The Politco Versus The New York Times

The Congressional Black Caucus mde some noise and some news in boycotting a seemingly routine committee vote on financial regulatory reform, but what did it mean?

The Politico says it was all about a long CBC wish list of demands that have been overlooked and ignored by Obama.  But the NY Times makes no mention of a wish list and says it is all about the plight of Inner City Broadcasting, a financially troubled radio group founded by a black icon, and the minority-owned businesses generally.

It's not as if the Politico is in dreamland here, since they seem to have hard evidence of a wish list:

Until Wednesday, Waters and other CBC members had been reluctant to spell out their Obama wish list, with Financial Services Committee members refusing even to say why they skipped the vote.

The caucus released a2½-page handout to answer those questions on Wednesday, with an emphasis on addressing the economic problems of members’ districts, ranging from the crisis engulfing minority-owned auto dealerships and newspapers to the need for more-targeted foreclosure mitigation programs.

I assume that Inner City Broadcasting is not mentioned on that list.  But the Times focuses on this:

Black Caucus Seeks to Ease Radio’s Woes

In a rare break with President Obama, the caucus, made up of black members of Congress, is holding back support for the legislation because it wants the administration to help minority-owned businesses, including Inner City, whose financial plight has been specifically identified in meetings with top administration officials.

...

While others are suffering, too, Black Caucus members and lobbyists for Inner City in a series of meetings have pressed the administration for special help for black-owned broadcasters like Inner City, participants in the meetings said.

...

Members of the caucus asked the administration to squeeze lenders like GE Capital and Goldman Sachs to renegotiate their loans with Inner City and other black-owned radio stations, arguing that these financial institutions themselves had already received federal assistance. Some caucus members even pushed to include black-owned radio stations in the bailout.

“There is a lot of concern about Inner City Broadcasting,” said Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, who set up one recent meeting with Mr. Geithner and Mr. Emanuel at the request of the Black Caucus.

Mr. Frank said the radio stations were only one issue raised by the caucus, and that others included financial difficulties faced by black-owned auto dealers, newspapers, banks and government contractors.

So, is all the CBC agita about Inner City Broadcasting, or are the Inner City people just along for the ride?  As a tie-breaker, let's go to the Washington Post:

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus, which had already delayed the legislation's passage, staged a last-minute boycott of Wednesday's committee vote to draw further attention to their frustration with the administration's handling of the economy.

...Frank seemed caught off-guard two weeks ago when Congressional Black Caucus members -- 10 of whom serve on his committee -- unexpectedly blocked the systemic risk vote to draw attention to concerns about the economy. The protest followed a meeting last month during which they shared their frustrations with Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel.

Frank learned Wednesday morning that caucus members would boycott the rescheduled vote, making the final tally much closer than it might otherwise have been.

"Since last September, we have continuously voted for bailouts and reform for the very institutions that created this devastation, without properly protecting the African American community or small business. That stops today," said Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Calif.). "While we appreciate the need for the expansion of regulatory authority, we can no longer afford for our public policy to be defined by the worldview of Wall Street."

Waters declined to say how -- or whether -- caucus members would vote on the reform proposal when it reaches the House floor.

"We're prepared to . . . leverage opportunities for our community. This particular moment provides an opportunity," Waters said Wednesday. "If we are going to support extraordinary powers for these regulatory agencies, we have to be sure that these powers will be used to benefit small and minority businesses."

Hmm.  I think the Times managed to get a specific name of a connected company pushing the CBC, picked up a kind-of confirming quote from Barney Franks and ran with it.  I'll bet that the CBC is fronting for plenty of successful black businessman who would like their slice of the bailout pie, including IBC.

Comments

[JM Hanes]

The New York Times probably decided to go with the local angle, since that's where most of their readers are.

[Jim]

But, but, but, 92% of their constituency supports o. he is obviously doing exactly what at least 92% of them want. There can't be any problems in their districts.

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

"We're prepared to . . . leverage opportunities for our community. This particular moment provides an opportunity," Waters said Wednesday.

Poly Sci 101, that.

[kleagle eagle]

They got the president they wished forand 40 years of free welfare and undeserved jobs at the expense of the white race, so let em eat johnny cakes.

