I Agree With Yair Lapid

I've sounded just like him when responding to the "you see, you-see disengagement was a huge mistake" right-wing crowd.

Yes it is terrifying that we have a Hamas state on our southern border but just imagine that 7,500 Israeli citizens were still there, with children needing to travel to school each day, Imagine their vulnerable expansive communities and the three military divisions deployed there to protect them and all the solitary pillboxes erected in the area and the long corridors that are used for security, the hitchhiking stations on the main roads, the synagogues, the cars, everything.

And that is – if you’ll forgive me – exactly what we said then. We have to distance ourselves from the Palestinians, to shut them off, to separate from their impeccable talent for doing the wrong thing. The disengagement – even with its failures and hardships – was the only thing that has allowed us now to carry on almost normally within an insane situation.

You tell 'em, Yair. Absolutely.

A Very Israeli Soap Opera

I thought this piece on the public fascination with the Haim Ramon case and why everyone wants to talk about it -- even more than Katsav, where there are more serious charges involved -- got it right:

This is the kind of case that happens often in this confused era where the balance of power between men and women is shifting, and a good thing it is, and everything is still in the phase of being formulated and clarified.

What seemed even to the kissed woman as a sort of crude surprise was interpreted by her several hours later as a blatant violation of the rules, and everything was turned upside down and became a criminal investigation, and ended up at court because of the twilight zone where it took place and in light of the media frenzy and other matters that are not always relevant.

And the kissing man, Haim, is so Israeli even at the stage where he invades the mouth of a strange woman on the way to a vote in favor of invading a neighboring country. He is no gentleman, and even when he figures out his mistake he isn't quick to offer roses as a way of apologizing, but rather, gets entangled in the affair and insults the one who only a week ago he liked so much. And there, she turns into an enemy that must be subjected to an all-out war that will end in disgrace, just like the war he voted in favor of at the government session following the kiss ended in disgrace.

And so, on the same ticket we got both a fable about our place and also the 2007 version of an Israeli soap opera. It's pathetic yet accurate, and this is perhaps why it's so widely discussed. It's so shaken up, oscillating between feminists who view it as victory over men and the sense of a Pyrrhic victory and sorrow and shame.

However....there is also an element of escapism in the countless conversations about these sex scandals. Let's face it, they are more entertaining, and less scary to discuss Haim Ramon and Moshe Katsav's troubles with women than growing threats from Hamas, Hezbollah, and Ahmedinejad.

I see a bit of parallel in the U.S. public dialogue, where folks would rather talk about the horse race in the 2008 elections, with the accompanying Clinton/Giuiliani/Barack gossip and soap opera elements, than the nitty gritty frightening issues of what the heck to do about Iraq and Iran.

The Katsav Dam Bursts

I was in the minivan, on my way to pick up my 10-year-old from a birthday party in video arcade hell at the mall (yes, we have those in Israel, unfortunately) when I flipped on the radio for the news and heard President Katsav ranting and raving live about the injustice of it all, the evil police, the vindictive legal system, and of course, the slimy, slimy media and how all of them were out to get him, and how all three had conspired to create rape and sexual harassment charges out of thin air.

His voice cracked, it sounded like there might be a few tears, and even on the radio, you could hear him banging on the table. I was frustrated not to be watching it.

That was at about 7:15 PM, I think. When I got home, in between all the fuss of getting kids ready for bed, I made a mental note to switch on the television to catch the top of the news so I could see what he looked like. When I did, I couldn't believe it....he was STILL talking live. How long did has this been going on?

(LATER -- Ahhhh, I get it now! He wanted to make sure his speech ran long enough to completely upstage Prime Minister Olmert speaking at the Herziliya Conference at the same time, calling for his resignation...very clever. And apparently, when Olmert called for Katsav to quit, he got applause. First applause he's heard in a long time.)

I can understand how he has a lot to say. This thing has been in the press for what -- seven months -- it broke before the Lebanon War this summer, and he's stayed pretty much silent through the whole ordeal, through some incredibly nasty stories describing him as every secretary's octopus boss from hell. He's crying McCarthyism, he's crying Dreyfus, he's crying everything that will make us feel sorry for him.

His bottom line -- he'll take a leave of absence, but he's not quitting: "I yield my immunity so an indictment can be filed against me, but the law does not demand I resign."

If there is an indictment, he says, then he'll resign.

What do the people think? Unscientifically, a Ynet poll found that 89 percent of the public wants him to resign now. Ynet also reports that the Education Minister wants to take his pictures down from public school walls.

I do feel a little sorry for him being indicted, tried, and convicted in the court of public opinion, before an indictment has even been handed down. But I find it hard to believe that they would hand down charges this serious against the president of Israel without some real evidence. And there's so much smoke, there has to be some fire, so his song and dance about his wonderful perfect marriage ring pretty hollow.

Speaking for every Israeli parent, I'm for any solution that can get him off the front pages so I don't have to discuss rape and sexual harassment every other week with my young children.

The Jerusalem Post has a nice chunk of his rant translated. As you can see, he's playing the race card big-time.

"My friends and I have stood against a vile attack while my name and reputation have been dragged through the mud," he said.

"I have refrained from responding…and even during these difficult days I do not intend to lower my head in humiliation. I will struggle with all my strength to clear my name," said a president choked up by his tears.

"Citizens of Israel, don't believe the accusations! There is one truth. I am the target of one of the worst hunts in the history of the State. Over the past few months an unprecedented brainwashing of the public has occurred. You've heard hair raising stories presented as truth by the media. I've survived because the truth stands with me," said Katsav.

"This public trial at the hands of the media has prevented me from defending myself…my truth. None of you have seen any evidence. I promise you that no such evidence exists. No one has asked for my side, and you grabbed onto these stories as truth. No one, at any point, stopped to ask if these accusations are true.

Charging a smear campaign carried out by the media and using words such as "McCarthyism" and "persecution," an enraged Katsav said, "No radio or television station has searched for the truth." At one point Katsav attacked Channel 2's anchorman Gadi Sukenik, saying, "Channel 2 has spilled my blood. The same Channel 2 that cancelled an interview with me because they preferred Muhammad Dahlan.

"Citizens of Israel, it is you who will be struck dumbfounded by the truth. The truth, no newspaper will be able to hide. I have never hurt any man or woman. I have always carried out my duties with honor."

Katsav, who was born in Iran, implied that the charges against him were motivated by racism against Israelis of Middle Eastern origin, who had traditionally be marginalized by Jews of European heritage.

"I saw myself as a symbol for all those who are not part of the elite clique born with silver spoons in their mouths ... who believe that only they can represent the people of Israel," he said.

Yup, that's the race card.

Oh, boy, how badly is it going to play if he gets pushed out of office and gets replaced by Shimon Peres. The uppity brown-skinned Persian is shamed and humiliated as the elite clique of Eastern European founding fathers returns to the top of the hill in the President's mansion. It's going to get ugly.

LATER: Two similar reactions. Lisa calls me up, "Lord, did you see how red-faced and embarrassed Katsav's attorney's were? They looked like they'd rather be anywhere else."

At the same moment, columnist Nahum Barnea writes:

Two top attorneys, David Libai and Zion Amir, sat in a small room packed to the gills with cameras and microphones on Tuesday afternoon while squirming about uncomfortably in their seats. Both are experienced in defending lost cases but never before had they defended such an embarrassing case.

Brokeback Wadi

A story of anti-Zionist man-love.

(Yes, I know I took the world's shortest hiatus. Sue me)

On Being a Political Hybrid

I can relate to this post.

It’s interesting that my weblog has found such a home on the right side of the blogosphere, and such disdain on the left. I am still a feminist, still pro-choice, in favor of gay rights, for affirmative action, progressive taxation, and many, many other Democratic and left-side causes. But the left simply won’t have anything to do with me, because I am an unabashed and unashamed Zionist and supporter of Israel, as well as the war on terror. I will never make excuses for terror. Not ever. So the lefties call me a conservative and assume that I am a Republican. Many on the right seem to think the same thing.

Yes, yes, and yes, even though I don't always agree with Meryl on everything Israeli-Palestinian -- she's more black and white, and I'm into the grays, but that probably has to do with the fact that I live here and she doesn't.

The fact that living in or strongly supporting Israel automatically makes you a member of the "right" in the blogosphere isn't a new topic. I've said it multiple times, on the blog and in Email exchanges with Roger Simon, the Political Hybrid.

We are Political Hybrids.

Now I don't just mean by that centrist, I mean actual hybrids with passionate feelings about a variety of issues that cross lines. And a hybrid, of course, could cross those lines in a variety of ways.

Equal-Opportunity Offensive

Not being a regular viewer of political cartoons in the States, I didn't really know much about this Ted Rall, except that he was also a blogger, and regularly triggers angry rants from Michele, who really can't stand the guy.

I thought, since he is a lefty, that his venom only offended the right-wing, so I was surprised when I saw that my dear friend and co-blogmother MB, a pillar of the left wing of the blogosphere, was extremely pissed off at him, too, for this nasty cartoon.

Now that's really horrible.

Fun fact: the word "Rall" translated into Hebrew means "poison." (if you make the "a" sound really gutteral)

A Two-State Solution

Over at the Jerusalem Post, the Calev Ben-David knows what America needs right now: a little help from Israel when it comes to the process of separating the Red States from the Blue States.

His column is a must-read. Hilarious.

No other country in the world has had more experience in modern times with the two-state solution process. True, we haven't actually achieved it yet; but Israel is unmatched in terms of dealing with the steps needed to get there.

To begin with, we need to establish a local organization dedicated to solving the Red-Blue States conflict, an Israeli equivalent to the American Israel Policy Forum, or Americans for Peace Now. My suggestion is a non-profit organization comprised of Israeli-Americans like myself, called The Israel Forum for Peace between Americans Now (IFPAN).

