Petraeus scandal: How about a Gen. sugar daddy for Paula Broadwell?

Posted on December 3, 2012 By Bloomberg News Politics

This July 13, 2011 photo made available on the International Security Assistance Force’s Flickr website shows the former Commander of International Security Assistance Force and U.S. Forces-Afghanistan Gen. Davis Petraeus, left, shaking hands with Paula Broadwell, co-author of “All In: The Education of General David Petraeus.” (AP Photo/ISAF)

I know we’re just settling in with our popcorn for the scene where the lawyers and PR handlers transform disgrace into opportunity for the players in the Petraeus scandal.

Already Petraeus is on the contrition circuit, saying last week he “screwed up royally.” Why next thing you know, he will be nominated to replace Hillary Clinton at the State Department.

But before we move on to “Act II: The Image Rehab”, could we clear up this business about how women get depicted when the stuff hits the fan in a scandal?

Some of you are feeling sad that Petraeus, the retired four-star U.S. Army general who had an affair with the author of his biography “All In: The Education of General David Petraeus” had to quit his job as Central Intelligence Agency director last month after admitting to an extramarital affair. “They threw this poor fellow to the wolves,” celebrity divorce lawyer Raoul Felder told the Daily Beast’s “Beast TV”.

Poor fellow, indeed, getting his reputation tarnished for engaging in indiscretions with Paula Broadwell, a married woman who surely must be responsible for the fall of our military hero, considering media commentary that dubbed her a slut and a cunning seductress.

David Petraeus scandal: truth behind resignation, Paula Broadwell

How could this bad result have come to such a good guy?

“From what we know now, he wasn’t an alcoholic or a drug addict—something that might impair his thinking,” wrote columnist Susan Reimer in the Baltimore Sun. In fact, “he did nothing truly weird, like Rep. Anthony Weiner, who sent those cell-phone pictures of his crotch to random women.”

He probably wasn’t a bank robber or an animal abuser or an inside trader, either, and from what I can tell, the only things he is guilty of are cheating on his wife and a surfeit of professional preening.

But there is something a little bit off when one party to a sex scandal is congratulated for the sins he managed not to commit while the other gets attacked as “a shameless, self-promoting prom queen,” which is the way Broadwell was described by an unnamed military officer in the blog Business Insider. (Memo to Mr. Unnamed Military Officer: Next time you give a media interview, show a little military-style courage and attach your name to those smears.)

Petraeus is no stranger to self-promotion himself, and several writers have called him out both for his assiduous courting of the reporters who covered him and for his tacky decision to adorn his civilian clothes with military medals for a recent speech in Washington.

But that self-promotion hasn’t led to any portrayals of Petraeus as “a shameless self-promoting prom king.”

I have, though, seen a lot of stories that referred to Broadwell as Petraeus’s mistress. And so has J. Nathan Matias, a research assistant at the MIT Center for Civic Media who studies gender representation in the media. Matias used a news database called Media Cloud to get an idea of how Petraeus and Broadwell were being depicted in mainstream media and in blogs, and noticed that the word “mistress” was being used in such varied places as USA Today, Newsweek and Slate.com. Bloomberg View and Bloomberg Businessweek have also referred to Broadwell as his mistress.

“If I were trying to write a piece, I wouldn’t refer to her in that kind of possessive way,” Matias told me. “I’d try to find language where I’d say they were having an affair, and identify her in terms of who she is in society, just as they are identifying Petraeus.”

Readers coming across the word “mistress” tend to visualize a woman who provides sex in exchange for cushy, rent-free living and a lot of high-end shopping, Matias said. That label is “kind of demeaning” in any event, he said, but doesn’t even apply in the case of Broadwell, a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Reserve, a West Point graduate and recipient of two master’s degrees.

“She is getting the typical response to the scarlet letter woman—he is a man, so he’s weak, but she is crazy, demonic and a threat to national security,” said Victoria Pynchon, a blogger on negotiation and women’s issues at Forbes.com. “He’s mostly getting a pass, and the women in this story are getting no pass.” Equal treatment in the media would at least make Petraeus the sugar daddy to Broadwell’s mistress, wouldn’t you think?