[pagar]

"since that's where most of their readers are."

I swear when I read that the first time, it read 'where both their reader are"

[bgates]

"kleagle"? Really? What's a representative from a Democratic organization like the Klan doing posting on a Republican-leaning site like this?

[anduril]

Pretty cool: Special Forces Soldiers Could Be Zooming Into Combat Wearing Gryphon Stealth Wingsuits.

[Melinda Romanoff]

bgates-

Did you see the SIZE of the snell on the hook of that one? Skewered right through the bait.

How's anyone supposed to take the bait on something with headlights that big? Sheesh.

[bgates]

How's anyone supposed to take the bait on something with headlights that big?

You must be looking for the Tiger Woods thread (he took the bait, she had pretty big headlights).

[Janet]

I think the whole minority oriented programing and/or religious diversity will be how the left attacks talk radio.
LUN is an organization called So We Might See - an interfaith coalition for media justice.

Anything with the words interfaith, coalition, or justice HAS to be bad!

[JM Hanes]

pagar:

You've just nailed down your reputation as a visionary.

[pagar]

I predict that Brad Thor's newest book (The Apostle) will see an increase in sales since the leftists are screaming that it is anti-Obama. I'll bet it's hard to buy promotions like that.

"The only reason this sub-plot is included is to slander the current President of the United States"

Brad Thor at least seems to feel that the US is a great country. I thank God that we can read stories written by such people, instead of books written by Bill Ayres.

[MarkJ]

Headline:

Maxine Waters: "No justice, no piece...of the action!"

[Narciso]

Well Alden the Preaodent is more like Edwards or Kennedy. But the point is still valid. Btw he saids he voted for Sarah as well

[Charlie (Colorado)]

let em eat johnny cakes.

Hey! I like johnny cakes!

[hit and run]

I don't watch cable news,but see where Bret Baier says that Jennifer Loven (AP) was on the panel tonight. Has she been on before? Huh.

[JM Hanes]

hit:

Yes. I saw Loven on the panel once, a month or more ago. I thought the idea of exposing her to some cogent conservative thinking was very good idea, and I wish Baier would bring her on more often. She actually made a pretty solid contribution, somewhat to my surprise.

[Narciso]

she has appeared before but not any time recently.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Remember the guy who was supposed to be conscious in a persistent vegetative state for 23 years?

Nope.

[jimmyk]

Nope.

Thanks, Charlie. That will teach me for taking an MSM story seriously.

Doesn't change my view on whether such a person should be starved to death, though.

[Janet]

LUN is a posting by Andy McCarthy that will make you sick. Lectures given by Muslims from INSA at Ft. Hood to our troops.
The Islamic Society of North America is one of the participants in the "So We Might See" organization I linked above.

Lecturing our troops, and advocating for media justice.

[matt]

Tying televangelists, Al Gore, the CBC, Larry King, and Hollywood together...I think it's beyootiful....LUN

[clarice]

Al Gore reminds me of Elmer Gantry, too. Or the Music Man.

[Ann]

Matt:

Hey, I love your blog. Keep up the good work and keep linking to it.

You will treasure the following:

Al Gore confronted on Climategate in Chicago

[E. Nigma]

Al Gore reminds me more of Elmer Fudd. 'Cept he's got more hair.

[Extraneus]

Nice link, Ann.

[Porchlight]

Al Gore reminds me of Elmer Gantry, too. Or the Music Man.

Yes, but they were likable rogues, and at least in the case of the Gantry film, sexy. I don't know how Al persuades the ladies.

[jimmyk]

I don't know how Al persuades the ladies.

$100 million can be very persuasive. Elin Nordegren is getting $55 million for two years.

[bio mom]

My female intuition senses that Jennifer Loeven is attracted to Steve Hayes. She gives him these looks when he is speaking during the panel. Wouldn't blame her. She probably hangs around with a bunch of girlie-man liberal guys most of the time. Either that or she is terrified that she has allowed herself to be surrounded by all these conservative types!! She is an attractive young woman despite her political bent.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Elin Nordegren is getting $55 million for two years.

