton, let me make one distinction. At least Democrats don't have to pay for it.:doit:

And they don't profess to be the party with the morals.

Cause they're not.

But neither are the repubicans.

chief executive of Eli Lilly & Company and of AT&T International. He served as the chairman of the board of Duke University

Doesn't Eli Lilly make stuff used in abortions?
Isn't AT&T involved with that illegal wire tapping?
Isn't Duke where those Field Hockey players were accused of raping those entertainers?

He certainly left a trail of scandal behind.






Don't forget to tip your waiters.

This is but the tip of the iceberg. The madam in question was basically the supplier for all of capitol hill and her book of names is in an evidence bag somewhere....

Beestie;338713 wrote:

This is but the tip of the iceberg. The madam in question was basically the supplier for all of capitol hill and her book of names is in an evidence bag somewhere....

It's sort of a mixed blessing for the administration. Since Republicans hold their politicians to a stricter sexual standard than Democrats, even if both parties are equally represented in the book, Republicans will get hammered worse. However, if leaked the book would dominate the news for at least 3-4 weeks and take the heat off the administration's dismal domestic and foreign policies as well as their various legal troubles.

Bill Mahr would probably have to host a three hour special just to cover all of the humor potential.

And what if the book is coded?

Bill Frist ... SW/Gblo/Cbk/Dm/Shp:blush:
Jim Bunning ... Viag++/Slp
Joe Biden ... +++?

She tried to sell the book/list but a judge wouldn't let her.

All the names will come out soon enough - and yes its far, far worse for republicans. I think they are all (politicians of both stripes) a bunch of losers so I'm kind of looking forward to it. I check Drudge/Fark/Smoking Gun regularly :-)

Nothing really new under the sun.

Lest we forget, one of the reasons Obama is currently contending for first place as the Democratic candidate for president is that he has 2 years of experience in the Senate.

One of the reasons he got to be a Senator is that his opponent Jack Ryan's campaign self-destructed when reporters were able to get his divorce papers unsealed.

Ryan's ex-wife, Jeri Ryan, is an actress and major babe familiar to Star Trek fans as Seven of Nine. Jack allegedly was not content to merely have one of the hottest wives in Washington, and the resulting allegations sank his political career at warp speed.

Why do we give a shit who sleeps with whom?
All I care about is the job they do.

I agree with Rob. On the other hand, I love to see self-righteous assholes get a comeuppance.

Moral? Keep legislation out of the bedroom, and you automatically defuse the humor potential when you get caught getting 'massaged'.

The fun thing is that her defense is that she ran a massage and fantasy business with no sex involved. She turned her phone records over to ABC so that they can do the leg work and ask all of her clients if sex is involved.

So the government freezes all of her assets, forcing her to use a public defender. The judge also denies her the right to sell her lists.

So she gave them to ABC for free. The first episode airs on 20/20 May 4th.:corn:

It does seem unfair that the government can freeze assets before a person has been declared guilty so that they can't afford a lawyer to defend themselves. It sounds like she's found a way to make her point.

The monolithic 'government' doesn't care about this. The individuals all throughout D.C. who represent the movers and shakers in the government probably care a great deal. Unfortunately, the case is so public now that there is no way to make it disappear.

Deborah Jeane Palfrey, 50, was interviewed by ABC News several weeks ago, the network confirmed Monday. The network did not pay Palfrey for the interview, which is to run on "20/20" beginning May 4, according to ABC News and Palfrey's attorney, Montgomery Blair Sibley.

Palfrey has hinted that well-known people in Washington were among her clients from 1993 to 2006, but has not named any. Asked whether ABC News could identify former clients, Sibley said, "Records were turned over unconditionally to them. They're going to do what they're going to do. Who knows?"

I'm sorta with Elspode. I wouldn't care at all who they slept with...

...except that they want to tell ME who to sleep with.

Ibram;339532 wrote:

I'm sorta with Elspode. I wouldn't care at all who they slept with...

...except that they want to tell ME who to sleep with.

Oh, karma, how you make my world so entertaining!

PBS: But with regard to prostitutes and sex workers in developing countries, is it necessary to work with them? Do you try to get them to change behavior? And if they don't, then what?

