I don’t know the slightest thing about this David Wu guy beyond the following:
Rep. David Wu (D-Ore.) announced Tuesday that he will resign from Congress, four days after a report that a young woman called his office complaining of an “unwanted sexual encounter.”
Recently, we had a discussion, in the middle of a thread about something else, about Mark Sanford and Bill Clinton and the fact that neither did what he should have done when their own scandals came to light: Resign.
This Wu guy understood that. Why couldn’t these other guys?
Related Posts
Weiner resigned, Spitzer resigned…seeing a pattern–I think Ds resign more often than Rs do….
I don’t know about that. I sort of doubt it. But then, I do my best to pay no attention to these ever-present scandals, so it’s not like I have a list in my head.
Clinton’s situation was completely different. He absolutely, possitively should NOT have resigned because of how these charges came up. If he had been caught the way Weiner and Spitzer were then yes resigning might have been appropriate. But given the witch hunt nature of the Lewinsky scandal by the devious Republicans he had an affirmative duty absolutely NOT to resign, period. To do so would have been to reward the most scurilous elements in our political system. NOT resigning was the honorable thing to do in Clinton’s case.
Wu’s been hanging since last November despite many allegations of erratic behavior. This latest issue was the final straw.
The 56 year old Wu most recently attacked the 18 year old daughter of a major donor.
But he did resign. Finally. After 18 years of doing absolutely nothing of political importance. It really is the voters’ responsibility to pay attention to whom they elect. Being a D in Wu’s district is like being a Republican in Lexington. Character ought to matter more…
Clinton should have resigned.
I suspect that had he resigned that Gore would have been elected President too.
Clinton’s situation was different? — it was like Arnold Schwarzenegger’s with a rumored background insufficiently explored by the press (although there was more fanfare made in Arnold’s case) and both of the spouses were both enablers, though Shriver only for time in office. Hmmm!
Brad likes to think of these things in military terms so let’s couch this issue that way. Spitzer, Weiner, Wu, Ensign and all the ones who did resign largely did so because they were disgraced and embarrased. Legally they could have been in some jeopardy as well. Even though he didn’t resign Sanford was probably in that camp as well.
But Clinton’s situation was completely different. Clinton was attacked in a paramilitary sort of way in order to diminish his presidency. Once “war” was declared the rules changed. Clinton had to fight it out to the bitter end even though some collateral damage was likely to occur. In this case his own honor as a husband and perhaps the sensibilities of his wife had to be sacrificed for the good of the country. The GOP just could not be allowed to succeed in their “war” against the president. And they would have been routed had it not been for their great fortune in discovering Monica Lewinsky. Sort of like McClellan discovering Lee’s marching plans prior to Antitem. Clinton’s fight was justified not because his sexcapade was a minor event. Even the lying about it paled in compaison to the GOP witch hunt. Under no circumstances should have Clinton resigned given the severity of the crime he committed in opposition to the preposterous assault on his presidency. No one died and certainly no one other than Hillary was a victim.
People get court martialed for what Clinton did. That was the point.
What you are saying is, if people you don’t like accuse you of something wrong, even if you did the wrong thing, you get a pass.
Am I missing something here? David Wu stands accused of committing an “unwanted sexual encounter” with a young woman, which, if true, rises to the level of rape, or some level of sexual assault. I don’t recall that either Clinton or Sanford were ever accused of non-consensual sexual relationships. One can argue that they, too, should have resigned, but certainly not for the reason of their sexual relationships per se.
You’re right. I’m just reacting to the equation, “sex scandal leads to resignation.”
Neither Sanford nor Clinton was rape. With Clinton, of course, there were all those allegations about women he was all over who did not want such attentions, but Lewinsky was not one of those.
She was just the youngest, least powerful, dumbest female on the White House staff. And he took advantage of that.
Technically, Sanford should have been court-martialed, since he a serving officer in the National Guard, and adultery is a court-martialing offense. Its seldom done, but to ignore it in such a high profile case was not the National Guards finest hour. BTW, anyone ever hear of him doing any weekends or two weeks during his time in the Governors office? He may have, but I don’t ever recall anything on it, after his initial enlistment.
I seem to recall him having been away once or twice on duty.
Speaking of which, remember what Tom Wolfe wrote about the long military tradition on that front… Read the paragraph that starts, “There had always been a part of the Military Wife’s Compact that tacitly granted…”
Of course, I would have adamantly insisted that Sanford was NOT that kind of officer. I always thought he was a good family man — until Argentina.
And of course, Nelson himself is supposed to have said, “Every sailor is a bachelor when beyond Gibraltar.”
Doesn’t mean it’s true. Just part of the lore.
RE Sanford,
I would avoid mentioning him in regards to Geographical Locations, since he pretty much ruined what it means to hike from Georgia to Maine along a certain mountain chain.
@Andrew “people” get court martialed for lots of things if and only if they are members of the military. Civilians have a lot more freedom, even ethically.
Monica Lewinsky was well into adulthood, and threw herself at him, thong and all. He was wrong to take advantage of her, but this went beyond the dodgy consent of an underling into the blatant solicitation of the big boss!
She was just the youngest, least powerful, dumbest female on the White House staff. And he took advantage of that.
-Brad
Do you know any of those things to be fact or are you just making a hyperbolic argument for effect? Was Ms. Lewinsky in fact the YOUNGEST female White House staff member? That’s either true or it’s not. Do you know FOR A FACT that it is true.
She was 22. I had thought I remembered she was 20, but 22 is young enough for the purposes of my point. (I really hate that y’all made me look up “Monica Lewinsky” just now; I could have gone happily the rest of my life without doing that.)
He was 49. He was the President of the United States. She was an intern. He was the most powerful man in the world, and SHE WAS AN INTERN.
Are y’all picking up on the cosmic imbalance here?
And Kathryn. I’ve worked for large corporations. It’s a firing offense.
Consensual oral sex with a subordinate–THAT IS ONLY FOUND OUT THROUGH A MASSIVE WITCH HUNT–Monica did not come forward….
It’s amazing the hoops people will jump through to defend the indefensible.
Clinton was 100% wrong: morally, ethically, professionally. And it wasn’t a momentary lapse. It was multiple times.
And I’d be willing to bet the ranch that Monica wasn’t Clinton’s only conquest during his time in office… nor since then.
In terms of what he did as President, I have no complaints. From what I’ve read about him, he’s got Reagan’s charm but with a brain. But when it came to personal morality, he was about as flawed as you can get.
Ask yourself – would I let me teenage daughter be left alone with him?
Monica didn’t come forward, but she also didn’t try to get her dress cleaned either.
Having heard what goes on at the SC Statehouse, what goes through parents minds letting their daughters work as pages there? They might as well be “recruiting escorts” for the USC football team.