"Now we're haggling about the price."

[clarice]

Everytime Gore starts talking I hear (VIMH),"There's trouble right here in River City....."

[jimmyk]

"Now we're haggling about the price."

Though in this case it's the price of being a cuckquean. (Yes, I had to look that up.)

[Ignatz]

--Elin Nordegren is getting $55 million for two years.

"Now we're haggling about the price."--

Considering the origin of that quote, that strikes me as a remarkably unfair statement.
He and his cocktail waitress are the whores in this situation. If that's what you meant, fine.
If however the wife who is cheated on while delivering his child is the intended target of that statement then I'm a bit stunned.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Considering the origin of that quote, that strikes me as a remarkably unfair statement.

Okay

He and his cocktail waitress are the whores in this situation. If that's what you meant, fine.

So she was paying Tiger?

If however the wife who is cheated on while delivering his child is the intended target of that statement then I'm a bit stunned.

So $55 million to stay married and keep her mouth shut is distinctly different?

[Charlie (Colorado)]

Just getting off a telephone press conference with Mann and Schmidt at which they took no inconvenient questions.

[Ignatz]

--So she was paying Tiger?--

I guess porn stars aren't whores either because the guy they're having sex with isn't paying them for it, the producer is.
I'd say calling two admitted adulterers whores is considerably closer to the mark than calling the victimized wife one.
Perhaps this will help:

whore (hôr)
noun
1.prostitute
2.any woman who engages in promiscuous sexual intercourse

intransitive verb whored, whoring whor′·ing

1.to be a whore
2.to have sexual intercourse with whores

--So $55 million to stay married and keep her mouth shut is distinctly different?--

She isn't being paid $55 million. She is quite understandably taking out an insurance policy that if her creep of a husband publicly humiliates her and violates the oath he took to her again he'll have to pay for the privelege.
I'd say that makes her the anti-whore.
You do seem to have a rather interesting take on what constitutes a marriage, though.
Considering your frequent discomforting comments in this area I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

[boris]

One of the nice things that can be said is he seems very consistent when it comes to respect, applying the same standard to others as to himself.

[clarice]

Andrew Bolt suggests Tom Wigley's emails show a growing discomfort with the CRU deceit, suggesting he may have been the whistleblower:

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/climategate_which_one_blew_the_whistle/>Whistleblower

[jimmyk]

Since my comment about Nordegren started this brouhaha, I'll weigh in: I agree that "whore" is inappropriate, which was why I replied as I did to Charlie's comment. On the other hand, my understanding is that the $55 million is a transfer of money to her control, in return for her agreeing to stay married for two years and keep quiet about the details of the incident. I don't see how that's "insurance." Nor do I think it reflects well on her, though she is the innocent victim here. But my original comment was just a tongue-in-cheek reference to "gold-digging," which does exist.

[Jane]

I must live in an alternate universe. I can see accepting that my husband fooled around, and committing to work things out - but if I was offered $55 million to do so, I think I would doubt the offerer's sincerity. Or is it a pay off for future deeds?

[clarice]

Offered--perhaps she demanded it and perhaps she was paid it because it was believed the costs otherwise in lost professional opportunities would be greater.

Just saying..

[Jane]

She is a nanny by profession - I mean please. I'm assuming she is staying to raise the kids and look good and the marriage is over. Cause otherwise it just looks like extortion.

[clarice]

Apparently she's from a wealthy family. The prenup was to protect him in case of divorce. Perhaps she felt that she had the power now to force him to relinquish some more assets in a way that changes the power relationship of the marriage.

I don't care much, frankly. The very rich, however, are not like you and me.

[Sue]

I don't have a problem with her taking a chunk out of his pocketbook. 2 or three chunks would be fine. I assume she is in love with her husband and has not also been cheating on him. That being the case, she is wounded and a wounded feline is the most dangerous. If I were Tiger, I'd sleep with one eye open.

[Jane]

I don't care much, frankly. The very rich, however, are not like you and me.

I know, but I have a disconnect about the money. It would make more sense in terms of staying married if he just wrote her a check.