In a blog post that managed to squeeze in the word “slut” four times, the conservative commentator Robert McCain noted that Broadwell had conducted interviews with Petraeus while the two were jogging, which apparently is reason to conclude “the slut was very cunning in her seduction.” Even The Washington Post found a way to present her as conniving, noting that she was “willing to take full advantage of her special access” to Petraeus while researching her book.

Petraeus, meanwhile, was described by an unnamed friend (does anyone talk for the record on this story?) as being “vulnerable” after leaving the camaraderie of the military to take the CIA post.

In the Baltimore Sun story, the author suggested “we need to learn to get past these bimbo eruptions.” Bimbo, from dictionary.com, is “an attractive but stupid young woman, especially one with loose morals.” What we really need to work on is getting journalism schools to teach students the apparently lost art of looking up words in the dictionary.

CIA

Source: Susan Antilla

http://www.facebook.com/mike.cobb.946 Mike Cobb

So, is Paula Broadwell a narcissistic overly ambitious feminist; or is she simply a naive and misunderstood soccer mom? Sorry, but I have to vote for the former.

Broadwell and Petraeus were both aware they were violating the military, intelligence and national security ethics codes by having an illicit personal relationship. Neither of them did anything to stop the affair; indeed they both encouraged, facilitated and participated in the affair. His motive was probably only sex, while she was in it for both sex and career advancement. But the bottom line is they are both equally guilty; neither of them took unfair advantage of the other. One thing is certain; he proved the old cliché, “There’s no fool like an old fool.” And Broadwell helped him do it for her own personal gain.

Let’s stop playing semantics in support of feminist causes; and stop to trying to say Paula
Broadwell was the victim of a double standard for men and women; or that she is being unfairly treated by the media. It is reported that the actual sexual chapter of the affair did not begin until after David Petraeus retired from the Army. This means she was not submitting to him as her superior officer. She was not under his command or authority. They were both civilians and she could have said “NO!” or cried “RAPE!” any time she
chose.

Further, if she is being unjustly treated by the media, it is her right and responsibility to come forward and defend herself. Her silence is an admission of guilt.

Politicians and members of the news media are inherently corrupt. We expect misconduct from them. But our men and women in uniform are different; indeed … Special. We hold them to a higher standard. We demand their character (including moral standards) are above reproach. We entrust our lives and national security to them. They are the only representatives of our government we can look up to, admire and respect. We demand they have courage, dignity, and self-discipline. They set our example. They are our heroes.

David Petraeus and Paula Broadwell are both graduates of the United States Military Academy at West Point, one of our oldest and most revered institutions. Its alumni include two US Presidents, numerous Generals, and Seventy-four holders of the Medal of Honor. The motto there is “Duty – Honor – Country.” Their word is their honor. Patraeus and Broadwell each took two oaths: (1) An oath of service to the country, and (2) An oath of fidelity to their spouse; the marriage vows. They have both failed to live by the code. They have both violated their word, and viz they have no honor. They have disgraced the uniform, and they both deserve everything they get.

Petraeus has taken the correct first step to salvage his reputation. He has done the right thing to voluntarily come forward and publicly admit his misconduct and to resign as CIA chief. It is now up to his wife Holly to make a decision about the future of their marriage.
If she forgives him … MAYBE the country will, and he will have a chance to rehabilitate his career.

Now it is Paula Broadwell’s turn to “Man Up” and follow Petraeus’ example, and take
that same “correct first step.” It is her turn to make a public confession and take her medicine. She owes it to the country. And her husband needs to make a statement as
well. She can hire every PR firm in the United States; but until these conditions are met … and as long as she remains in hiding, avoiding her just due … she has no chance to restore her reputation.

And it should not be overlooked that both Petraeus and Broadwell may well still have legal problems ahead to contend with, regarding the mishandling of classified documents and information.

Point for point and fact for fact … this business is a carbon copy of the 2007, Navy Captain Lisa Nowak case. You remember the astronaut who wore a diaper a thousand miles to confront her “other woman.” In 2009, she copped a plea to the civilian charges against her; and in 2010, the Navy stripped her of rank and kicked her out of the service under “Other Than Honorable” conditions. Having 22-years service, she was allowed to quietly retire. Her husband divorced her in 2008, and is believed to have custody of their three children.