The next thing is to get both sides on the Red-Blue States divide talking, to get them engaged in serious dialogue no small matter, as anyone who's ever watched CNN's Crossfire or Fox's O'Reilly Factor knows. Certainly the political leaders of the Red-Blue struggle are not going to want to publicly discuss such a sensitive issue as dividing America before real groundwork is laid.

Perhaps the Oslo process model should be used here. IFPAN could get the ball rolling by inviting to Israel a few nonofficial representative figures of both camps, to hold a "peace dialogue" between them let's say, Karl Rove and Charlie Daniels for the Red States, and Michael Moore and the cast of Queer Eye for the Straight Guy for the Blue States.

UNDER IPFAN's supervision, this "Jerusalem Process" will hammer out a preliminary "declaration of principles" stating that the Red and Blue States agree in theory to divide themselves into two nations.

At that point, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon will invite the political leaders of both sides Bush and Vice-President Dick Cheney for the Reds, Senators Kerry and Hillary Clinton for the Blues to a summit meeting at his Sycamore Ranch to work out a formal final-status treaty dividing the US into two states.

Some tricky issues will need to be worked out. For one thing, the three clusters of Blue States in the Northeast, Midwest and Pacific coast do not form a contiguous territory. One solution may be found in the fact that all three areas border at some point on Canada. Perhaps the Canadians can be convinced to provide an extra-territorial "safe-passage corridor" along the US border connecting the Blue State clusters

Then there's the question of what to do with those large "settlement" pockets of conservative Red State voters found in Blue States California's Orange County, for example and likewise, those liberal Blue State settlements in Red States such as Austin, Texas. I suggest a "mutual transfer" agreement of sorts, where the residents of these regions would be compensated to move to the area where they would feel most politically comfortable.

One of the trickiest issues is bound to be the status of the capital. Although Washington, D.C., is currently controlled by the Red Republicans, it sits within the solidly Blue Democratic District of Columbia. Given the immense symbolic value of the city, and specifically such structures as Capitol Hill and the White House, it's unlikely either side would be willing to cede full sovereignty over the site to the other.

The only answer here may be to "internationalize" Washington, D.C., with a neutral third party overseeing its governance and allowing both Red and Blue Americans equal access to its politically holy monuments.

One expects the negotiations to be difficult; Prime Minister Sharon will have to demand that Bush, Cheney, Kerry, and Clinton remain sequestered at the ranch until they hammer out an agreement, and threaten that they will have to help clean out the sheep shed if the talks drag on too long.

If that's not enough, more drastic diplomatic pressure may be needed. Even economic sanctions should be considered, with Israel threatening a complete boycott of exports to the US including Jaffa oranges, Epilady devices, and locally-produced Ecstasy pills if a two-state solution is not arrived at.

Obviously, you've gotta read the whole thing.

What She Said

Imshin gets it right, as usual.

I recognize the sentiments expressed by those opposed to Bush, crushed by his success at the polls. I recognize the frustration, anger, and sadness they feel, faced as they are with the stupidity and ignorance of people for not voting for the right candidate. I’ve been there myself.

In our case, not only had they elected the wrong guy, they had done it just a few months after someone from their side had murdered our prime minister.

We couldn’t help thinking, like the prophet Elijah who said to King Ahab, all those years ago in this very same land, “Hast thou killed and also taken possession?” (Kings I, 21, 19)

They had murdered Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, they had murdered peace, and now they were electing into office the very man who had stood up on that balcony above Zion Square in Jerusalem, as the crowds below him held up banners of PM Rabin in an SS uniform.

Can you imagine the bitterness and bewilderment, not to mention the fear for the future?

...I confess to having harbored a secret frustration that democracy gives the same vote to me as to ignoramuses and imbeciles who cannot be made to see sense; who are not controlled by the same moral values as I am.

And I have come to see how arrogant and foolish and narrow-minded I can be, thinking that I know better, thinking that I have the mandate on common sense and on knowing what's right.

The Schizophrenia Continues

My inner Israeli is rather relieved that Bush won. We don't need the message sent to terrorists that they can accomplish regime change, and we don't need the U.S. in flux when all this craziness is going on with Arafat.

We also don't need a new U.S. president as an excuse for foot-dragging on the Gaza withdrawal, and my gut feeling is that Sharon will only dare to make concessions and take risks when he feels that there is an American president who's got his back.

My inner American (the one who voted for Kerry) is concerned and worried regarding what's in store over the next four years, particularly when it comes to the Supreme Court and especially regarding abortion.

There are so many parallels between recent U.S. elections and recent Israeli elections. The fear factor, the need to pick a guy who appears tough to deal with the bad scary terrorists. The way that the religious right might not be a majority, but they are sure well-organized and effective. And the way that the left seems lost and searching for an identity -- knowing what it is against, but not quite sure what it is for.

How Cautious Can a Headline Be?

It's fun watching the news organizations continue to cover their butts so as to avoid repeating 2000.

Check out this NY Times lead:

President Bush swept to an apparent popular-vote victory over Senator John Kerry last night, and seemed headed toward winning enough Electoral College votes to assure his re-election.

Let's not commit ourselves or anything...

Good Line

CNN decided to call Ohio as a "Green State" -- too close to call -- neither Red nor Blue. So immediately commentator Jeff Greenfield said that it looks like Ohio voters and officials will soon realize that it's not easy being Green.

Is Politics A Load of Crap?

Well, you can't argue that baby Tamar doesn't give a shit about politics.

Background: I have the amazing sleeping baby, she sleeps through the night, every night, unless she wakes herself up by pooping.

When I went to sleep tonight, I wasn't sure if I was enough of a political junkie to wake up at 4-5 AM Israel time to watch the results.

Now it's almost 6, and I've been up for two hours, because I've changed two diapers on this baby. Is this some form of commentary?

The Votes Are Tallied

I mean the Knesset vote on the Gaza withdrawal. Our family watched it live on television -- and it was pretty darn dramatic and entertaining. The kids were into it, especially my son, who is shaping up into quite the news junkie. All he wanted to discuss today was Yitzhak Rabin (this evening began the Hebrew anniversary of his assassination) and Sharon and the vote on Gaza.

The fact that he is up on all of this stuff is blowing away my high school babysitters. They are 17 and he is eight, and I daresay he follows the news more closely than they do.

I guess it's genetic: he's the son of a journalist and a journalist-turned-media-lawyer.

It's amazing how he reaches logical conclusions on his own. When I explained to him that the settlers in Gaza are very sad about leaving their homes, he said, "Well, the government has to give them money to buy new houses."

And more chillingly -- he's understood for a while now that Rabin was killed by people angry that he wanted to give land to Palestinians. And now he's hearing that Sharon wants to give Gaza to the Palestinians. So he followed the logic and asked me if Sharon was going to get killed, too, and if so, when?

Not even a blip on all this on the U.S. news radar, what with elections and baseball.

This vote could be the opening shot in a big government shakeup. Sharon fired two ministers who voted against the plan, and several of his ministers and some of the coalition partners say that they will quit and walk out of the government, if he doesn't agree to a national referendum on Gaza within the next 15 days.

(As usual, if you want some organized factual information on the vote and not my impressions interspersed with anecdote -- go to Jonathan's site -- who I met in NY in a too-brief "put a face to the blogger" encounter...)

I Did It

Cast my vote, sent in my ballot. Not that it's going to make a big difference: Connecticut isn't what you'd call a swing state, but at least I've done my civic duty.

Who did you vote for, you ask? You know, it's weird, maybe it's my background as a reporter, but it feels wrong to declare it publicly....

OK, what the hell, here goes -- I voted for Kerry. It just didn't seem fair to cast the vote that was best for Israel. I had to cast the vote that I thought was best for America. Being in America for the debates really affected me. While I knew it would be hard to vote for Bush before the debates, after watching them, I felt it would be impossible.

For the record: the fact that my friends and family would disown me if I voted for Bush did NOT play a role in my decision.

Also for the record: I did not vote with burning passion for the candidate and I do not feel like the sky will fall and life as we know it will end if Bush wins.

And the Mud Continues to Fly....

The mud in the McGreevey-Cipel affair continues to fly so thick and fast, all NJ residents had better duck...

This from the Philadelphia Inquirer -- registration required for the whole article -- in a detail-filled splash for the Sunday paper...

Attorney: Deporting threatened for Cipel McGreevey said he'd make him unemployable, according to the ex-aide's counsel. The governor's lawyer denied it.

By John Shiffman and Mitch Lipka
Inquirer Staff Writers

In an attempt to silence him, Gov. McGreevey threatened to make Golan Cipel unemployable and therefore subject to deportation, according to the lawyer drafting a possible sexual-harassment suit against the governor.

The governor's lawyer said the allegations are false.

In an interview, New York lawyer Rachel Yosevitz contended that a visa threat against the Israeli national was part of a pattern of intimidation and "power play" that began fully two years ago.

McGreevey's advisers have maintained that the conflict with Cipel surfaced only last month. But Cipel's legal team now says that the two men began feuding immediately after Cipel left the state payroll in August 2002.

On several occasions, Yosevitz said, the "governor's representatives" visited Cipel at his homes in the Trenton area and later, in New York.

"They made it clear to Golan that he could not and should not go public with what he had gone through with the governor," Yosevitz said.

"They made it clear that the governor would do as he pleased - and that if he wanted to have him deported, he would have him deported."

In response, William E. Lawler 3d, the governor's lawyer, said flatly: "That's not true."

According to Yosevitz, Cipel will return to the U.S. this week "and decide whether to sue."