[Ignatz]

Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe a prenup is primarily to protect the guy with all the dough, correct? The party without all the dough agrees to considerably less than she otherwise would be owed if the marriage dissolves because the party of the first part can't keep his niblick out of the skeezer trap. So whatever he's paying it's just slightly less advantageous than the previous advantageous deal. Good for her, for whatever she gets.

We don't know what the details are but it basically sounds like a change in the length of the prenup and the amount she is entitled to if it comes to that. Considering that recidivism in this area is rather high and forgiveness is quite a bit tougher on the second go round I'm very reluctant to cast any aspersions on his wife. Seems to me "insurance" over a potential second public humiliation is a very good term for it. If someone prefers a different term that's their perogative but it doesn't change the nature of what occured.
If a guy wants to humiliate his wife then seems to me a renegotiation of a contract already to his advantage is the best he should hope for.
He should consider himself lucky he didn't marry a Bobbit or the cops might have found his 3 wood out on the neighbor's lawn rather than his Escalade.

--but if I was offered $55 million to do so,I think I would doubt the offerer's sincerity--

I suspect the text messages, voicemail, multiple lies, breaking of vows, risk of infecting her with repellant diseases, screwing some other woman while she's birthin' his babies, public humiliation, ad infinitum, ad nauseum, might potentially have cast a modicum of doubt on his sincerity even prior to his offer.

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

She is apparently the wronged party as far as the infidelity, but is infidelity worth dragging the family and her children thru the mud by causing a public spectacle at 2:30 AM? She had a generous prenup and now she has doubled it. Seems she puts a dollar amount on the fidelity of her husband and that doesn't speak all that well about her.

If this is so important to her, she should have kept it private and gotten a huge trust for her children and left. Now she just looks like a bigger gold digger than she seemed when she got him to marry her in the first place.

I'm shocked that this confrontation took place in front of both her mother and Tiger's Mom and the kids were in the house. Kudos for Tiger for leaving rather than escalating the scene.

I have no sympathy for either of them. Tiger for being a typical jerk and her for being such a bitch.

But then I'm very cynical about these things and totally agree with Chris Rock when he says, "a man is as faithful as his options." Of course, I started married life with a Navy Commander's orientation back when "don't ask don't tell" applied to wives and their husbands and we were told not to ask what our husbands were doing on RR at the local hooches in Vietnam. That it was just a stress releaser and had nothing to do with us, the wives.

[Captain Hate]

She is a nanny by profession - I mean please.

I'm really irked by this dismissive characterization; and this isn't the only place I've seen it. It's honest work that when done well benefits more people than Tiger hitting a goddamn ball.

[Sue]

and her for being such a bitch.

How is she being a bitch? Tiger said she didn't do anything, remember? She's the rock of the family, according to Tiger. In fact, all we know about her is she found out her husband was screwing a bimbo or two or three and went a little batshit crazy. Happens to the best of them, that batshit crazy urge.

[bad]

Someday, Tiger and Elin's precious children will be able to google their parents and read all about it, and then some.

[Ignatz]

--"a man is as faithful as his options."--

Bullshit.

[hit and run]

Sara:
totally agree with Chris Rock when he says, "a man is as faithful as his options."

Totally as in no exceptions? Or totally as in,not literally totally?

Because there's a five letter word for someone with that view totally toward all men. It starts with b.

[jimmyk]

We don't know what the details are but it basically sounds like a change in the length of the prenup and the amount she is entitled to if it comes to that.

I give up. All reports I read said that it was an immediate non-contingent transfer of funds to an account under her control, in exchange for agreeing to remain married for two years and quiet. An upfront payment in exchange for future services is not insurance, but you are welcome to call it that if you wish.

Now I'm ready to move on to more important topics.

[MayBee]

I'm with Ignatz, Sue, and Captain Hate here.

Tiger cheated with a series of cocktail waitresses and party girls after he promised to share his life with Elin.
What does she have to do to prove she isn't a whore? Leave him and take none of the financial support she now has?
Stay with him and put up with whatever he want to do because she doesn't have any financial control?

[MayBee]

Chris Rock is a funny comedian, but that joke taken as a truism is demeaning to both men and women.