At the very least, Paula Broadwell is no better, and deserves the same fate as Lisa Nowak.

But a public confession of guilt is apparently not Broadwell’s plan. She has retained a public relations firm to rehabilitate her reputation. It is reported she has hopes of reviving her career. Just what career that may be remains a mystery… maybe Consultant Terrorist, Pulp Fiction Writer, Professional Fraud, or Courtesan. The more we learn about her, the less qualified she appears to be for any other line of work.

And to repeat, if she is being unjustly treated by the media, it is her right and responsibility to come forward and defend herself. Her continued silence serves only to make her that much dirtier.

The fact she apparently plans to deny any culpability in this sad chapter in our national History only serves to compound her guilt, and draw attention to the serious flaws in her character. It is now obvious Broadwell is completely amoral. One has to wonder if David
Petraeus was her first extramarital encounter, or if he will be her last. It seems safe to say she will do whatever is necessary to get what she wants.

Happily Married

There are no carbon copy infidelities. Each one is its own personal tragedy. Paula Broadwell has become the dependent clause in a complex sentence. The independent clause is Scott. He has to become the engine of her rehabilitation. Paula could still go far; imagine her in the lead regarding disabled veterans. Florence Nightingale was a prostitute! If Scott can overcome the horrific trauma she’s put him through, if Paula sincerely still loves him and wants to save a marriage she savaged, and if he has the ego strength to block and blunt repeated attacks on an obviously undeserving woman, then all this crap everyone’s talking and writing about will become irrelevant, as irrelevant as that old fraud, that’s the general, who I’m certain willingly himself be seduced.

http://www.facebook.com/mike.cobb.946 Mike Cobb

Wow … point for point, you and I disagree on just about everything. So there’s no point in exchanging views. Have a nice day. G’Bye

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003367444388 Francis Ford

Mike Cobb, I agree. This spin machine of Broadwell’s is getting very highly annoying too. Why doesn’t she apologize and then go hide in her own life for awhile? And why not pay attention to something other than her ruined reputation like the family she just burned? Ever needing to be the center of attention Braodwell insists we “see her side” a la some poorly thought up feminist principles. And so we get the “Broadwell spin” everyday.
Look, we all got it already! Two cheats one male one feamle had a sexual affair and helped grease the way up each other’s career ladder. They probably were more than embedded in Afghanistan and that would mean both broke military laws there too. They are both sluts and both morally lost. Then they got caught. OOOPPS. End of story!
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003367444388 Francis Ford

I forgot to say oes anybody even believe their affair timeline? I call total BS!
Emily

It says in the article, “Next time you give a media interview, show a little military-style courage and attach your name to those smears”

Double standard here – Broadway sent jealous/threatening emails to Jill Kelley and General Allen anonymously. How come she was not required to show some courage and attach her name in the emails?

Pam Blackwell

How do you know she actually sent them?

Amy

Another piece of ‘journalism’paid for by Paula’s PR team?

Sorry, too transparent an attempt at spin, try again.
Albertina Lourenci

Honestly that both became infatuated in the middle of nowhere in Afghanistan is totally human and understandable. Fairy tale would be if both divorced and got married. The real problem is the threatening e-mails sent by Paula. This is the outcome of poliamory. The only fun of poliamory is to hurt the feelings of the monogamous people involved. Once this was a secret affair and was not working well obviously, the affair got derailed. The crystal vase is broken. And once more nobody learns the lesson. Isn’t it curious? Again and again the love affairs will happen. Why? Because we live in a society without space to express our emotions. Petraeus calling Paula simply recreational attests men and women are still like primitive apes. Or the biography has not quality? Why has Petraeus approved it then? It will become a PHD thesis. Only Socrates-Plato or Rodin-Rilke can be honored and identified as strong coupling processes? I find very natural that love arose between Petraeus and Paula. Again the language of love has been repressed. For the sake of what? Family institution as the basis of our society. This is why 50% of Americans are born outside marriage and single parenthood is prone to become normal behavior for human beings.

http://www.facebook.com/mike.cobb.946 Mike Cobb

I’ve never seen a more long-winded attempt to explain immoral conduct, while failing utterly to excuse it.