She said that the statute of limitations for a lawsuit runs out at the end of the month, the two-year anniversary of Cipel's departure from the state payroll. Now THAT is an interesting piece of information -- what I had been wondering was why the whole thing was coming to a head, and going public now. Now it makes some sense -- Cipel has been pursuing this thing quietly for two years, and now that the clock is ticking to the end of his opportunity to sue, he gave McGreevey an ultimatum (or blackmailed him, depending on whose version you believe.)

Still lots of holes in Cipel's version:

McGreevey sexually harassed Cipel more than a dozen times while Cipel was a state employee from January 2002 to August 2002. Cipel's original job was to serve as McGreevey's liaison to the Jewish community and to the state's homeland security office, which was headed by an assistant attorney general. But as a foreigner, he could not obtain a security clearance, and after two months, he dropped any homeland security duties.

According to Yosevitz, a "last sexual assault" occurred in August 2002. Lowy has refused to specify what sexual conduct was alleged but said that it involved something other than intercourse.

"Golan said, 'Enough, I won't do this. I have had enough,' " she said. " 'This is no longer going to happen. You are no longer going to do this to me.' "

After Cipel spurned this particularly strong advance from McGreevey, Yosevitz said, the administration forced him to resign from his post as a liaison with Jewish groups.

With help from McGreevey, both sides agree, Cipel landed a job with MWW, a big public relations firm with an office in Trenton.

Sounds pretty weird, no? Either the governor would want to keep him "under control" -- which means he wouldn't force him to resign -- or he would want to pay him off and totally get rid of him -- in which case, one would think, he'd line up a job for Golan back in Israel...or in LA....but why would he keep him so close at hand?

Another Inquirer story published today hints that by asking the FBI to investigate Cipel, that McGreevey might have handed the feds a key to a Pandora's box.

When Gov. McGreevey asked the FBI to investigate an alleged extortion attempt by former aide Golan Cipel, the governor invited - perhaps inadvertently - intensified federal scrutiny of his own actions.

Current and former law-enforcement officials are now expected to interview McGreevey's inner circle and review schedules, phone logs, and other sensitive records - all with the governor's blessing, federal authorities say.

"It certainly could get interesting," said one law-enforcement official familiar with the case.

Leaders of the union representing state troopers already have told those who guard and drive the governor to be prepared for visits from FBI agents.

"You better be careful what you wish for," said former federal Judge Stephen Orlofsky. "You can't control the FBI once you make a request.

"You can't expect that the FBI is just going to interview Gov. McGreevey and Golan Cipel and that's it. Their investigation will be comprehensive, and could lead to other things."

Several McGreevey associates already are under indictment or federal investigation over matters unrelated to the Cipel bombshell.

Blah, blah, blah, yadda, yadda

I feel like I owe an apology to those who tune into this blog expecting up-to-the minute-analysis of Israeli politics, when all they get is the latest installment of the Golan Cipel soap opera (I'm addicted -- it's better than "The Sopranos") and what's going on at the Olympics (the Israeli windsurfer Gal Friedmanis currently in first place!)

Guess I'm burned out on Israeli politics. I just can't get into worrying about the internal dynamics of the Likud (yawn) and whether or not they agree to a unity government with Labor (double yawn) and whether or not this means there will really be early elections (triple yawn)

For coverage and cogent analysis, turn to other bloggers.

Funny story, though. My son, age seven, took the newspaper this morning to cut out pictures of his new hero, Arik Ze'evi. He's just started to get into reading what's in the paper. And he said, "Daddy! Did you know there's going to be elections?"

Sure enough, there was a headline that said: Peres: There will be early elections.

My husband said, "No, no, there's no elections. Somebody named Peres just thinks there will be."

"Oh," responded my son, "so this guy Peres is confused?"

My husband said: "Yes, he is. Very confused."

And from the Olympics -- my kids, aged 7 and 5, feel they must decide as they view each race or match, which country they are rooting for (when neither Israel nor the U.S. are involved.)

Their criteria are quite amusing.

My five-year-old daughter: "This time, I want the Chinese to win."

Me: "Why the Chinese?"

Daughter: "Because when we went to eat at a Chinese restaurant, the food was really delicious!"

The Nutty Professor

Just when you thought the Cipel/McGreevey story couldn't get any weirder...it does.

NEWARK, N.J. Aug. 20, 2004 — A judge on Friday ordered a psychiatric evaluation for a doctor who told reporters he had an affair with the former aide accusing Gov. James E. McGreevey of sexual harassment. Dr. Michael David Miller was repeatedly urged by a public defender and Judge Donald Volkert to refrain from speaking during his 20-minute arraignment. He was arrested late Thursday on charges including pretending to be a law enforcement officer.

All the talk yesterday was of the tapes and pictures that Cipel may have. This makes sense in terms of what McGreevey did -- the hard evidence may have been what drove him to go public.

Cipel's Version

Here's Cipel's side of the story in full.

So, do we believe him? I personally, am finding it difficult. I'm asking myself if I'm a sexist, whether if it was a woman telling this story, if I would believe her to a greater extent.

More: the NY Times profile on Cipel -- reveals the tidbit that his sister is married to comedian Yair Nitzani.

And here is the more gossipy NY Daily News story, unveiling a college professor who claims to have also been Cipel's lover.

(links via Miriam, who is interested in the same stuff as I am...)

Note where the two stories I've been posting about intersect -- from the NY Times story....

David Twersky, a former editor of the weekly New Jersey Jewish News and now director of international affairs at the American Jewish Congress, said that he warned both Mr. McGreevey and Mr. Cipel two years ago that there was a widespread and damaging perception they were having an affair.

..and Twersky, obviously is at AJCongress which just hired Alon Pinkas.

The story of Yossi Olmert's leaving the country made the front page of Yediot Aharonot today. Talk about a slow news day....

Touro College In the Thick of It

The scandal keeps on unfolding.

Who would have thought that one would ever see "Touro College" and "sex-and-blackmail" in the same sentence?

I'm Famous in North Jersey!

Check it out....from the Bergen Record (registration required)

Affair strikes many chords in world of Internet users Saturday, August 14, 2004

By BRIAN KLADKO
STAFF WRITER

Governor McGreevey's resignation because of a gay affair mixed politics, sex, corruption, culture, and religion, and it hit with a bang. So it was perfect fodder for the Internet.

In a forum that invites people to speak their minds, it offered plenty to argue about. In a forum that puts a premium on irreverence, it offered more than a few opportunities for double-entendres and clever graphics. In a forum accessible to people the world over, it held universal interest.

From as far as Israel, Allison Kaplan Sommer weighed in on the scandal's connection to her adopted country.

"So the New Jersey governor's male lover ... is Israeli," Sommer wrote on her Web log, or blog. "Just peachy. Exactly the kind of publicity we need. ... I'm wondering how long until the conspiracy theorists start claiming that Cipel was a Mossad spy."

McGreevey's move, or at least his speech, managed to impress Wonkette, also known as Ana Marie Cox, a collector of political gossip based in Washington, D.C. Still, she couldn't resist a little playfulness.

"This was the speech of the year," she wrote. "The most high-profile outing, well, ever, and McGreevey handled it with grace and dignity. He sort of makes me want to go gay, too."

A gay couple in Washington, D.C., kept things simple but light on their blog, Polibois (a boi refers to a boyish gay man or woman). They posted a photo of McGreevey and the words, "Now we can ask: Hot or not?"

Eat your heart out, Wonkette -- you may be the toast of the Beltway, but MY quote came first.

Thanks to my pal Andrew Silow Carroll, editor of the New Jersey Jewish News and Protocols guest blogger, for giving me the heads up on the story.

The whole thing is looking bad for the Jews...specifically, this guy Charles Kushner -- McGreevey's top fundraiser -- is making things look very bad for the Jews. This is from another Jersey paper, The Trentonian:

Insiders told The Trentonian yesterday it appears there is a driving force behind McGreevey’s alleged former lover, Cipel....

A Democratic insider yesterday said there is evidence to believe McGreevey’s troubled top fund-raiser Charles Kushner is pushing the buttons of revenge, and exercising his power as a Democratic Party force.

The insider told The Trentonian on Friday that Kushner was upset by the way McGreevey dealt with the alleged videotaped hookers for blackmail scheme that caused federal agents to descend on Kushner last month.

According to the source, Kushner is paying for Cipel’s lawyer and forcing the issue with the former anti-terrorism czar and confidential aide.

Kushner -- a son of Holocaust survivors who serves on the boards of several Jewish organizations -- was the sponsor for the work visa that allowed Cipel to come to the United States and gave him a $30,000-a-year job in public relations with one of his companies, according to The Associated Press.

The Daily News rounds up the sleaze pretty succinctly, as a good tabloid should.

Here is the background on the Kushner "hookers for blackmail" case referred to above, and here is the story on CNN. And here's a story that ran in the New York Jewish week about how the sleaze might affect the Jewish institutions supported by Kushner's money.

The Plot Thickens...and Gets More Confusing

Now, Golan Cipel is claiming that he was never Governor McGreevy's lover.

OK....

And, according to the same Ha'aretz article, he's hiding out...where else? Here in Israel.

New Jersey Governor James McGreevey and his former top aid Golan Cipel were never lovers, and never engaged in sexual relations, Cipel's lawyers said yesterday....Cipel's lawyers Alan Lowy and Rachel Yosevitz denied that Cipel, a former top aide, is homosexual, stressing that he is heterosexual and always was. Cipel reportedly said the disgraced governor made repeated sexual advances toward him. He said he only wanted justice and got it when the governor announced his resignation...Cipel's attorneys said the sexual gestures and harassment occurred after Cipel was appointed an aide, and that Cipel rejected them, first gently and then more firmly. The governor's response was to fire Cipel in 2002. They denied that Cipel tried to blackmail the mayor for $5 million. The attorneys say that the governor said he had an affair with Cipel, even though he didn't, because there is no room for a sexual harassment suit if the sex was consensual. If this were the case, the governor would have no reason to resign over an extramarital affair, even a same sex one.