[Jane]

I'm really irked by this dismissive characterization; and this isn't the only place I've seen it. It's honest work that when done well benefits more people than Tiger hitting a goddamn ball.

I apologize Capn but look at the context - Clarice was talking about losing out on "professional opportunities". No matter how great a nanny she is, I doubt she is going to take home $50m elsewhere.

Frankly despite my torrential love for Tiger, at this point my sympathies are with her.

[Sue]

my sympathies are with her.

Me too. It might be I understand batshit crazy or something, but I won't hold her emotional breakdown against her.

[MayBee]

I think a loss of "professional opportunities" would apply to him if she left him.
His image is part of his paycheck. He didn't have to get married, but his reputation can't afford a big scandalous divorce and a series of cheap women.

[clarice]

Jane, I meant Tiger's professional opportunities. If she talks he surely will lose some sponsors, promotional opportunities, etc.

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

I knew when I posted my comment that there would be all kinds of not me, not all men, etc. All I can say is that attitude is naive.

I'm no beauty, I have a decent figure, but nothing that would stop traffic and I have been hit on over the years by preachers, politicians, community stalwarts, regular church goers, fathers at Pop Warner/Little League games, a brother-in-law and a step father-in-law, and even when my husband was standing 10 feet away, and my experience isn't all that unusual.

I love men, prefer their company much more than women, and I'm a naturally trusting person, but I'm not a fool, not a woman who wears rose colored glasses. And truthfully, the more a man professes his true blueness, the more suspicious I am of him. As my Dad said, "just remember this one thing, never trust a man who says 'trust me'." That goes for women too.

As to my use of jerk and bitch. I don't care if he was fooling around, there is no excuse for a public spectacle and NEVER EVER an excuse for violence.

[centralcal]

Ignatz! Agree totally! Agree with Sue and Captain Hate! Agree with MayBee, also.

My daughter helped put herself through college by working as a nanny.

[MayBee]

So, Sara, were you only as faithful as your options?

[MayBee]

No, there's no excuse for violence.

But what made it a public spectacle?

1)Tiger being seen in public with a nightclub hostess, thus getting a write up in the Enquirer
and
2)Tiger leaving the house and taking it into the front yard.

You can't blame Elin for making this public. The golf club-wielding is indeed bad, and her fault.

[Captain Hate]

No matter how great a nanny she is, I doubt she is going to take home $50m elsewhere.

I'm not dismissing the accuracy of what you're saying, Jane, and agree with you. I just get upset that so many people are willing to turn their children over to a faceless daycare center yet are dismissive to the legitimate function that Elin serves.

[Sue]

The golf club-wielding is indeed bad, and her fault.

Actually, at this point, we only assume it was her fault. What if she was defending herself? What if Tiger has a history of slapping her around and she has kept it well hidden and this time she said no mas? Anyway, I don't hold that against her as much as others here seem to. Was it a good thing? No. Was it the most awful thing that happened that night? Absolutely not. Apparently she caught him sexting his lover. On top of the NE article, she lost it. And for all we know, the only thing she took the club to was his vehicle.

[Sue]

hit on over the years by preachers, politicians, community stalwarts, regular church goers, fathers at Pop Warner/Little League games, a brother-in-law and a step father-in-law, and even when my husband was standing 10 feet away, and my experience isn't all that unusual.

I think it is unusual for that many men married men to hit on a married woman. It is not something that has happened to me nor is it something anyone in our crowd has mentioned happening to them.

[Ignatz]

--All reports I read said that it was an immediate non-contingent transfer of funds to an account under her control, in exchange for agreeing to remain married for two years and quiet.--

jimmyk,
After your post I went and read several news accounts. Initially it was reported she was getting paid directly some amount and the prenup was being modified. The later ones seemed to backtrack on that and say it was an adjustment of the time period and the amount of the prenup. In either case the vast majority of the total or all of it is a contingent amount based on the future event of how long the marriage lasts. Presumably the future position of Tiger's trousers may have some bearing on just how long it does last. Sounds like a contingent insurance policy to me.

