Wednesday, July 22, 2009
Legislature / Phillips Let Us Not Overlook Why Stanley Should Lose His Job
Posted by Betsy Phillips on Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 7:55 AM
the saga of state Senator Paul Stanley and his 22-year-old former legislative intern, McKensie Morrison {emphasis mine]
There are two issues here.
One, the legal issue. It matters whether Stanley fucked Morrison and whether Morrison felt she had to agree to it in order to keep her internship because, if she felt compelled, Stanley's committed a Class C felony under state law (39-3-527--sexual battery by an authority figure--"The defendant was at the time of the offense in a position of trust, or had supervisory or disciplinary power over the victim by virtue of the defendant's legal, professional or occupational status and used the position of trust or power to accomplish the sexual contact.").
But two, even if Morrison didn't feel compelled, if she wanted to have sex with him, the fact that Stanley would even try to take up with a person who worked for him, who wasn't in a position to say 'no' and know it wouldn't affect her job, proves he's unfit to serve. I know it doesn't make him unusual, but it does make him unfit. You don't put the people who work for you in that position. Period.
Comments (23)
Showing 1-23 of 23
I agree with you.
But I have a question for you. Did you reach and equally strong and rapid conclusion about Clinton & Lewinksky?
like
dislike
That is a good question. And, honestly, I don't remember. Lewinsky is a year older than me so I would have been twenty-two(?) when that story broke?
So, I probably thought it was stupid that he was being impeached for getting a blow job and I would have been listening to women talk about how working in environments where those kinds of shenanigans go on makes for a shitty work environment for everyone. And I would have been hearing that for the first time.
So, that's the truth. I am sure I didn't reach an equally strong and rapid conclusion about Clinton and Lewinsky, because I was twenty-two and was just learning that the world was more fucked up than I knew.
I don't think a politician is morally obligated to his constituents to remain faithful to his wife. I think you can cheat and still be a good politician. Shoot, people do stupid shit all the time and it's not my business.
But when you fuck underlings?
That is my business and it's unacceptable.
For those looking to turn this into a democrat vs. republican issue or liberal vs. conservative, I think the biggest difference between sex scandals between the two parties is the hypocrisy issue. People cheat on their partners all the time, that's not a political issue and for the most part I'm in favor of it being a thing for families to sort out and deal with privately. BUT when your party and you personally (as is the case in so many of these scandals) put yourself out there as a voice of morality and try and legislate the privacy and rights of others when it comes to "family values", you better make sure your own house is in order or deal with the consequences. This isn't about how it's ok for democrats to have affairs and fuck interns and it's not ok for republicans, to me it's about how so many of these republicans make judgements and argue laws on the basis of protecting families when their own family lives turn out to be well crafted lies.
And in the case of Paul Stanley and his disgusting waste of time and money to ban adoptions by single parents (i.e. GLBT folks) while he was busy fucking an intern and paying off her boyfriend to keep it all quiet, this scandal really couldn't happen to a better person.
To be fair to Stanley (which pains me to do, the bigot deserves anything he gets), it sounded like he was just talking about being the victim of the blackmail attempt and hence he couldn't say much because of the pending case on that part of things, not that he was necessarily claiming to be the victim in the whole scandal or denying responsibility as that goes.
'Course I wouldn't put anything past this morally reprehensible piece of human garbage.
I knew this would immediately pull out the "Well, what about..." response that dittohead morons are convinced is an unanswerable and clever retort for any Republican misdeed.
Thanks RedHatRob for being so predictable.
Of course, what others do or have done is irrelevant to what Paul Stanley has done. RedHatRob suggests that something Bill Clinton did more than a decade ago in Washington somehow immunizes Paul Stanley from any sort of criticism or accountability. Of course, that is stupid.
RedHatRob also suffers from the collective mental illness of right wingers who inherently just cannot perceive their own hypocrisy. His attitude: "Well, you never said anything about Clinton, so you must be a hypocrite." Put aside the curious idea that no Democrat ever criticized Clinton's conduct; that's simply not so. But, ebven putting that aside, RetHatRob, being an idiot, does not consider the flip side of such an assertion:
RedHatRob, you were so disgusted with Clinton, why are you not equally disgusted with Stanley? Doesn't that make YOU a hypocrite?
Also I have no sympathy or compassion for anyone who thinks it's their job to "protect" children from being raised by loving and capable GLBT and/or single parents yet clearly thinks so little of his own wife and children to drag them through a very public sex/bribery scandal.
First of all, isn't free speech great? Thanks for using the actual word, Betsy, because it reminds us of how DISGUSTING AND PROFANE it is that Stanley did what he did. Because that's what he did.
Second ... to those whining about the Lewinsky thing ... yeah, I was pissed about the Lewinsky thing and I certainly voted for Bush in part because I was mad at Clinton and at Gore for not taking a stronger stand. Don't you think that's part of the reason why Bush won TN in 2000? DUH!
Now, I also recognize that Bush and the GOP (including Lamar, Frist, Fred "Manwhore" Thompson, Corker, Blackburn, Duncan, Roe, and Wamp) not only lied to the American people, but they tortured people to extract false confessions to justify invading Iraq and killing hundreds of thousands of people.
So... I'm sorry, but there's just not any moral equivalence between lying about a blowjob and lying to justify invasion of Iraq.
So, what is really a "threat" to marriage? A lying, hypocritical predatory heterosexual adulterer in public life? Or two lesbians getting married, living together, and minding their own business?
Republicans: The party of morality and good ol' fashioned family values, like sleeping with women other than your wife.