Cipel's version definitely doesn't add up. You appoint an underqualified guy to a big high-paying job and then you sexually harass him? Makes no sense. Though most of the people who are interviewed who know Cipel say that he doesn't seem like the blackmailing type -- if there is a blackmailing type.

I guess this is turning into a case of "he said - he said."

One Native Son That We're Not So Proud of....

So the New Jersey governor's male lover at the center of the gay corruption scandal is Israeli. Just peachy. Exactly the kind of publicity we need.

The seeds for Gov. James E. McGreevey's stunning announcement yesterday that he is gay and that he will resign in November were planted four years ago at an elegant political reception in Israel.

It was at a performing arts center in Rishon Lezion, a middle-class enclave outside Tel Aviv, that McGreevey was introduced to Golan Cipel, a spokesman for the local mayor and a former information officer for the Israeli consulate in New York.

Six months after that chance encounter in March 2000, Cipel left for New Jersey to work on the Woodbridge mayor's campaign for governor. McGreevey helped him find a car, a job and an apartment a tenth of a mile from the Woodbridge townhouse he shared with his wife.

The Israeli national would go on to play a controversial role in McGreevey's political life over the next two years, first as the newly elected governor's homeland security adviser, drawing widespread criticism for his inexperience, and then as a "special counsel" with ill-defined responsibilities and a $110,000 annual salary.

Oy vey.

McGreevy's ill-fated trip to Israel, of course, was funded by the Metrowest Jewish Federation. You know, I don't think that when they bring up-and-coming American politicians to Israel in order to feel more warmth and affection for the Jewish state and to develop long-term friendships that will continue when they reach more powerful positions, that this is quite what they have in mind.

I'm wondering how long until the conspiracy theorists start claiming that Cipel was a Mossad spy.

Being behind on this, as I am on most of the news lately, Jeff Jarvis's Buzzmachine was a great place to catch up on the story.

I thought that the Israeli press would immediately start digging up dirt on Golan Cipel, but they don't seem to have picked up the story, at least not yet.

My husband Googled him in Hebrew, but came up with nothing.

Conventionitis

I guess I've been watching too much cable news and reading too many convention blogs (and articles about convention bloggers.)

I dreamed last night that I was in Boston covering the Democratic convention. Actually, the dream involved being in Boston more than the convention itself -- mainly hanging out at my hotel and going out to bars and shmoozing. And being stopped by security guards all the time.

Sounds like the blogger brigade at the convention is running into some technical difficulties.

Atrios unmasked by Jeralyn at Talkleft, who is giving the best blow-by-blow "color," as journalists call it.

Stuff like:

What's with all this 70's soul music? One or two songs would have been enough. If we're moving into the new century, how about some current tunes to take us there? Do we sound like we're getting cranky? We are a bit. The speeches have just been okay. No shining moments yet--not even Al Gore. At least, not for us.

The crowd is now doing "the wave." Why, we have no idea. Guess someone special is about to come out. We just went from dimmed lights as if a star was on their way to brightness. Now some state delegation to our left is screaming "Kerry, Kerry, Kerry" and "Edwards, Edwards, Edwards."

Ok, DNCC, time to pick up the pace here.

She's obviously more jazzed and enthused than your average reporter, using adjectives like "awesome" and describing Hillary as "radiant." But she's really fun to read.

So I guess the dreams mean that subconsciously I would have liked to have joined the fun and been one of the pioneer blogger corps, despite my Jarvisesque protestations that no real news happens there.

And it would have been even feasible for me to fly over -- I'm usually in the States for summer vacation. But now, I had to go and have a baby. Man, this motherhood business even interferes with UNPAID careers....

Convention

I'll be following the Democratic Convention Bloggers here. A list of participating bloggers is here.

I've been to one Democratic convention -- I covered the 1992 Democratic Convention, A.K.A. the coronation of Bill Clinton, for the Jerusalem Post. It was hard to find interesting stories there -- the whole thing was so pre-planned staged, like a giant high school pep rally, with no access to the big players unless you were Tom Brokaw.

Nothing like covering a Likud convention, which is a combination of theater, circus, and WWF wrestling. And at which reporters can walk right up to top cabinet ministers and ask them impertinent questions.

You Have To See This

It's called "This Land" -- a Bush vs. Kerry satiric song video. My husband E-mailed it to me, and if it's not all over the Net already, it will be soon.

Too hilarious.

The Jewish Kerry is Coming to Israel

So it's time to meet the brother -- he's just your typical non-Jew who converts to Judaism only to find out that he was really kinda Jewish in the first place.

Cameron Kerry, the younger brother of Democratic presidential nominee in the United States, Senator John Kerry, is expected to visit Israel next week. He is scheduled to meet with Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom, the director of the Prime Minister's office, Dov Weisglass, head of the opposition MK Shimon Peres, and others.

Cameron Kerry converted to Judaism when he married Kathy Weinman of Michigan, and later learned that his paternal grandparents were Czech Jews who had converted to Christianity before immigrating to the U.S.

We'll get to meet the Footlicker, too.

Accompanying Cameron Kerry on his tour of the country will be Senator Kerry's adviser on Israel affairs, Jay Footlik.

I'm sorry, I just can't help it.....I know, I KNOW that it's immature and inappropriate to make fun of someone's name, but seriously, doesn't "Footlik" sound like a web site that caters to fetish-y guys who like to drool on women's shoes?

Kerry No-Show on Israel Vote

So it's Tuesday afternoon here in Israel, and I'm sitting here working with the TV blaring "Fox and Friends" in the background (the only U.S. morning news show we get here live, folks, not a reflection of my politics) and I'm waiting for the big Kerry VP announcement. (As I type, they're reporting that it's John Edwards.)

In the meantime, I've stumbled across this Zev Chafets column from last week.

Congress voted overwhelmingly last week to affirm the Bush revolution in Middle East policy. On Wednesday, by a 407-9 vote, the House "strongly endorsed" two promises made by the President to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in a letter of April 14: 1) The U.S. agrees that it is "unrealistic" for Israel to pull back to the pre-1967 lines and dismantle its major West Bank settlements, and 2) the U.S. does not expect Israel to resettle Palestinian refugees.

The next day, the Senate passed a similar nonbinding resolution. The vote was 95 to 3.

The Bush doctrine, now ratified by both houses of Congress, radically alters more than 30 years of American Middle Eastern diplomacy. It puts the U.S., for the first time, flatly on the Israeli side of the post-Six-Day War dispute. Not surprisingly, Sharon hailed this as "a great day in the history of Israel."

Only three senators voted against the pro-Israel resolution: ex-Klansman Robert Byrd of West Virginia, John Sununu of New Hampshire and independent James Jeffords of Vermont. Richard Lugar of Indiana, the chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, skipped the ballot. So did only one other senator: John Kerry. He was in California.

Chafets interprets this as signaling that Kerry's pro-Israel pronouncements are hollow.

President Bush's tilt toward Israel is very unpopular in Old Europe, among American foreign policy establishmentarians and in the Naderite wing of the Democratic Party. All three constituencies matter very much to Kerry. His Senate no-show signals to them that a Kerry administration wouldn't be bound by his predecessor's promises or policies.

Kerry Takes a Stand

Well, I've been waiting quite a while for something like this: John Kerry taking some actual specific positions on Israel.

Ha'aretz reports that the Kerry campaign sent a position paper entitled: "John Kerry: Strengthening Israel's Security and Bolstering the U.S.-Israel Special Relationship," to "a group of people in the Jewish community" in mid-June.

And why exactly he didn't release it publicly at the same time???? Pretty strange, if you ask me. Could it just be an ego thing, wanting to make certain Jewish leaders feel "in the know" and smarter than everyone else? Or are these positions he felt he wanted to keep under his hat and out of the headlines for some reason? And if so, why did the "group of people in the Jewish community" go along with that?

Are we not talking Jewish leaders, but big Jewish Democratic donors, with the deal being that the position paper was quid pro quo for certain donations? Inquiring minds want to know.

Anyway, bottom line...

Kerry, who previously spoke against the separation fence at a gathering of the Arab-American Institute, is now seeking to correct that impression: "The security fence is a legitimate act of self-defense erected in response to the wave of terror attacks against Israeli citizens."

The presumptive Democratic nominee also declares his opposition to transferring debate on the fence to international forums. The paper shows consistent support for Israel on all the issues at hand: Kerry backs Israel's disengagement plan and also the two central points in President Bush's letter to Prime Minister Sharon - the resettlement of Palestinian refugees in the Palestinian state, not within Israel, and recognition of Jewish population concentrations in the West Bank when establishing the permanent borders. "In light of demographic realities, a number of settlement blocs will likely become a part of Israel," Kerry wrote his supporters.

He further declared support for Israel's actions against Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other terror organizations and recalled that he was a signatory to the motion of support for Israel passed by the Senate during Operation Defensive Shield.

On the issue of Palestinian leadership, Kerry declared that "Yasser Arafat is a failed leader and unfit partner for peace" and called for "his total isolation." He thereby aligned himself with Bush administration policy, and in contrast to former president Bill Clinton, who recently stated that despite his disappointment with Arafat, negotiations should be conducted with him.

Kerry lists additional issues on which he supports Israel: the battle against cutting foreign aid to Israel; calling upon the United Nations to evince a more balanced approach to the conflict; support for moving the American embassy to Jerusalem; international action against regimes that support terror; and maintaining Israel's military supremacy.

