GayPatriot

The Internet home for American gay conservatives.

Married Democratic Senator Nominated Girlfriend for U.S. Attorney

by

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.

Comments

  2. 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!

  4. 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.

  5. “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.

  6. 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.

  7. 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.

  8. 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.

  9. 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.

  10. “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?