--And truthfully, the more a man professes his true blueness, the more suspicious I am of him.--

This would seem to be a slight variation on the "when did you stop beating your wife" gag.

[bgates]

She is a nanny by profession

Without delving into the respective societal benefits, I bet she made more money as a swimsuit model than as a nanny.

I have been hit on over the years by blah, blah, blah

[bgates]

oops.

I've had several black people hit me up for spare change over the years. If I were Sara, I guess I'd expect the same from Colin Powell or Kobe Bryant. Lucky for me I'm not a bigot.

[Captain Hate]

I think it is unusual for that many men married men to hit on a married woman. It is not something that has happened to me nor is it something anyone in our crowd has mentioned happening to them.

I thought I'd stumbled on a portal to a "letter to Penthouse" universe...

[bad]

I never thought I'd be writing to you....

[jimmyk]

The later ones seemed to backtrack

Ok, well at least we're in agreement on definitions, only the facts are at issue. :) I hadn't seen the retractions.

[Jane]

I just get upset that so many people are willing to turn their children over to a faceless daycare center yet are dismissive to the legitimate function that Elin serves.

I'm not dismissive of her and I have missed the comments that are. I admit the post that you reacted to may have come across like that but it wasn't intended. I waitressed my way thru both college and law school and have always referred to that job as "blood money". I've very respectful of her and also her newly acquired $50 million.

[Captain Hate]

I'm not dismissive of her and I have missed the comments that are.

Not generally here; elsewhere on a sports bbs.

[bgates]

I thought I'd stumbled on a portal to a "letter to Penthouse" universe...

try justninetyminutes.typepad.com.

[clarice]

bad is very bad.

[MayBee]

I still want to know if women are only as faithful as their options.

[clarice]

And the money pours out as the science is in question.

DOE To Invest $979 Million To
Support Carbon-Capture Projects
CNN/Money, by Cassandra Sweet The U.S. Energy Department said Friday it has awarded $979 milllion in federal stimulus funds to support carbon-capture and -storage projects at three coal- fired power plants owned by American Electric Power Co. (AEP), Southern Co. (SO) and a unit of Summit Power Group Inc. The federal funds will be added to about $2.2 billion in private capital to help the greenhouse-gas emission-reduction proj|OVER>ects move forward, U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu said.

[hit and run]

Sara:
I knew when I posted my comment that there would be all kinds of not me, not all men, etc. All I can say is that attitude is naive.

You're funny.

You're experiences are enough for you to claim to know better than me how I would react in the face of female advances.

Regardless of how I have reacted to such over the years.

You can't hide behind "naive" because I'm telling you,I've been there,and haven't done that.

Or you are calling me a liar?

[Captain Hate]

In partial fairness to Tiger, the awkwardness of him not pulling this off implies that cheating like this really isn't what he's about. My opinion is that this is a result of hanging out with Jordan and Barkley, two notorious hounds who either had wives that didn't care or were very good about keeping it from them. Or both.

[MayBee]

It sounds like he got away with it for a lot of years and with a lot of women for it not to be what he's about, Captain Hate.

[Ignatz]

--Lucky for me I'm not a bigot. --

Depends on how fast one says your screen name.

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

Hit, Sue, et al: I don't pretend to know how others will act, I only know what I've seen and what I've personally experienced and what a few close girlfriends have experienced over 40 years.

Sue, I've never been in a position to have options. When I wasn't busy working a 60 hour week, I always had two kids in tow. I don't have a trillion dollars. I didn't marry a man worth a trillion dollars.

This is a quote from my best friend and co-blogger. A man who has been on both sides of this fence. He caught his first wife in bed with another man the day he returned from Vietnam. But after that, during his twenty years of being divorced, he was no angel either.

His take:

She seems like a nice girl and the kids are beautiful, but the truth is… men are dogs and young ones with all of that scratch are particularly canine. Compounded by the fact that every cute little air-brain-hotty within his range is in HEAT for that type.

People make mistakes, shit happens and for the Woods family, everyone will make out even more with this first episode of “As Tiger Squirms, Finally”; and so be it! One could think his life, and the publicity therein going forward, will be more interesting because of it.