Seeking to set himself apart from Bush on several issues, Kerry blasts Saudi Arabia and promises to act against anti-Semitic statements by senior Saudi government officials. "As president, he will never permit these kinds of attacks to go unanswered," the paper promises.

Sounds pretty good to me. But this IS a paper, released under some pretty weird circumstances. I'll come closer to believing these are truly his positions when I see Kerry actually say these things out loud.

The I-Word

I just watched Bush's big promote-democracy-reach-out-to-the-Moslem-world-speech in Turkey.

It struck me as weird that when he was surveying the situation across the Middle East, that he referred to what was going on in the "Holy Land," mentioning the Palestinians by name, but not the name of the country they are fighting with.

Like there was some kind of policy decision not to utter the word "Israel."

I mean, it's not like he called us the "Zionist Entity" or anything, but "Holy Land" sounded bizarre and Pat Robertson-like.

I didn't see the speech from beginning to end, so perhaps at one point he said the word? I'll have to look at a transcript.

Kerry Woos the Jews and Gets His Foot Licked

Well, from this article, it seems that Kerry is bending over backwards to show that he's just as pro-Israel as Bush, quickly supporting the Sharon disengagement plan just as the president did.

During the six months that remain until the U.S. presidential elections, Kerry is expected to deliver a major address both on the Middle East and his foreign policy platform. This speech is likely to convey Kerry's outlook concerning the Israel-Palestinian dispute - that is, Kerry will demonstrate unqualified support for Israel, along with his commitment to the promotion of negotiation with the Palestinians and the securing of Arab states' support for the peace process. He will also try to put to erase the residue of past positions that now seem awkward - in the past, Kerry issued declarations against the separation fence and in support of Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat's leadership, and he has also cited controversial names as possibilities for the special envoy post.

So it seems pretty clear that he's competing aggressively for the Jewish vote (Florida, anyone?) rather than taking the tack of swinging left to placate the base and Arab-American voters.

The article contains quotes from and introduces us to Kerry's adviser on the Middle East and Jewish communal affairs, the unfortunately named Jay K. Footlik. I just don't think that any aide to a politician should be named FOOTLIK, do you?

Living Like an Absentee

So I just got an E-mail that helpfully explains how I can get all my material for my absentee ballot in the Presidential election online.

The info is available from Democrats Abroad, whose goal, of course, is to urge as many expats as possible to kick Bush's you-know-what. And it's being launched from -- guess which chapter.....yup, from Democrats Abroad France!

It's all very nicely organized. The Republicans are behind on this one -- the voting section of the Republicans Abroad website isn't ready yet. You'd think that after the close call in Election 2000, in which absentee ballots made a difference, they'd be more on the ball.

I'm not sure which state I should vote absentee from. The last state I lived in was Connecticut, where we took a sabbatical from Sept. 2000 - Sept. 2001 and was where I voted last. But my permanent address in the U.S. is now my parents' place in Rhode Island. (The truth is, does it really matter? Both those states will be pretty much in Kerry's pocket, n'est pas? But maybe there will be congressional races in which my vote will make a difference. Charlie Bakst, if you're out there, please advise)

My Vote is Still Up for Grabs

So during my trip to the U.S., I challenged all of my friends and family (pretty much all knee-jerk Democrats like me) to please, please try to find reasons to make me enthusiastic about Kerry and want to vote for him.

No dice. I got lots of reasons why Bush sucks, why the administration is all evil greedy liars, about their terrible domestic policy is (much of which I agree with) and of course all the news talk was about lying about Iraq and whether it is a new Vietnam.

But still, I don't want to vote AGAINST someone, I want to vote FOR someone.

And then just as I was coming home, there was the Bush-Sharon lovefest all over the news.

I hate to think that I'm going to cast my vote just to cover my own ass (and the asses of my loved ones, of course.)

But I'm going to need some GOOD reasons to vote against someone who is so supportive of Israel at this critical juncture. There was no way that Sharon could move forward with this plan without a leg up from the White House, and boy, did they deliver.

I found it hard to talk about Iraq with Americans: there was an internal schizophrenia going on whenever I discussed it. I can't be a hypocrite and pretend to be against the war. But how self-centered is my support? As an Israeli, I am just SO UNBELIEVABLY glad and grateful and relieved that Saddam is gone and out of our hair. But I can't help but sit back and wonder what the all-American "Allison had she not moved to Israel" would have thought about the Iraq. If I'm honest, I think I might have been sitting there with the rest of my peers bitching about the fact that we were misled about the WMD and that there was no coherent exit strategy, and that it was not worth the price, and has taken the focus away from al-Qaida and getting terrorism, etc.

And what with being pro-choice and pro-gay marriage and concerned about education, would I even be thinking twice about voting for Kerry if it weren't for where I was living?

I could just not vote, but that would be a cop-out.

George and the Jews

My dear departed colleague Carl Schrag who left us in Israel for the frozen tundra of Chicago ponders in Slate as to whether or not there will be a massive Jewish shift towards Republicans this election.

His conclusion:

Jews would have to overlook major points of contention on domestic issues in order to reward Bush for standing by Israel. Some of the most vocal in the community may do so, but it's unlikely that large numbers will follow.

This is, of course, assuming that Kerry is the Democratic candidate. If Dean had made it, it could have been a different story entirely.

Let's Do the Time Warp

These classic Doonesbury cartoons about John Kerry from 1971 are pretty cool. Reminds us that this guy has been around for a LONG time.

Democratic Primaries? Israel? Anyone?

So with the endless coverage of the Democratic primaries, I thought I'd do some quick research and compare-and-contrast the positions of the various candidates on Israel. Wanting to be quick, I hoped I wouldn't have to go to each of the candidates' individual sites and dig out their Israel position.

A session of Googling uncovered that among the alphabet soup of all of the American Jewish organizations, none had prepared a clear-cut guide to the positions, statesments and quotes from the various candidates regarding Israel and Middle East peace. Couldn't find a Jewish or pro-Israel publication with such a guide, either.

It's a bit troubling that there was only one place I could easily find a clear and well-organized guide to the candidates' stated positions on the question of "Israel and Palestine." At the Arab American Institute I guess I have to thank Mr. Zogby.

I'd love someone to prove me wrong and find the elusive guide I'm looking for -- or maybe an ambitious blogger needs to fill the void and organize a guide themselves.

Absolutely, the Thing I Like the Most About Howard Dean....

His wife.

She sounds like my kind of woman -- wears flats, no makeup, cares about her career and her patients, takes care of her kids, belongs to a book club, hates campaigning, and refuses to turn herself into a jetsetting Stepford wife just because her husband wants to be president.

And she raised her kids Jewish, to boot, though married to a WASP and living in Vermont. (I wonder how she feels about her husbands recent "faith in Christ" remarks...)

At Least I'm in Good Company....

I was honored, yet thrown, to be nominated for "Best Conservative Blog" in my dear friend MB's Koufax Awards -- the prizes of the lefty blogosphere.

As I've discussed before I am regularly flipped out when attached to the adjective "right-wing" or "conservative" -- something that NEVER happened to me before I met the blogosphere.

I'm not alone. Roger is also nominated, and is probably also weirded out by it.

In addition, Jeff Jarvis and Michael Totten happen to be discussing the topic as well, Jarvis rather passionately.

Meryl Yourish, too. (I agree with Meryl in that Lieberman and Edwards are the most interesting prospective Dem candidates)

I'm curious and have a question for those older than me -- is this polarization what it was like in the Vietnam era?

It seems that supporting or opposing the war in Iraq has become this huge single-issue litmus test, that overshadows one's views on every other issue. If you supported it -- you're a right-wing, pro-Bush Republican, dammit, whether you think so or not....?!?

Dr. Dean: First, Do No Harm

So far, I haven't been writing about the U.S. presidential race, but as a doctor's daughter, this Washington Post piece, "The Doctor Factor" by Marjorie Williams caught my eye and made me laugh out loud.

At long last, the revelation I've been waiting for: the reason why -- beyond the prospect of epic, McGovernesque defeat -- I feel so uneasy about Howard Dean.

The man is a doctor. This is the least-examined chapter of his career. But suddenly it all makes sense: Where else but in medicine do you find men and women who never admit a mistake? Who talk more than they listen, and feel entitled to withhold crucial information? Whose lack of tact in matters of life and death might disqualify them for any other field?

She speaks from the experience of two and a half years of serious illness, and quite a few doctors.

A doctor who has told you one thing at Appointment A might propose an entirely different course of action at Meeting B. Fair enough -- except for the pretense that nothing has changed. It is the very rare doctor who will say, "I've changed my mind," or, "Sorry, I was wrong when I said X at our last meeting." Usually, what he said last time has simply become . . . inoperative.

Rudy, Rudy, Rudy

Just watched former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani get interviewed live on an Israeli talk show by Yair Lapid. Boy, he sure seems tanned, rested and ready...for something. He said he definitely plans to run for elected office, he just hasn't decided what yet.

First priority, he said, is helping Bush get reelected and then he'll focus on himself.

I wouldn't rule him out as a Republican presidential candidate in 2008. The leap from mayor to pres would be pretty unprecedented, but nothing like 9/11 ever happened before. Otherwise, maybe he'll give Hillary or Shumer a run for their money in the Senate? Who knows.

Boy is he supportive of Israel, though. He patted himself on the back for being onto Yassir Arafat early when as mayor, he kicked Arafat out of a UN 50th anniversary concert when he unexpectedly showed up. He said that after prosecuting the Achille Lauro case and seeing how Arafat ordered Klinghoffer's death, he never believe Arafat was capable of truly renouncing terrorism.

He said several times, "You have a great country," and talked about U.S.-Israel ties having strengthened after 9/11, etc. etc.

