From Farai

When Is a Sex Scandal NOT a Sex Scandal?

Today we led with the indictment of Detroit's "Hip Hop Mayor," Kwame Kilpatrick. He faces multiple counts on charges including obstruction of justice.

But the charges are about obstruction of justice — or a cover-up — not about sex itself.

Still, it seems like headline writers get a lot more mileage out of the idea of a sex scandal than an investigation into whether the Mayor lied to the court. Some of the headlines running on the wires and in the papers today include:

Detroit Mayor Faces Charges in Sex Scandal

Detroit Mayor Charged in Text-Message Sex Scandal

Another U.S. Democrat Involved In Sex Scandal

(That last one is from Radio Netherlands.)

The Kilpatrick case seems, to me, Nixonian. (Of Watergate, the former president said, "It's not the crime that kills you, it's the cover-up.")

Nixon fought to stay in office, but eventually resigned.

Kilpatrick's been indicted, and he's still fighting ...
Do you think he will resign or hang on until he's forced to go?



Please keep your community civil. All comments must follow the Community rules and terms of use, and will be moderated prior to posting. NPR reserves the right to use the comments we receive, in whole or in part, and to use the commenter's name and location, in any medium. See also the Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Community FAQ.

ah sister Chideya... this is not about the three letter s-work as much as it is about ethics and a presumption of power. personally, i don't get a kleenex tissue about who does what to who and when and where, i am not cleaning nobody's dirty laundry but my own. The problem though for the K Kilpatrick's and the E. Spitzer's types is that they are public citizens. Their wages/salaries are derived from the average taxpayer's infusing the government coffers with a chunk out of their meager wages [most non livable]. Hence, such individuals who run for public office and are elected/erected by the people to serve the people must be accountable to the people who are their funding source. When they fail at their mandate or violate the tenets of its operation then such individuals must be sanctioned accordingly.

Hence, the issue is not about sex it is about corruption and perjury. Both Kilpatrick and Spitzer as so-called attorneys have violated the ethics rules they had agreed to uphold and both are beyond knee-deep in their own egotistical corruption. Both should be disbarred, monetarily sanctioned, as well as made to perform some community service work.

How come one rarely hears about women in such scandals? As a man myself, I ponder this all the time since most of us are usually raised by women at what point do you forget the struggles of the woman that raised you and turn to such a misogynistic bent that you proceed to violate all the ones you so-call profess to respect and love. Is the will to power and control that strong? Or is it a presumption that ultimate male power/respect within the eurocentric paradigm construct is lodged/gained via the sexual submission of another human being of any gender definition? You see even if it is paid for I still view it as sanctioned rape because if your personal relationship was established with full glasses and not two halves attempting to make a whole then there would be not constant backsliding by one of the halfs to top off themselves because somewhere in the relationship their is a big leaking hole.

Sent by K Mjumbe | 4:15 AM | 3-25-2008

The way Kilpatrick continues to talk about being vindicated when all is said and done, leads me to believe he'll fight until he's forced out. He has already made public apologies with his wife sitting by his side. I do wish the sexual elements in these scandals involving public officials could be left out. They are usually private matters and we have no business prying into the bedrooms of others. Frankly, I don't want to hear about the sex lives of elected officials. What they do intimately with their spouses and mistresses really should be of no concern to the public. This is expecially true when these officials have children who then become part and parcel of the scandal.

What the mayor has done sounds to be illegal involving obstrucion of justice and purjury. Stepping aside, in my opinion, would be the right thing to do in his case to ease the burden on his family and spare his children the humiliation that he has brought on them. But it seems that men in power often times get carried away, lose control of themselves and end up squandering their opportunities and ruining the lives of the families who love them. What's worse in this man's case, is that he seems to be too selfish to leave--which would spare his family the humiliation. A reporter on this story said it best: "our gifts can take us places where our character cannot keep us."

Sent by Evelyn | 4:01 PM | 3-25-2008

I think he's gonna fight until the Feds come and haul him away. I won't make a judgment on his guilt or innocence, but the people of Detroit knew what they were in for when they re-elected him for a second term. The allegations of mayoral misconduct were very public during his 1st term and the people of Detroit elected to roll the dice again. Is anyone really surprised? Really?

Sent by Bill M | 4:31 PM | 3-25-2008

And Another Thing:

This should make people think about who they're voting for a little more. Just because you like the guy/he looks like you/has a nice personality doesn't mean he has the character to be honest and accountable for his actions.

Sent by Bill M | 4:34 PM | 3-25-2008

Interestingly, here in Indiana, Chelsea Clinton drop-kicked some college student at Butler University who had the timerity to ask her how MonicaGate impacted her mother's world view. "That's none of your business," she proclaimed to a cheering crowd.

I thought she was graceless and dismissive...and I didn't agree.

Last week's speech on race (though I'm loathe to reduce it to that and just lack a better term now that I'm typing on the fly) came because the media (and the metrics that tell them this is what we want to know about) made it clear that the people and events that shape the lives of our pols is important background information. We've made it our business to know--to dive into the dirty drawers pile and see what (or who) is there.

I must tell you: I don't much like it.

As for Kwame K, I, like many others, think he'll hang on to the bitter end. Whether that's hubris or angry innocence is for the courts to decide.

Sent by Lalita Amos | 3:03 PM | 3-26-2008


Support comes from: