It's funny(odd) to me how people like Spitzer & McGreevey drag their spouses before the cameras...

[El Pinko]

Why do they do this? They've already humiliated and embarrassed the spouse once, but that's not enough?

They have to force the poor woman to stand beside them as they resign/mouth contrite pieties?


What exactly is the point?

To make the statement that "Yes, I'm a louse, but I'm a louse of sufficient standing that my wife will stand up here beside me despite it all."


It seems like a form of spousal abuse and egomania gone wild to me.


I don't have a problem with women who stick by their husbands after infidelity, but honestly, if I were a woman in that position,

and my hubby asked me to come up to the podium with him, I'd tell him that he made his bed and that he was on his own.

What a disgraceful way to treat a partner and the mother of your children - as a last-ditch political shield.

:puke:

[bellasgrams]

1. I don't see why he had to quit when Bush is still Pres. I think his

crime is much worse. and I don't see the double standard with Larry Craig either.

[El Pinko]

2. I understand that point, and I agree...

...but that's not really what my post was about.

Why that Joker-faced bat Laura continues to stand beside POS despite the fact that he is a mass-murderer is another question altogether.

[Muttocracy]

3. see editorial from McGreevey's wife

edit to fix link (and comments below are mine, not a quote):
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/12/opinion/12mcgreevey.html

I hope Silda dumps Eliot fast and gets her own career going again. But I can see where in just a matter of hours of knowing about this, she may have not wanted to make an absolute decision yet. Maybe it's easier to stand quietly and go through the motions for a while than make statements or disappear and have the press hunting you down.

And she gave him some pretty tough looks in those press conferences which spoke volumes. She hasn't been going around saying how much she loves him or anything - more of a silent witness to all of this. It also makes it clear that this is about HER pain as much as HIS career.

[Demobrat]

4. They can't really force them.

So the question is actually why does the spouse do it? I couldn't, at least I don't think I could, but I wouldn't presume to judge the ones who do either. They're in a miserable position, having just been blindsided in the worst possible way. Maybe they think it's the best thing for the children, who knows?

[El Pinko]

5. Obviously it's not at gunpoint, but I'm sure some pressure is brought to bear.

I can't imagine putting my wife through something like that. I'd go take my lumps alone, regardless of whatever my advisors told me.

[Demobrat]

8. Well you probably wouldn't cheat on her with hookers either.

It's all about him, obviously.

[The_Casual_Observer]

6. It's tragically noble of them. I doubt they are dragged.

Could it be they actually are carrying out the "for better or for worse" vow?

[mondo joe]

7. No one understands a marriage but the people in it. Especially long time marriages. NT

[emilyg]

9. I doubt they are dragged.

[Venceremos]

10. My husband

said basically the same thing this morning. He'd been hearing criticism of the wife for standing with him, but nobody said anything about the husband having the gall to ask her to do it. So thanks for bringing this up.

My first husband was a serial adulterer, so I agree that it's abusive to ask the wife to stand with him publicly in these situations. For one thing, he's asking her to be photographed in one of the worst moments of her life -- every time she sees those pictures it's going to bring back the pain. And although she probably isn't forced to do it, I'm fairly certain she isn't thinking clearly either.

IMO, the disgraced politicians who ask their wives to do that are cowards. They don't want to face the music alone, so they ask the person they're most familiar with to stand with them.