Albertina Lourenci

Well the only real problem with Paula’s behavior was the messages threatening Jill Kelley. Period. The way you are reasoning looks like the way Medea reasoning or for Greeks love was a divine attitude or a mind attitude.

To give a lesson to the Greek Hero Jason, Medea who lived with him for ten year killed the Princess that Jason was wanting to marry, the King and decapitated with a sword the two young kids. She was considered a Goddess and had a son with the Crete’s king it seems.

It was exactly Christianism which introduced sensualism or to respond to the heart. A Brazilian song says the reasons of the heart belong to the heart and

only the heart is allowed to approve the behavior or not. So if instead of hearing their hearts, they decided to abide by the laws of military behavior and not threaten their survival, it is up to them to take this decision. And nobody has the right to interfere. Or you do not accept that when you get married religiously, you do need to tell the priest yes or no at the last moment!!!

How many said no?

Civil society accepts divorce and privacy. The problem with poliamory is exactly that those involved get lost and might even kill others. When this kind of emotional exchange reaches this level, of course it becomes bad behavior. And especially as scorched earth put forward, Paula was willing to continue threatening others and fooling the husband pretending everything was fine. And the General was already aware of the threatening messages apparently and both wanted to control the situation and fool others. In this sense I agree the affair ended up in a tragedy. This does not mean that to hear the heart is bad and that divorce should not exist. Personally I am unable to cheat because I would be cheating my beliefs and principles. I believe in monogamous relationships. Obviously they don’t give a damn to what they promised to the nation. Yet they are not as courageous as Edward VIII who became King on the death of hisfather in 1936. However, later that year Edward revealed his desire to marry the divorced American socialite Wallis Simpson. British Prime Minister Stanley Baldwinadvised Edward that for political and religious reasons he could not marry Mrs Simpson and remain king. Edward abdicated in order to marry, and George ascended the throne as the third monarch of the House of Windsor.

Edward heard his heart and lived a long life with a woman whose opinion was vital for him to be a King. Let’s applaud the males and let them do whatever they approve to keep institutions that belong to the “ancient Greek times”.
Likewise I am a researcher. The profession of researcher does not exist in universities especially faculties of architecture. What should I do? Be faithful to the truth and continue faithful to my research trends or go back to at least a hundred years ago, embrace the paradigms of Modern Movement developed at Bauhaus in Germany and get a job and fool youngsters teaching them outdated information that continue to harm the environment insofar provoking climate change?
I abandoned the university. While a student I did not mind the zeroes they gave to me for developing up to date monographs instead of taking their stupid tests. I discovered that acting like this my added value became the time and then they were always on strike. I had more time to advance my research and ended up getting the necessary scores to be approved. In Brazil I would only accept to teach in a public university like the University of São Paulo.
Do you know that Brazilian people when they eat rice and beans they pay 48% of taxes? Multiply by 200 millions and you get how much money is spent to pay outdated people and corruption. Did you get it? War is a coward escape for not being able to face the challenges of peace. Thomas Mann wrote this. And I would paraphrase Divorce is a coward escape for not facing the problems of the process of individualization. So the need for the women not to be a rib of the spine of the husband. In so doing, of course all the glory of the man is based on the wife’s support.
Where is the beauty in this story? Hillary support Bill Clinton because she herself could become the President of the USA. And I hope she will. Hillary knows what it means to hear her heart and not failed institutions. Al Gore and Tipper criticized them so much. Now they are divorced. Did you get it? Why?

babtxu

David & Paula: Both super ambitious, both craving for having an exceptional career, both absolutely ready to sacrifice all they have for fame. Sadly, they both have families they shamelessly put into limelight. Both don’t deserve them. There are many Petreuses and Pauleuses in the Army who put all our American values to shame. And the truth is – nobody in the Army will speak up for political correctness. I fee for the families. People like them should not marry, should not commit to have children, have families