I'm sure he means it and all -- he's been here on about a zillion solidarity trips in the past few years -- but it also certainly won't hurt his future political fundraising efforts.....

Yair asked his advice about our recent mafia woes (see previous post) -- noting that we couldn't call it organized crime because nothing in Israel is organized. Rudy said that we have to go after the mobsters as aggressively as we go after the terrorists.....

Drifting Jews and Arabs

Here's the Washington Post's Laura Blumenthal on partner-swapping among Jews, Arabs, Democrats and Republicans.

In the last presidential election, Arabs supported the Republican candidate while Jews overwhelmingly backed the Democrat. That was before the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, and Bush's response. Since then, the political moorings of the two communities have come loose. Democratic and Republican leaders are trying to catch them as they drift. Though they are small in numbers, Arab and Jewish populations are concentrated in several swing states, such as Michigan and Florida. And Jewish donors play a role in many campaigns.

Sensing an opening, Democratic presidential contenders have reached out to Arab voters, speaking at an Arab American Institute conference this fall in Detroit. AAI President James Zogby, a Democrat, quipped: "They didn't come because we have pretty brown eyes." But then, the Democratic National Committee also held an emergency strategy session last year to address reported Republican gains among Jews.

And the weirdest image in the article:

Republicans, meanwhile, describe a White House so at ease with Judaism that Jay Lefkowitz, then deputy assistant for domestic policy, blew a three-foot shofar, or ram's horn, at a senior staff meeting during the High Holy Days, drawing laughter and applause from senior strategist Karl Rove.

Jay's come a long way. When I was the Jerusalem Post Washington correspondent in DC during the first Bush administration, I used to sit in his kitchen in Georgetown and tell him that he'll never be able to get the Jews to vote Republican. I used to say that to Matt Brooks, too, who is also quoted in the article.

Now you can count me among the confused Jewish Democrats. And Al Gore's dissing of Joe Lieberman isn't making me feel particularly loyal to the Democratic Party these days. I'm still trying to find something to like about Howard Dean besides the fact that his wife seems offbeat and interesting -- Jewish girl from Roslyn, Long Island meets Park Avenue goy, moves to Vermont and becomes a country doctor/mom married to the governor? Doesn't happen every day.

Here's a trivia question about the author of the Post article: where was Laura Blumenfeld's name first in print, before she became a journalist? (Hint: it has to do with someone mentioned recently in this blog)

The Future of France?

This has been making the rounds in France and Israel via email.

Arnold Grabs The Expected Headline

So the article everyone was waiting for, chronicling Arnold's predilection for groping women, has finally come out in the LA Times. (registration required, I'll cut and paste below for those who don't want to bother signing up.)

OK, Roger Simon, our official blogosphere connection to the stars and show biz culture -- whaddaya think? How bad is Arnie by LA movie guy standards?

As far as politicians go, he'll fit right in, won't he? Although any Republican who forgives Arnie and still is horrified by Clinton's behavior is a big fat hypocrite.

Women Say Schwarzenegger Groped, Humiliated Them
The acts allegedly took place over three decades. A campaign aide denies the accusations.
By Gary Cohn, Carla Hall and Robert W. Welkos
Times Staff Writers

October 2, 2003

Six women who came into contact with Arnold Schwarzenegger on movie sets, in studio offices and in other settings over the last three decades say he touched them in a sexual manner without their consent.

In interviews with The Times, three of the women described their surprise and discomfort when Schwarzenegger grabbed their breasts. A fourth said he reached under her skirt and gripped her buttocks.

A fifth woman said Schwarzenegger groped her and tried to remove her bathing suit in a hotel elevator. A sixth said Schwarzenegger pulled her onto his lap and asked whether a certain sexual act had ever been performed on her.

According to the women's accounts, one of the incidents occurred in the 1970s, two in the 1980s, two in the 1990s and one in 2000.

"Did he rape me? No," said one woman, who described a 1980 encounter in which she said Schwarzenegger touched her breast. "Did he humiliate me? You bet he did."

Four of the six women told their stories on condition that they not be named. Three work in Hollywood and said they were worried that, if they were identified, their careers would be in jeopardy for speaking out against Schwarzenegger, the onetime bodybuilding champion and box-office star who is now the front-runner in the Oct. 7 gubernatorial recall election.

The other unnamed woman said she feared public ridicule and possible damage to her husband's business.

In the four cases in which the women would not let their names be published, friends or relatives said that the women had told them about the incidents long before Schwarzenegger's run for governor.

None of the six women who gave their accounts to The Times filed any legal action against him.

Schwarzenegger's campaign spokesman, Sean Walsh, said the candidate has not engaged in improper conduct toward women. He said such allegations are part of an escalating political attack on Schwarzenegger as the recall election approaches.

"We believe Democrats and others are using this to try to hurt Arnold Schwarzenegger's campaign," Walsh said. "We believe that this is coming so close before the election, something that discourages good, hard-working, decent people from running for office."

Walsh said Schwarzenegger himself would have no comment.

The Times did not learn of any of the six women from Schwarzenegger's rivals in the recall race. And none of the women approached the newspaper on her own. Reporters contacted them in the course of a seven-week examination of Schwarzenegger's behavior toward women on and off the movie set.

Schwarzenegger's attitudes about women have been an issue on the campaign trail, where critics have accused him of being misogynistic, based on past statements he has made to various publications. In response, Schwarzenegger has said he respects women and that many of his comments were made in jest or simply meant to be provocative.

Schwarzenegger's conduct toward women also has been widely discussed in Hollywood over the years, notably after a March 2001 article in Premiere magazine called "Arnold the Barbarian." After the article appeared, a number of Schwarzenegger's colleagues wrote to the magazine saying that the story was inaccurate and that Schwarzenegger treated women with respect and kindness.

The earliest incident of the six described to The Times was said to have occurred in 1975 at Gold's Gym near Venice Beach. E. Laine Stockton, then newly married to professional bodybuilder Robby Robinson, said she had gone to the gym to watch her husband work out.

Stockton was 19 at the time. She said she was wearing slacks, tennis shoes and a loose-fitting T-shirt. She said she was not wearing a bra.

As she sat on an exercise bench, Stockton said, Schwarzenegger walked up behind her, reached under her T-shirt and touched her bare left breast.

"The gym is full of bodybuilders and Arnold comes and he gropes my breast — actually touches my breast with his left hand," she said.

She said Schwarzenegger then walked away without saying a word.

Stockton said she does not rule out that Schwarzenegger "may have meant it in playfulness." But she did not take it that way.

"I was just shocked, shocked to the point where I almost didn't know how to react, because it was so out of the blue and so unexpected," she said. "It just completely caught me off guard, and when I finally came to my senses, I immediately went over to Robby and I said, 'Look, Arnold just groped my breast.' "

Robinson, a former Mr. America, Mr. World and Mr. Universe, said he "tried to comfort her."

Robinson has since had a falling out with Schwarzenegger. An African American known as the "Black Prince" during his years on the professional bodybuilding circuit, Robinson has accused Schwarzenegger of racism — a charge that Schwarzenegger's campaign denies.

Robinson said he was upset by what Schwarzenegger had done to his wife, but did not confront him. "What he did was uncalled for, but I couldn't say nothing," Robinson said, explaining that he feared he'd be ostracized by the bodybuilding world.

He said he told his wife to stay out of Gold's Gym.

Robinson and Stockton are now divorced. They were interviewed separately by The Times.

Incident on Street

Another incident described to The Times was said to have occurred in 1980. A former pro beach volleyball player said Schwarzenegger touched her breast on a Santa Monica street.

The woman remembered walking down 19th Street, just off Wilshire Boulevard, when Schwarzenegger spotted her from his car.

"Come here," she recalled Schwarzenegger saying, as he motioned with his finger to the woman, then 22.

The two knew each other. She worked as a waitress at Fromin's deli, she said, a place Schwarzenegger frequented. On an earlier occasion, she recalled, Schwarzenegger had asked her when she was going on break. "We could have a lot of fun in half an hour," she remembered him saying. She said she was both a little scared and a little flattered. "I can't say I wasn't flattered. Arnold invited me to his apartment." She said she declined his invitation.

Schwarzenegger later renewed his invitation, she said, when he spotted her playing in a women's volleyball tournament at Venice Beach. "After the game, he came up to me and said, 'Now you will come to my apartment.' He didn't want to hear no." The woman said she told him, "It's not going to happen."

Now, she said, as she walked along 19th Street, Schwarzenegger conveyed a sense of urgency: "Come close, it's very important." As she drew nearer to his car to hear what he had to say, she recounted, Schwarzenegger "grabbed and squeezed" her left breast.

"If I was a man," she said she told him, "I would bust your jaw."

As tears welled in her eyes, she said, Schwarzenegger laughed. "He thought it was hilarious."

She said she went to her car and "just started crying and crying."

The woman said she told her sister about the encounter, a claim the sister confirmed. She recalled that her sibling was "completely offended."

One of the women in the 2001 Premiere article was British television host Anna Richardson, who accused Schwarzenegger of touching her breast. In an interview with The Times, she reiterated that account.

Richardson said she was interviewing the actor in December 2000 as part of his promotional tour for the movie "The Sixth Day." The interview, to be aired on her TV show "Big Screen," took place in a suite at the Dorchester Hotel in London.

Richardson said she had interviewed Schwarzenegger on previous occasions and that he had been a "perfect gentleman."

"This time around was quite different," she recalled. "He kept looking at my breasts, kept asking if I worked out," she said. "I went to shake his hand and he grabbed me onto his knee and he said, 'Before you go, I want to know if your breasts are real.' "

Richardson, then 29, said she replied that her breasts were real. She said she looked around for help from other people in the room, but nobody came to her assistance. "At that point, he circled my left nipple with his finger and he said, 'Yes, they are real.' " She said he then let her go.

