I'm bisexual too -- its good times in the mind, even if you cannot carry it out in real life.

And that's the sticky wicket... no matter what anyone says, you are committed to one person. This is no different than any other relationship. I suppose it is a shame that you were unable to consummate this desire a while back. I always knew I was attracted to the same sex when I was younger; one can't not fantasize about what one desires during the pubescent periods of one's life... the thought just sort of... err, come. But I appreciate that you admit that you always knew on some level.

But, the fact remains you are in a committed relationship. No matter what a bunch of these people here might say, there is virtually no difference between this desire and the desire for other women than your wife. Witness: I had offers for mind-blowing sex while I was in relationships before. One was a threesome of quite desirable potential and the other with arguably the most attractive person I could have gotten my greasy hands on. But I kept the faith and stayed loyal. This is a good thing.

I would advise the uninformed who say A) that sex with a man is fundamentally different from that with a woman and B) That you are probably gay -- the second accusation is one of most insulting and insidious in intent (and, oddly, more likely to come from homosexual folks) -- I would think that, having been through periods of closeting, you owe it to yourself to be honest this time around and would presume you have considered this.

I would advise that you consult with the wife -- I know this can be hard; I have broken off relationships because the other person was unable to emotionally deal with my bisexuality emotionally, irrespective of the fact that I made it clear I was loyal and dedicated.

Black Robe... Aguirre the Wrath of God... The New World... the mini-series(es), the Conquistadors (e.g. Conquistadors: Cortes).... thats just off the top of my head, and I could no more recall many more historical movies about the civil war i doubt.

Good lord man, in grade school we learned the Europeans contaminated blankets wth smallpox and delivered them to Native Americans.....Its one thing to discuss how horrible it is, but PLEASE, can you all just admit this record is part and parcel of every public school curriculum the continent over? If people failed to pick up on all this then, I suppose they were poor students (and I was not geek at all). Paraphrasing an above poster, perhaps this time, they should keep paying attention, now that they have learned something.

They DID teach us this in grade or middle school.

I'm tired of this conversation. I think Ms Clinton could ave been a fine preseident. I have argued with all manner of Obamatrons about her merits, but her call to 'count the votes' in florida and michigan was the end. There could be nothing more despicable than that. She is dead to me.

Are you suggesting somebody 'do something' about Ms Clinton? She was (and is) a first lady, you know.

I don't know guys. His Operation Lardass was a success, as was his Operation Addiction and its offshoots, Operation Jail and Operation Hearing-Loss.

What's a poppet...? Puppet? Haven't seen the poppet spelling since my family smacked the liverwurst out of my mouth and dragged me back the the USA as a child.

How is a blog posting about how insoucient, and focussed on completely non-fact based or salacious garbage -- the media at large is -- not a relevent item? It seems quite topical and current and of note. This particular Wolff bit examplimfies the worst of gossip-rag political hack writing, and further indicates potential biases. Glen Greenwald does this all day.

You're just being contrary for the sake of it.

You have officially joined the mode of communication usually only granted to the special denizens of Front Page Mag and Free Republic - nothing but reactionary loopbacks.

Its also pretty clear many responders here didn't even read the post, but rather took it as an opening to slam Walsh. I can understand critiquing Walsh, but as for this rather innocent piece correctly pointing out the nutiness of Vanity Fair/Wolff, I don't see much room to slip the knie through the armor.

"There may be a risk of physical violence as well. Has he ever threatened her or her friends with violence? "

And then allude to his potentially being a cheater too?? That is pretty offensive, although now that I think about it, it seems part and parcel of AA veterans. I once put an (ex) GF in rehab. A friend of mine was in AA at the time, and one of his buddies walked right up to me and immediately asked, without knowing me, what I was doing to do about my addictions problems. I'm no innocent, but without knowing me, or indeed anything about me, he presumed because I was with someone who was an addict of sorts, I surely must be one myself.

It just seems to be part and parcel of the N-step programming, or a certain mode of thought, because thinking back now, I can think of other similar presumptions made by 'members' that they can 'spot' things other people can't. Sometimes these instincts have been correct, but just as often not...