TOBIAS: First of all, very recently I was in Haiti in a program where we are working with prostitutes, teaching them skills that will give them the economic leverage to get out of prostituting. The particular program that I visited, young women were being taught the skills of being beauticians, of doing cosmetic work and hair work and that kind of thing. Now, none of these young women were saying, "I don't want to work with this non-governmental organization because they have a policy opposing prostitution." Quite the contrary. These young women were people who wanted to get out of prostitution. So there's nothing about our policy of requiring organizations to oppose prostitution and sex trafficking that in any way gets in our way of working with people who have been traced, or people who are in prostitution, trying to get them out of it. …

PBS: But is there a moral quotient, a moral factor in your prevention work?

TOBIAS: There's a certain moral aspect to it, but the principal focus of what we're doing here is to carry out the prevention program that is at the heart of this program, which is abstinence, be faithful, and the correct and consistent use of condoms, driven by the fact that from a public health perspective, those are the components that really make the most sense.

richlevy;339531 wrote:

So the government freezes all of her assets, forcing her to use a public defender. The judge also denies her the right to sell her lists.

Oh, man, this is great!

I'm trying to figure out how many judges they had to talk to before they found one that wouldn't have to recuse himself. And I'm sure by the time they found one, he or she was given a littany of instructions and a crash-course in seldom-used legal maneuvers to keep the list under wraps.

I'm holding my breath to see if they impose a gag order on ABC! Guffaw!!

There are rivers of sweat running down Pennsylvania Avenue, political favors are being called in left and right, PR firms telephones are ringing off the hook.

Yes, ladies and gentlemen these are our elected representatives in all their stinkin' glory.

All the furor over some sex; I don't get it. Heck, if I were to manage to have sex there would probably be a ticker-tape parade in town.

It just breaks my heart to see yawn and sex in the same sentence.

rkzenrage;339526 wrote:

Why do we give a shit who sleeps with whom?
All I care about is the job they do.

This was my opinion until a sharp acquaintance of mine pointed out that marital infidelity might also correlate with other flavors of infidelity, and possibly worse. Now I'm kind of up in the air on the whole thing.

The world isn't transparent; we never completely know how well these people do their jobs, or what other figs they're plucking.

xoxoxoBruce;339730 wrote:

It just breaks my heart to see yawn and sex in the same sentence.

Shoulda been Yet Another Washington Nookiefest.

Say... you live in DC. Are you getting in on all this action going on down there?

A gentleman doesn't kiss and tell...

Do they kiss and pay?

Escorts don't kiss, and I'm no gentleman, so it all works out.

xoxoxoBruce;339898 wrote:

Say... you live in DC. Are you getting in on all this action going on down there?

At $300 an hour? I doub... heyyyyy, waiiiiiit a minute... Crikey! I GOT it!!

Hey, HM, where's a good place in DC to buy a wig 'n some lipstick???

grant;339808 wrote:

This was my opinion until a sharp acquaintance of mine pointed out that marital infidelity might also correlate with other flavors of infidelity, and possibly worse. Now I'm kind of up in the air on the whole thing.

The world isn't transparent; we never completely know how well these people do their jobs, or what other figs they're plucking.

I don't think because someone cheats on their wife they are going to lie about everything.
If we get rid of the stigma of sexual behavior and giving a damn if someone is divorced, gay, sleeping around, dating or not, then they will be able to leave their wives before dating around if they are not happy in their marriage, instead of trying to maintain the image of the perfect, ridiculous, xian, family that so many feels means "something".
Get rid of that bullshit, and then they can leave their wives whenever they want.
Finally, even if they do cheat on their wives, that has nothing to do with their integrity elsewhere.

I, for me, do not lie anywhere in my life, even the "how does this look on me" crap. Those in my life know not to expect me to lie about those. If it makes you look bad, I tell you. An aunt asked me once if she looked like she had gained weight... I still hear about that "episode".
However, I don't think that most do that or should. If you can lie about how she looks in a dress you can separate your personal life and your business life.
As long as they have a good track record professionally, I will vote for them.

rkzenrage;340658 wrote:

snip~ instead of trying to maintain the image of the perfect, ridiculous, xian, family that so many feels means "something". ~snip

Jews, Muslims, Buddists, et al, don't have images of what family life should and shouldn't be?

Perhaps... but I don't see them projecting it on others in the way xians do.
They leave it in their own home where it belongs.