Albertina Lourenci

Well to avoid feeling attracted towards colleagues, people are marrying colleagues. Obviously in professional terms both have strong affinity. The problem is that David’s success is based on “exploiting” Holly’s good will to follow him all over the world and hence to sacrifice her own process of self-individuation. Probably this is why she doesn’t give a damn to her appearance and is overweight. Those that understand of the language of the body says that people go overweight when they are under stressing conditions. To the contrary both Petraeus and Paula feel very well and are athletic and nice looking. Yet there is a generation gap between both.
A stable relationship implies heart + mind going hand in hand.
The need to unfold your process of individuation here has been translated as fame, uncontrolled sex and so on. Very biased views indeed. Sartre would put forward that one that loves want the other while freedom and expects this freedom to emerge as love. Or religious marriage is all about expressing that you have that internal call to live with and be faithful tow a person in freedom for a lifetime. Out of the blue you end up in Afghanistan and feel as isolated heroes. Well how to control your desire to overcome solitude in a more intimate relationship. Testosterone is there like the hunger hormone grolin to be satisfied.
I do not see any problem that as grown up people they exercized their freedom and finally decided that it was better to continue married apparently. The only one that failed in the story was Paula sending threatening messages. Obviously no anonymous person would know about the affair and especially threaten the right person that was considered a romantic rival. In this case Paula should divorce and be a good loser in order to be coherent with parts of her own self. But there are parts that can attract a husband like Scott. So Scott is accomplishing Sartre’s conception of love. Great and modern guy! Indeed we are a bunch of “invisible personalities”. To bring them to harmony, coherence and integrity is what one calls process of self-integration. What I agree with most is that Paula has an invisible “personality” that obviously is not responsible for a socially acceptable behavior. Kelly did very well to show the messages to FBI. Very courageous and now she is messing up the life of another general. And all will go public in a best seller book: “All in”.
So young generation really wants to transform society. YOU can read
The richer sex: how female breadwinners are transforming love, sex and marriage from Liza Mundy. There you can understand that in colonies like Connecticut and Massachussets, when a man divorce, he would auction the woman. Worse she would be conducted to the public market as if she were as horse to be sold….After having read this I start to understand American culture REALLY well…Many thanks to Liza Mundy and all the books that will be published to create a better world.

Pam Blackwell

Again, how do we know she actually sent these “e-mails?”
Have’nt you ever had the experience of someone breaking into your e-mail account and sending out spam to your contacts obviously without your authorization?

scorched earth

Aaaaaawwww….poor, poor misunderstood Paula crying buckets of crocodile tears because she GOT CAUGHT. She needs to be prosecuted for adultery, misuse of classified information, and having a bloated, insatiable ego.

Here’s how “sweet” Paula was. The day after her romantic getaway with her poor cuckolded husband was supposed to be a birthday party for her at her brother’s place. Guess who was on the guest list?? That’s right….The General. How nice to secretly humiliate her husband with her lover while she was the center of attention.

Disappear, Paula; just disappear. The scarlet “A” is on your fore head forever and the only career path open to you is the take out window at Mickey D’s.

Keep it going. Dee Dee Myers and Glover Group. You’re only talking to the choir. The rest of us are waiting for Paula’s new book…..”Getting chased around the desk: My life with Peaches” :):)

Fawlty

It doesn’t quite seem to add up, does it? If her husband really learned at the end of a romantic birthday dinner, canceled a party that included Petraeus (“you invited HIM to the party!!??”), stayed with HER brother for a week and then joked with reporters back at home? And co-hosted the party with neighbors? “I wasn’t worthy of a bike ride with Lance Armstrong!!?? It came out because you were jealous that another women might be moving in on the General!!?? Did the FBI review information on MY patients when they came to the house!!??” Something doesn’t quite add up.

Pam Blackwell

We’re on the same page on this one!

Tom

The timeline of the affair I think was alot longer than what they are saying she was with him in afghanistan when he was still general
CherokeeGuy

Disgusting spin. How could anyone see this as a feminist issue. The term “Mistress” for a woman cheating on her husband with an old man who can promote her is being polite.
Pam Blackwell

Honestly, none of it adds up. I agree with Fawlty below:

“t doesn’t quite seem to add up, does it? If her husband really learned at the end of a romantic birthday dinner, canceled a party that included Petraeus (“you invited HIM to the party!!??”), stayed with HER brother for a week and then joked with reporters back at home? And co-hosted the party with neighbors?”

Opinion Corner