Isn’t the real truth about things usually found in the tabloids anyway?

[MayBee]

Sue, I've never been in a position to have options.

You just listed all your options.
And you did pretend to know how others will act. You said men will cheat.

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

I am obviously much more cynical than most of you seem to be. Maybe it is years of treatment at Navy Hospital where when you come in with a stubbed toe, they automatically test you for STDs and the first question they ask is whether your spouse just returned from deployment.

Maybe it is knowing one of my closest friends lost her virginity to her preacher when he attacked her after giving her a ride home from babysitting his kids. Or maybe it is the years in politics, where we had to make it a rule that any volunteer caught trolling for powerful guys would be dismissed, after one of our volunteers, a 2nd grade teacher, contracted herpes from the candidate. Or maybe it was all those days after work with friends stopping in for happy hour and watching the pickup lines start flowing and both men and women trolling the room for a partner for the night. Or maybe it is just living in So. Calif.

[JM Hanes]

I've only scanned the thread, but jeez, Tiger has been screwing around and folks are beating up on his wife?

He wrecks their marriage but doesn't want her to divorce him or make a fuss, and she's the whore for telling him that's going to cost him plenty?

Outside of physical harm, he hurts her in the worst possible way a husband can, but she's the bitch who wants to make him hurt too?

Maybe she thinks money is the only way to do that, or maybe she has no reason to trust him to live up to the terms of their pre-nup -- especially when he can afford the best lawyers that money can buy.

Frankly, I don't think anyone ever really knows what goes on in someone else's marriage, especially when things go wrong, but people's reactions are pretty telling.

Sara:

"is infidelity worth dragging the family and her children thru the mud by causing a public spectacle at 2:30 AM"

That's an absolutely jaw dropping question. If you were talking about dragging children through the circus of a long, messy, public spectacle in divorce court, you might have a point about considered decisions. It would still take two people to dance that tango, and the "modernization" of divorce law would make her the underdog there too.

I don't know what the gender stats on infidelity might be, but I think it's pretty clear that your not-so-casual insistence that men will be men is just as insulting to men who take fidelity seriously as any other stereotype used to tar whole groups of people whether socially or politically or otherwise. You can call it "realism" but I've seen plenty of folks getting a blast from your own furnace for using stereotypes that you object to.

[PD]

If this is so important to her, she should have kept it private and gotten a huge trust for her children and left.

Did she announce the renegotiation, or was it leaked?

[bad]

I have been hit on over the years by preachers, politicians, community stalwarts, regular church goers, fathers at Pop Warner/Little League games, a brother-in-law and a step father-in-law, and even when my husband was standing 10 feet away, and my experience isn't all that unusual.

When I wasn't busy working a 60 hour week, I always had two kids in tow.

What a sleezy bunch to hit on a woman in front of her children.

[centralcal]

It is also possible, if not probable, that Tiger's wife is immensely hurt and wanting to hurt back a little bit (or even a lot). Perhaps she feels that his bank account is a sore spot and a perfect target?

[Ignatz]

--Outside of physical harm, he hurts her in the worst possible way a husband can, but she's the bitch who wants to make him hurt too?--

JMH,
I have heard from a very good friend that physical harm may not be the worst thing in a marriage.
Her first husband put her in the hospital for a week with broken ribs.
The second one cheated on her.
She says, quite sincerely, the first one hurt her less than the second.
Loss of control and anger issues were more forgivable and understandable for her than planned and concealed betrayal.
****************
In defense of Sara there are some subjects that people approach from their own experiences and can only see through that lens. That there are guys who would die before they hurt their wives may just not register because of unpleasant experiences. I understand what she speaks of regarding the Navy, as the Air force was similar. But Sara they do exist and there are no small number of them. I suspect there are some right here on this board.

[MayBee]

Wait. Sara, you thought the allegations of Tiger having an affair were a lie.
Now you are saying, all men cheat.
That seems to be quite an inconsistency.

Regardless, we all have our own experiences. Including the men here who wouldn't and don't cheat on their wives. I think you don't realize how offensive it is to basically accuse them of being hounds in waiting.
It's a pretty vicious accusation.