The Schwarzenegger campaign provided a different account.

Sheryl Main, a Hollywood publicist who has worked with Schwarzenegger on many films and accompanied him on his worldwide travels since 1995, said she was present at the interview with Richardson. Main said it was Richardson who provocatively approached Schwarzenegger. She said that after finishing the brief interview, Richardson rose, cupped her right breast in her right hand and said, "What do you think of these?" She then sat on his lap and was immediately escorted from the room, Main said.

She contends that Richardson later concocted her story.

Secretary's Story

A movie studio secretary said Schwarzenegger grabbed her buttocks in the late 1980s.

She said the episode occurred on the Columbia Pictures lot, where she worked. She said she often accompanied her boss, who was also a woman, on visits around the lot. One day the boss asked if she would like to meet Schwarzenegger, who was in a production office.

"It was like, 'Oh, come with me, you can meet him,' " the secretary said.

When they reached the office, she said, Schwarzenegger was seated on a couch. The secretary, then in her 30s, said she sat on a couch opposite Schwarzenegger while the actor and her supervisor talked. When the conversation ended, the secretary said she approached Schwarzenegger to shake his hand and say goodbye.

He remained seated, she said, and he slipped his left hand under her skirt and grabbed her right buttock.

"He just held on. He held on and said, 'You have a very nice ass.' He said, 'I'd love to work you out.' "

"I remember thinking his hand was cold on my butt," she said.

The door was open and the secretary said she remembers seeing a couple of people outside look in — and then quickly look away.

"All I was really thinking was, 'I'd like to go.' I was trying to figure out how to get his hand off my butt and his arm away from me without making a big deal of it. I remember thinking, 'Geez, that's a strong arm.' ... I was just thinking, 'Let me get out of here.' "

She said she looked at the ceiling and looked at her boss, who kept repeating, "We've got to go now. We've got to go now,' and yanking my arm. My boss did the best she could to get me away."

The secretary said Schwarzenegger released her after about 20 seconds.

Later, as they left the production office, the secretary said her flustered supervisor remarked, "Oh, my gosh! I had no idea he would do that." The secretary said she replied: "Oh, well, no big deal."

"I was sort of embarrassed in front of her. It just felt strange."

A day or two later, Schwarzenegger called her boss' office, and the secretary said she answered the phone. "He figured out it was me and he said, 'Oh, you still haven't come to work out with me.' " She said she did not respond and simply put her boss on the line.

Six or seven years later, the secretary recalled, she walked past Schwarzenegger on a studio lot. "No recognition. No looking," she said.

Now 47, she has been in and out of the entertainment business. After a long period of unemployment, she said she now has another secretarial job at a movie studio and does not want to risk losing it by being publicly identified. She also declined to provide the name of her boss on the Columbia lot.

She has, however, recounted the story numerous times through the years — initially as a warning to other women with whom she worked. Yet the secretary said most women she knows in and around the entertainment business were untroubled by the incident.

"I was like, 'He's disgusting, he's revolting.' They said, 'No, he's hot.' The attitude of women was more upsetting than he was."

She also told the story to a friend, Michael Collins, a freelance writer and a director of the Los Angeles Press Club. In an interview with The Times, Collins said that she recounted the episode to him eight months ago — well before the recall race. "She never thought he might run for governor," he said.

'This Is Disgusting'

In late 1990, Schwarzenegger was in the San Bernardino County town of Fontana, shooting "Terminator 2: Judgment Day." According to a female crew member, Schwarzenegger harassed her on several occasions.

She recalled encountering the actor in an elevator as she headed downstairs to the pool of the hotel where the cast and crew were staying. On each occasion, she said, she was wearing a terrycloth robe over a black, one-piece Speedo swimsuit.

"At least three times — if not more — he would end up in the elevator with me, groping me and trying to take my robe off," said the crew member, now 41 and still working in the movie industry.

"He would pin me against the corner in the elevator" and try to take off her robe and pull down the straps of her suit, she said.

The incidents did not last long, she said, because the elevator ride was short.

The woman said her response to Schwarzenegger's actions evolved with each incident. "The first time, you're like, "Oh, my God! I was groped by Arnold Schwarzenegger!' The second time you're like, 'This is disgusting.' The third time you're like, 'Get the ... away from me.' "

She said she told her boss, who advised her, "Just stay away from him."'

After that, the woman said, she would check the hotel hallway before entering the elevator. She said if Schwarzenegger got into the pool, she would get out.

"What could you do? He was the highest-paid actor in the world. I was a peon," she said. "The only thing you could do is stay away from him."

The crew member said she told her husband about the elevator confrontations in 1992 or 1993. "I heard this story a long time ago," her husband confirmed.

The couple spoke with The Times only after repeated assurances that their names would be kept confidential. "I'm a professional in the film business," she said. "I fear retribution."

Another woman, now a wife and mother in her 30s, said she also fell in Schwarzenegger's "sight lines" while working as a crew member on "Terminator 2" in Fontana.

She said Schwarzenegger was sitting in a director's chair, surrounded by three or four other men, waiting for filming to start. It was either late afternoon or early evening, she said.

"I was walking on the set and Arnold called out, 'Come here, you sexy devil,' and reached out and pulled me on to his lap," the woman recalled.

She said he then whispered in her ear: "Have you ever had a man slide his tongue in your [anus]?"

"I didn't know how to react," the woman said. "It was bizarre. What he said was so specifically sexual, it was bizarre.

"I remember looking around and seeing this bank of smiling faces and feeling alone," she continued. The men standing at Schwarzenegger's side, she said, "were in total support mode — of him, not me. It was kind of like everything he did was OK, and isn't it funny and isn't it swell? It was like they were proud of him .... Nobody said, 'What are you doing? Leave her alone.' "

After the incident, she said, she continued on her way. "I didn't fall apart," she said, but added: "It's embarrassing and degrading when you're doing a job."

She did not report the incident, she said, because she was a low-level crew member. "You're in an environment where you just go with the flow." The attitude on the set was: "Isn't it flattering that Arnold is paying attention to you?"

The woman said she recounted the incident at the time to a family member. In an interview with The Times, the family member confirmed being told about the encounter and said, "Arnold thought it was kind of fun to toy with her. It embarrassed her."

The woman said she wished she "wasn't so spineless," but feared that she would be shunned in Hollywood if quoted by name.

"There's an unspoken rule in the industry," she said. "What happens on the set stays on the set."

Nancy Tafoya, who was also on the set of "Terminator 2," recalled her own encounter with Schwarzenegger. Tafoya — who was serving as a legal guardian for 13-year-old actor Eddie Furlong, her nephew and one of the film's key characters — said she was talking with a group of people when Schwarzenegger came up behind her and yanked her long, black hair.

Her head snapped back, she said. Although she was not injured, Tafoya said she was "shocked." The people around her, she said, started laughing.

Tafoya said she was never touched in a sexual manner by Schwarzenegger, but she saw him push his body against a female crew member.

Tafoya said she was about 15 feet from Schwarzenegger when he approached a woman wearing jeans, a shirt and tennis shoes.

She said Schwarzenegger walked across the room and faced the woman. "Then he grabbed both sides of her knees and pushed them apart and started moving his pelvis into her," Tafoya said. "It lasted about 10 seconds." She said the woman laughed nervously, and Schwarzenegger walked away.

"I thought that was incredibly offensive, and I didn't know who I was more annoyed with — him or her," said Tafoya, a social worker. "But when I looked at her, I thought the woman didn't have much choice, because it happened so quick."

Walsh, the Schwarzenegger spokesman, said that the campaign was talking to senior crew members on the "Terminator 2" set to investigate the various incidents cited by The Times.

"We talked to members of the production crew who were in a supervisory role and they said they were not aware" of the alleged improprieties, Walsh said.

Permissive Atmosphere

Some of the dozens of people interviewed for this article stressed that the culture on movie sets tends to be rowdy and permissive. Often, the tone is set by the star, they said.

In Schwarzenegger's case, they said, his sense of humor and language is often outrageous — but not mean-spirited. Many of his colleagues find him to be charming.

"He's fun, extremely intelligent and very professional," said stuntwoman Simone Boisseree, who worked with Schwarzenegger on four films. "I like him as a human being and think he's a decent guy."

Another stuntwoman, Chere Rae Bryson, came away with a different impression after working with Schwarzenegger on the 1990 movie "Total Recall." She said he often used vulgar words for vagina and clitoris during her contact with him during the filming.

"He was crude, boisterous and disparaging around women," she said. "In the makeup room, his language was so bad I turned around and walked out."

Bryson said Schwarzenegger seemed to have toned down his behavior when she worked with him on a second movie, "Collateral Damage," released in 2002.

"People do change as we get older," said Bryson, who was also an actress and Playboy bunny. "All of us, at one time or another, have displayed behavior that I'm sure we're not proud of. Hopefully, he's evolved from that."

Bryson said Schwarzenegger was also on his best behavior whenever his wife, Maria Shriver, was present. The couple were married in 1986. "When Maria was around, he was a gentleman," Bryson said. "When she wasn't around, he was the opposite."

One woman who says she was deeply offended by Schwarzenegger's words was a waitress at the now-defunct Bicycle Shop cafe on Wilshire Boulevard in West Los Angeles, where the actor used to hang out with about half a dozen friends on Sunday mornings in the late 1980s.

"They always sat in my section," she said. The group was friendly and chatty with her, she said, and took their lead from Schwarzenegger. They tipped well, too. "There was definitely harmless flirtation with all of them," said the woman, who also worked sporadically as a TV actress.

One Sunday, she said, she was pouring coffee at the table when Schwarzenegger beckoned her to his side.