To be fair to Stanley (which pains me to do, the bigot deserves anything he gets), it sounded like he was just talking about being the victim of the blackmail attempt and hence he couldn't say much because of the pending case on that part of things, not that he was necessarily claiming to be the victim in the whole scandal or denying responsibility as that goes.
I doubt that. He went on to say that not only was he a victim, but that this was all a misunderstanding and that he was looking forward to clarifying things once the investigation had been concluded.
My guess is that he wanted to get those photos into the hands of the cops so that they'd be part of the investigation and therefore not easily obtained by the press. If our little blackmailer actually wanted to expose Sen. Stanley for the finger-wagging blowhard hypocrite that he is, then these pictures would be in the hands of the Commercial-Appeal right now. But since the TBI has them, they're considered "evidence."
That's probably the best that Stanley could make of the situation, near as I can cipher.
Apparently I have a little more to say on this topic...
For the love of all things good in the world is it too much to ask for one of these cheating politicians (of any political affiliation) to show some character and backbone and when they get caught just say, "I screwed up, I'm human and I realize that I was wrong to judge others so harshly. No one is without fault and I should be the last one to say what's right for anyone else's family"
Instead we get endless babble about God and sin and how they are praying and working to be a better Christian and take control of their role in the family, etc. Ted Haggard has prayed himself into a fine heterosexual who never thinks about meth and male prostitutes anymore, Mark Sanford is trying to convince God to make him fall back in love with his wife, etc.
Perhaps the real answer here to is suck it up and admit that no one is perfect, families are messed up and complicated, and the job of a lawmaker is to solve the very real problems facing people in their every day lives not wasting time and money by trying to legislate the morals and sexual habits of people.
Tenn Rod -- It looks like Red Hat Rob wrote that he agrees Stanley should resign -- his point was the hypocrisy of liberals who defended Clinton's actions with an intern ,but are now calling for Stanley's resignation for an elicit relationship (we assume) with an intern.
As for Stanley, he should resign, but his failure as a husband and father should not diminish the correctness of his policy positions. If so, then shouldn't Obama be called out for sending his children to private schools while he publicly opposes school choice? What about a politician who supports abortion rights, but would not allow his or her child to receive an abortion -- is that fair game?
I agree, nobody said anything when he was fucking another legislator's assistant two years ago; she was simply fired and life went on. This time it was his own intern, and the power dynamic makes it a lot scummier. Then again, maybe it's just because he's so damn ATTRACTIVE and CHARISMATIC.
Rico, you're a moron. For many reasons, but in particular, this comment:
"but his failure as a husband and father should not diminish the correctness of his policy positions"
Yes, yes it does, when you consider his "policy positions" include discriminating against loving couples AND individuals while extolling the superiority of the ONE TRUE WAY, heterosexual marriage. His (repeated) infidelity demonstrates the fallacy of his argument.
TennRod: See the first line of my post. I agree that Sen. Stanley should resign, for precisely the reasons outlined by Betsy Phillips.
My questions was whether this moral standard applies only to Republicans, or do Democrats get a pass on boffing interns?
Incidentally, Clinton was not impeached for getting a blowjob. He was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice. He had a habit of boffing interns and faced with a lawsuit alleging sexual harassment, he lied about his pattern of behavior and suborned lies by others. He was cited for contempt of court and had his law license suspended for five years.
Aunt B, I agree. If indeed sex was had between the intern and Stanley, he should resign or be ousted. The if is not a very big one because why would he resign his chairmanship if he wasn't guilty? I also agree with Ryan. I also agree that it was a wonderful way to hide the pictures by calling in the TBI. And, the Governor from SC should be ousted because he lied to his staff and was unavailable when he should have been working. As for Clinton & Lewinsky, I lost any respect I had for Hillary for putting up with Bill but I never had any for Bill to begin with. If a representative for The People will lie and cheat on their spouses and family that they supposedly love, they will lie and cheat their constituents. I lean more toward the Repulican party for various reasons and I have been saying consistently that the problem with the Republican party is that most of the leaders put themselves up on a pedestal with no where to go but down. Don't preach morality and principle's to me when you are just a human yourself and not willing to walk the walk. I was disgusted that the assistant to Sen. Black wasn't fired. Wonder if that self-righteous Robin Smith would be throwing Stanley out of the party or making excuses? Glad she's gone. At least that's one right step for the TNGOP.
Betsy, thank you for this post. I had a similar experience at my first job right out of college. I was green and starry-eyed and worshiped my (married) boss. Said boss spent the better part of two years manipulating me into a sexual relationship. Let's just say it didn't end well, and I spent years trying to recover from the experience.
It's abusive for someone in a position of power to enter into a relationship with any subordinate, let alone a much younger one. Period.
I think this guy who holds himself out to be a moral, “family values” sort of guy should step down. Do you want a hypocrite, who has sex with an aide and puts himself at risk of being blackmailed to be a representative? If you do, fine, but no more preaching about family values.
Hootie -- Your post is the second reference I've read to an alleged prior affair with another legislator's assistant. The other one was from someone commenting on another blog that she had served as an intern.
Paul is not the sharpest knife in the drawer and being the Mama's boy that he is, has an inflated sense of self.
If all people have to counter the stupidity of Stanley is the Clinton-Lewinsky affair, then they have nothing ...
Clinton was impeached (meaning they TRIED to oust him) and acquitted ... there's nothing left to say on te subject ...
Stanley's situation hasn't even really been addressed, yet ...