[Jim Rhoads a/k/a vjnjagvet]

Here's off the top of head list of men who have much in common with Tiger (and it isn't golf):

Abraham, Samson, David, and more recently, Elliot Spitzer, John Edwards, ARod, Bill Clinton, Michael Jordan, James Worthy, Mickey Mantle, John F., Robert and Ted Kennedy, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Warren G. Harding, Jimmy Swaggert, Jim Bakker, most rockers, many opera stars, countless stars of stage, screen, radio and television.

All of them had trouble keeping their marriage vows. But not all famous male politicians, sports stars, preachers, opera singers, or great actors violate one of the great commandments by succumbing to one of the strongest and oldest urges in the universe.

Some of those who falter have wives who are part of the deal; many do not.

Tiger's carefully crafted "perfect" image, along with his unprecedented success on the golf course and endorsing products has made this incident more than just the story of another man with clay feet. But is Tiger really the adulterer of the Century?

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

Who called Tiger's wife a whore? I certainly didn't. I have sympathy for both of them. But, it was her reaction on Thanksgiving night that brought the press down on them big time. And someone in that household has been leaking to TMZ, and I don't think it is Tiger and probably not his Mom, who was there. Her Mom, who was also there, maybe. An employee, bodyguard, who knows? But someone is leaking these negotiations and the only one I can see who benefits from the current leaks about the prenup negotiations is Tiger's wife.

He's an ass, but I'm sorry, I just can't dredge up a whole lot of emotion for a woman who stands to walk away with $100 million or so for 4-5 years of marriage. The kids, OTOH, need to be protected with trusts where neither party can touch the money.

She can stay with him out of genuine love & loyalty or she can stay with him for the money. If she is only staying for the money, then that is a stupid move. Take what is a good sized fortune and move on and let him move on and get back to what he does best. If it is for love & loyalty, then she has a right to crack the whip and demand fidelity with consequences and he owes it to her to tow the line exclusively. But a limbo state, is just stupid. On both their parts.

[PD]

Regardless, we all have our own experiences. Including the men here who wouldn't and don't cheat on their wives. I think you don't realize how offensive it is to basically accuse them of being hounds in waiting.
It's a pretty vicious accusation.

I don't think it's that vicious, actually. It is possible to be faithful and yet unfortunately feel the tug of hound-in-waiting-ness. "I'm married, not dead" has a lot of truth to it. Women are attractive, after all.

Having said that, a man who vows fidelity and then cheats is reprehensible.

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

Wait. Sara, you thought the allegations of Tiger having an affair were a lie.
Now you are saying, all men cheat.
That seems to be quite an inconsistency.

Huh? There is a difference between not being surprised and condoning it. What are you talking about?

I think I was like everyone else. Shocked at the first news, questioning the source of the Enquirer, and waiting to see how it all shakes out.

[PD]

But someone is leaking these negotiations

I agree that's likely, but unless it's *her*, I don't see the rationale for saying that *she* made the renegotiation public. Maybe she did, maybe she didn't.

[Ignatz]

Here's some funny stuff about a not funny situation from Jesper Parnevik the guy who now regrets introducing Tiger and Elin.

[MayBee]

Huh? There is a difference between not being surprised and condoning it. What are you talking about?

I'm talking about how you were so certain it was a lie that he was cheating.

Now your position is that all men are cheaters.
So it seems very inconsistent to me that your first response wasn't "Of course he cheated! He's a man!"
I said nothing about you condoning it.

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

I think you don't realize how offensive it is to basically accuse them of being hounds in waiting.
It's a pretty vicious accusation.

This doesn't even make sense. No one accused the men here of anything.

However, that said, what planet are you living on?

[Sara (Pal2Pal)]

I'm talking about how you were so certain it was a lie that he was cheating.

Obviously, from what I've said, I would never "be certain" a man wasn't cheating, so you have either misinterpreted something else I've said, or you are mistaking me for someone else.

As I recall, when this story broke, I took pretty much the same position that Jane did, that I'd still appreciate him as the world's greatest golfer no matter what the truth. I think I also indicated that the whole thing made me sad.