"I bent down to listen to him," she recalled. "He said, a little louder than a whisper, 'I want you to do a favor for me.' I thought, OK, maybe he wanted more bread. And he said, 'I want you to go in the bathroom, stick your finger in your [vagina], and bring it out to me.' "

She stood upright. "I was thoroughly disgusted" but said nothing to Schwarzenegger, she recalled. "There was drama in the silence of it," she said. "He looked up, and it looked like I was threatening [him] with the coffee pot."

Everyone at the table then glanced over at the restaurant owner, Andre Driollet. He wagged his finger at the waitress, she said, apparently fearful that she was going to dump the coffee on Schwarzenegger.

"I was so appalled, and when Andre looked at me [as if] to say you better not, I immediately went to him to tell him what happened," she recounted. What Schwarzenegger had said "was above and beyond what was acceptable. I think he should have had hot coffee poured in his lap."

Driollet, who according to a relative is living on a boat in the Caribbean, could not be reached. In an interview with The Times, a friend of the waitress said she told him of the incident long ago.

The waitress said she told Schwarzenegger at the time: "If you're ever some place and some woman throws hot coffee on your head, it will be me." He laughed, she said.

"He thought it was the funniest thing. And then the whole table laughed because, if Arnold laughed, the whole table laughed."

Times researcher John L. Jackson contributed to this report.

Excellent symposium on "Antisemitism and the Left"

Fascinating stuff. Read it, read it.

More On School Lunches...

Poor Michele is really getting beat up over the school lunch thing. For the latest in the saga, check here and here.

Some of the hate mail and comments she's been receiving sounds truly horrific:

As the subject dragged on - here as well as on other blogs - the comments sunk lower and lower, from people who claimed that those who had to use the program should go to jail for child abuse, to those saying that women should keep their legs closed and they wouldn't have these problems. The subject became broader and broader and less about the lunch program and more about pointing fingers at single mothers, to one blogger who thinks that kids who use the program should call him daddy.

Ugh.

As a result of the wide variety of contradictory names she has been called, Michele is looking for other potential members of the
SocialistZionistBleedingHeartConservativeScumBucketAnarchistWarMongerer-
MeatEaterLunchGiverSpawnofSatanBushBootLickerMarixstConspiracyTheorist
Party.

I'll join.

Food Fight

The food fight surrounding free meals at school continues. John responds to Michele and I in an update to his post -- he REALLY didn't like the Oliver Twist remark, apparently. He says that if we're gonna feed them breakfast or lunch, why not feed them all day long? Why not clothe them?

Michele fires back: "Just because I want to give a meal to a hungry kid because that kid can learn better on a full stomach and not flunk out of school and go on to become a drain on the system does not mean I support some ridiculous socialism-inspired theory of giving and getting based on needs and abilities."

I really liked the point made by this commenter on Michele's post, written by one Graham Lester:
"The children are not extensions of their parents. It's not their fault if they have crappy idiot parents. Even if the parents spend every penny they have on crack, the kids should still be fed. Holding children responsible for the sins of their parents is just ignorant balderdash. If the parents are good people who just happen to be poor for one reason or another (and there's ten thousand different things that can make a good person poor), then I for one am more than happy for some of my tax money to go to helping out their family. So I say feed the kids whether the parents are bad or good. When children go unfed it demeans the whole society. Excepting a minority of sociopaths, everybody suffers as a consequence. Feeding hungry children is a thoroughly legitimate function of government."

Take THAT!

Michele very adroitly kicks John Hawkins' privileged right-wing tushy for his opposition to free and subsidized breakfast and lunch programs in public schools.

In John's Oliver Twistian world, he'd have the "older kids spend some time beating out erasers, sweeping the hallways, or doing something else to pay for their food. Even the little kids could at least -- I don't know -- make macaroni pictures dedicated to the US taxpayers who are paying for the free pizza they're getting at lunch. Let them learn that there is no "free lunch" or "free breakfast" for that matter and that you should have to work for everything you get. Even that would be preferable to putting these kids on the dole and teaching them that the world owes them free food..."

Yeah, let's let 'em starve and teach 'em a lesson....

The F-word

Feminism, of course. What else could I possibly be thinking of?

Boy, oh boy, I really do not embrace Diana's definition of feminism: "Feminism as we know it is a radical re-ordering of the relations between the sexes based upon the writings of certain thinkers, published mostly in the late 60s and early 70s."

She, like Dean, is free to equate radical feminism with feminism, but I just do not see it that way.

Diana thinks that people like me, who embrace the wider definition of feminism I found when I Googled are merely fooling ourselves.

Here's what I found on Google. First, the short and simple definition: "a doctrine that advocates equal rights for women/"

And now the longer version: "What is feminism? By general definition, feminism is a philosophy in which women and their contributions are valued. It is based on social, political and economical equality for women. Feminists can be anyone in the population, men, women, girl or boys. Feminism can also be described as a movement. A revolution that includes women and men who wish the world to be equal without boundaries. These boundaries or blockades are better known as discrimination and biases against gender, sexual orientation, age, marital status and economic status. Everyone views the world with his or her own sense of gender and equality. Feminists view the world as being unequal. They wish to see the gender gap and the idea that men are superior to women decreased or even abolished."

Please take note: Nothing about man-hating. Nothing about opposition to the concept of pregnancy and motherhood. Nothing about required lesbianism. Nothing about advocating the right to abortion under any and every circumstance.

Diana claims:

"The point is: definitions matter. Yes, labels matter. Taxonomy matters. "I'm a feminist and I love to have men look at me." Sorry: that's not feminism. Feminism is a harsh code, as harsh as Islam in its way, and it says that no woman can enjoy having men look at her and call herself a feminist. And sorry, it also says that no woman can enjoy being a married woman, a mother, defining herself by her family associations, and call herself a feminist. That is stretching a definition beyond recognition. It's dishonesty. Sorry, but no woman who stays at home with her kids is a feminist. Sorry to ruffle feathers but you might as well call a person who eats meat but feels guilty about it a vegetarian."

Gee, that reminds me of another form of extreme Orthodoxy. The kind that says I can't even contemplate wearing jeans, walking into a church, driving on Saturday, or eating a cheeseburger and still call myself a member of the Jewish people.

Must every movement or affiliation be defined by and limited to its most extreme manifestations? I don't think so.

Yes, I read feminist literature in the 1970's. My mom -- my stay-at-home suburban Jewish wife of a doctor -- subscribed to Ms. Magazine.

Yes, some of what I read was out there. But when you are fermenting a social revolution, often the founding fathers -- or mothers -- as the case may be -- push the envelope further than it need be pushed. I'm still incredibly grateful for what this movement has accomplished on a personal level and on a wider scale.

No, it hasn't been perfect. Yes, mistakes have been made. And my generation of women is still figuring it all out (would you believe that all of my friends from Wesleyan class of 1986, all steeped in the most lefty campus PC forms of feminism -- taught by the kind of academics that Diana despises -- have ended up -- gasp -- married with children?)

Currently, my feminist heroines are blogosphere warriorettes Judith and Meryl for defending feminism way more eloquently and linking far more prolifically than I am.

While I'm praising feminist commentary, Dean was urging all of us misguided feminists to read a certain article that he thought would help us see the light

An astute blogger named Lesley gave it the onceover. Dean, for the record, I agree with Lesley's critique of the piece. (I was happy to discover Lesley in Dean's comments section, and she's my latest blogroll addition. Thanks, Dean, for helping me find her.)

He's So Diplomatic

What kind of a stupid career diplomat shoots off his mouth at a cocktail party about the country to which he has just been named ambassador?

It's not that I'm surprised that a French ambassador to Israel is coming in already believing that Sharon is a "lout" and that the country is "paranoid" (which begs the eternal question, should you be considered paranoid if everyone really is out to get you?)

How Do you Solve a Problem Like Maria?

Anyone else notice how utterly invisible Maria Shriver and the kids have been since the news of Arnold's candidacy for California governor broke? Sort of jibes with the rumors that she was not supportive of this move.

It's been hard enough for her to try to maintain a semi-serious journalism career as a Kennedy....and the wife of an action movie star....and of an action movie star with a reputation for groping women...

Now she's got to cope with trying to be taken seriously as a journalist as the Kennedy wife of a movie star with a groping reputation turned politician. Yikes. Guess it's time for a chat with Hillary.

I want a Ariana Huffington/Arnold Schwartznegger debate just to hear silly accent vs. silly accent.

My Brother Vs. Ted Kennedy

Well, I haven't been linking any of the many press appearances of my brother, Seth Kaplan, who is a lawyer for the Conservation Law Foundation, but how can my sisterly pride resist when he takes on the likes of Sen. Edward Kennedy?

This is the first time that Kennedy has come out so strongly against the Cape Wind project that my brother supports. Think it has anything to do with the fact that it's in the backyard of the Kennedy's Hyannisport compound? You decided.

Seth was quoted on the Cape Wind project in the New York Times Magazine and on CBS Sunday morning. And I think he must be be on the speed-dial of the Boston Globe.

I like to think that spending his childhood fighting with me was good practice for his future as an argumentative advocate for the environment...

Bill and Chris Go Wild at Oxford

Wherever one may stand on the politics of it all, this little memoir of life at Oxford with Christopher Hitchens and Bill Clinton contains some juicy gossip. Of course I have no clue whether the source is reliable. (Via Alas, A Blog)

Ampersand, Arik Sharon, and Me

So how's this for irony? First, Ampersand announces he is blogrolling me in the following manner:

Oh, and I've added Allison Kaplan Sommer's pro-occupation blog An Unsealed Room, as well. Since Allison (who is Israeli) pretty much defends Israel's occupation, she and I disagree a lot. This has given me the opportunity to be impressed wit