Married Democratic Senator Nominated Girlfriend for U.S. Attorney
So, here’s a story about an extramarital liaison which should have legs. It has more relevance to our public discourse than any tale of a golf player’s indiscretions. And reveals more about corruption in our nation’s capital than the irresponsible actions of a junior Senator who carried on with a staffer.
Here we’ve got a committee chairman, playing a key role in drafting health care legislation, not merely carrying on with a staffer, but doing so while nominating her for a position of power and authority:
Senate Finance Chairman Max Baucus’ office confirmed late Friday night that the Montana Democrat was carrying on an extramarital affair with his state office director, Melodee Hanes, when he nominated her to be U.S. attorney in Montana. According to a source familiar with their relationship, Hanes and Baucus began their relationship in the summer of 2008 – nearly a year before Baucus and his wife, Wanda, formally separated in April. The Senator has since divorced his wife.
Glenn Reynolds, whose post alerted me to the story quips, “At least the former Mrs. Baucus didn’t attack him with a golf club.“
For some reason, I don’t think the MSM will give this story the same coverage they gave to that featuring another Western Senator, but from the other side of the aisle.
17 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Seriously, what is the difference between the American MSM and the media in, say, Venezuela?
Comment by American Elephant — December 4, 2009 @ 11:50 pm - December 4, 2009
For some reason, I don’t think the MSM will give this story the same coverage they gave to that featuring another Western Senator…
Would that be the old “it’s okay when Democrats do it” reason? Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Bill Richardson, Tim Geithner, and Charlie Rangel LOVE that reason!
Comment by V the K — December 4, 2009 @ 11:51 pm - December 4, 2009
Actually, it’s more like it’s what’s expected of liberals.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — December 5, 2009 @ 1:39 am - December 5, 2009
Shouldn’t a married man be able to also have a civil union with his girlfriend in order to clear up next of kin, hospital visitation, health insurance, etc. rights? Just because the wife is only able to love, honor and obey one husband is no reason why a husband should not have the right to honor, love and obey a few women at a time. If he can handle all that pms, let him loose.
But, the law says only one man and one woman can marry. So what is poor Max Baucus to do? Look how they hounded poor Mark Sanford. Look what is happening to poor Tiger Woods. Isn’t it obvious that men can handle more than one woman at a time? Why are we stuck in traditional marriage? Why can’t a gay husband have several gay-mates?
Enquiring minds want to know.
Comment by heliotrope — December 5, 2009 @ 9:56 am - December 5, 2009
“For some reason, I don’t think the MSM will give this story the same coverage they gave to that featuring another Western Senator, but from the other side of the aisle.”
Gee, I read about it this morning on the front page of the NY TImes.
Comment by Tano — December 5, 2009 @ 10:44 am - December 5, 2009
Just because the wife is only able to love, honor and obey one husband is no reason why a husband should not have the right to honor, love and obey a few women at a time. If he can handle all that pms, let him loose.
Heliotrope, I would then urge you to petition your congressman and senators, as well as your state representatives to get the ball rolling. Or you can bring a case to a court, and see what happens. The only thing is that if polygamy was allowed, you would probably need an amendment, to restrict polygamy to men. Good luck!
In the meantime, get a good lawyer so that you can have documents created so that any girlfriends can have visitation rights, and hope your hospital honors it if and when it’s needed.
Why are we stuck in traditional marriage? Why can’t a gay husband have several gay-mates?
No one has to be stuck in traditional marriage. Don’t get married, or get a divorce. As of now, though, any legislation or court cases involving same sex marriage or civil unions involve only one partner.
So what is poor Max Baucus to do? Look how they hounded poor Mark Sanford. Look what is happening to poor Tiger Woods.
It looks to me that, with the current laws, these persons should not have married. Now that they have, I guess they have some options. Get a divorce, promise their wives they won’t cheat anymore and keep that promise, or have their wives agree to their dalliances. They can also petition their representatives for polygamy. But my guess is their wives don’t want that arrangement.
Comment by Pat — December 5, 2009 @ 12:34 pm - December 5, 2009
It’s bad in Montana. The media here will hound him about the public opinion 100 times harder than his personal relationships or the fact that his staff seems to be a revolving door for pharmaceutical company, health insurance and climate change lobbyists. At one time it was found over a third of his staff found employment testifying before his committees after leaving employment with his office. But the Montana papers won’t dare take him down for it, since Republicans are scarier boogiemen.
Comment by Tim — December 5, 2009 @ 12:58 pm - December 5, 2009
What should be the issue here is not that he had an affair, those are regrettable events that happen all too often.
But that because of said affair he nominated her to a government position.
That is the real issue here.
Comment by Leah — December 5, 2009 @ 1:03 pm - December 5, 2009
Because they are liberal/Democrat, their sense of propriety and morality are such that they does not see the problems with this.
Conservative/Republicans wear their morality and propriety on their sleeve so when they experience this kind of indiscretion, the ridicule and humiliation is harsher.
However, Conservative/Republicans are more likely to be contrite, apologetic and may resign.
Liberal/Democrats simply do not see the problem because they cannot tell the difference between right or wrong.
Comment by LCRW — December 5, 2009 @ 1:14 pm - December 5, 2009
“Liberal/Democrats simply do not see the problem because they cannot tell the difference between right or wrong.”
The reason why it’s difficult to hold liberals to high standards and an ethical code is because they have neither. How else can it explained why liberal politicians who get busted smoking crack, chronically cheat on their taxes and their spouses (some even leave their mistress to drown at the bottom of a lake) get reelected over and over again?
Comment by Sharp Right Turn — December 5, 2009 @ 1:53 pm - December 5, 2009
Dan-
When I first saw your headline (having not heard the news yet), I honestly thought you must mean Sen. Barbara Boxer.
LOL!
Comment by Bruce (GayPatriot) — December 5, 2009 @ 2:34 pm - December 5, 2009
Gee, I wonder if you might show us where:
http://tinyurl.com/yc6edkx
I see a blurb about it on the front page of the website, but the story is buried in Politics.
Cheers!
Comment by ThatGayConservative — December 5, 2009 @ 3:32 pm - December 5, 2009
I agree with Leah. I do not carry who he screws. Giving her a high ranking job is the problem
Comment by PatriotMom — December 5, 2009 @ 6:22 pm - December 5, 2009
“Gee, I wonder if you might show us where:”
I read it online. All morning it was the third story down on the far left column, visible without scrolling down.
Comment by Tano — December 5, 2009 @ 9:48 pm - December 5, 2009
Wasn’t Baucus the guy who smeared his campaign opponent, and gays by extension?
#14 Whatever, Tano.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — December 5, 2009 @ 9:51 pm - December 5, 2009
Yes, Baucus was the guy who smeared his opponent Taylor in 2002, causing Taylor to suspend his campaign in October. I never forgot that.
Comment by David Ross — December 6, 2009 @ 12:59 am - December 6, 2009
So, I suppose, it’s perfectly alright for liberals to trash gays as long as it furthers their political career.
Nice.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — December 6, 2009 @ 5:58 am - December 6, 2009