Oh, I see. Jewish, Muslim, Buddist, et al, people don't consider whether a candidate is divorced, gay, a philanderer, or whatever. Right.

I don't think as much, or in the same way that xians do. No.

Oh, I know you don't think so. But that's because you've got some kind of notion that all Christians, and apparently Jews, etc, etc, think alike. That's your mistake.

From this site

76.5% of American adults are Christian (52% Protestant; 24.5% Catholic).
14.1% do not follow any organized religion; they are Agnostics, Atheists, Humanists, Secularists, or have no religious affiliation.
1.3% are Jewish.
0.5% are Muslim, followers of Islam.
0.5% are Buddhist.
0.4% are Hindu.
0.3% are Unitarian Universalist.
0.1% are Neopagan (Druids, Pagans, Wiccans, etc)
There are many more small religions, each of whom are followed by fewer than 0.1% of American adults.

But ABC news says, "Generally, 59 percent say abortion should be legal in all or most cases,"

And the S.F.Chronicle reports a March 8-12, Pew national survey;

51 percent opposed same-sex marriage and 39 percent supported it.
Allowing gay and lesbian couples to adopt children -- 46 percent in favor, 48 percent opposed.

None of those numbers jibe with any religion. Must be people deciding on other than strictly religious grounds because I don't see any correlation. Do you?

So, some Christians have a brain about some things. This is supposed to impress me? They still believe in the tooth fairy.
This says what about how they will vote for a gay candidate that is clearly the best black woman for the job?

This says you don't know how any Christian, or anyone else, will vote. It says you can't predict election outcomes by the religion of the voters. It says only you believe in the tooth fairy while religious people are considering more, in deciding what candidates to support. It shows you're prejudice and wrong.

an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason.

Nope, it's all in "The Book" and xians think it is supposed to apply to others outside their home as well. A founding principle of the path.
Not a prejudice, a fact.
Not prejudiced.

You don't know what Christians think. Christians don't know what Christians think, except ones they have actually talked to. You've been watching too many TV Evangelists ... worse yet believing them.

Or reading the Bible...

More than reading, believing. By the way, most Christians do very little of either.

Good grief. One minute we're having fun poking fun at those pompous asses on capitol hill and the next minute we're on an "I know Christians better than you do" hijack?

Well I got news for you gents: Jesus just left Chicago and he's bound for N'oLeans. Allllll aBourd!!!

Now, where were we? Oh yeah. ABC sucked their nads into their colon and won't release the names of any of the Madam's clients. God, why couldn't that woman have just handed the list over to Drudge? He'd a told that lawyer to ... well, you know. And we'd have ALL the names. But NOOOOooooo she has to give it to a network. No fun. No fun at all, I tell ya.

xoxoxoBruce;341010 wrote:

More than reading, believing. By the way, most Christians do very little of either.

Right! They'er to busy trying to figure ways to fuck someone out of something.

Beestie;341024 wrote:

Good grief. One minute we're having fun poking fun at those pompous asses on capitol hill and the next minute we're on an "I know Christians better than you do" hijack?

Well I got news for you gents: Jesus just left Chicago and he's bound for N'oLeans. Allllll aBourd!!!

Now, where were we? Oh yeah. ABC sucked their nads into their colon and won't release the names of any of the Madam's clients. God, why couldn't that woman have just handed the list over to Drudge? He'd a told that lawyer to ... well, you know. And we'd have ALL the names. But NOOOOooooo she has to give it to a network. No fun. No fun at all, I tell ya.

I have to agree with ya... I wish she would have given it to Drudge as well. My guess is that someone got a restraining order on NBC. Just a guess.

TheMercenary;341027 wrote:

I have to agree with ya... I wish she would have given it to Drudge as well. My guess is that someone got a restraining order on NBC. Just a guess.

Honestly, there was no legal way to prevent ABC from airing the names. The case hasn't gone to trial so the judge can't even issue a gag order which, I think, is the only way to silence the press.

The john's lawyer contacted ABC and threatened all kind of legal hell if they told, ABC caved and the perp is free for another day. It'll all come out in time.

Beestie;341024 wrote:

Good grief. One minute we're having fun poking fun at those pompous asses on capitol hill and the next minute we're on an "I know Christians better than you do" hijack?

He drags it into every thread.

Only when pertinent, you don't have to stalk me you know?

Don't flatter yourself.