Nixon faced a real Congress

Not to mention real journalists.

It's maybe a little tacky, but not more so than any campaign fund-raising is, and certainly less so than some kinds.

Vice-President-elect Biden went off-script and said something mildly amusing.

Quick, alert the media. Clearly he's going to be a loose cannon.

And not all lawyers make lavish salaries, either, as any public defender well knows.

Ditto anyone working in legal services. I hear many of those places -- already running on tight budgets -- are being hit hard.

So far, the only profession that seems recession-proof is punditry.

Well, a person with "Hussein" for a middle name and a last name one letter removed from "Osama" is the President-elect. So maybe even the Bush name isn't necessarily a liability ... in some places.

And that's just not allowed in this country. Oh, sure, it's okay to speak about other countries in which things like social class or inherited wealth or institutions of socialization and policy planning networks affect who runs for and is more likely to win office, and what sorts of policies are consistently supported over time.

But you cannot do that for this country, for then you are an extremist fringe lefty conspiracist paranoid.

Any attempt in this country to point out the ongoing class warfare is immediately deemed to be a dastardly attempt to "incite" class warfare. This seems to me the equivalent of blaming the poor bastards in foxholes in 1914 France for inciting World War 1.

Hey, don't be putting the hate on beards. Abe Lincoln had a beard, too, you know. I'm with Obama on this -- I think Richardson should grow back his beard.

Anybody know any current congresscritters or current governors with beards? (Is there a political anti-beard sentiment in this country? Is it some sort of weird beard-wearer == radical-bomb-throwing-commie association?)

Right. Because obviously if no one ever responded to something said by someone who edits and anchors an hour-long show that airs every weekday evening on one of the two most-watched cable news networks in America, nobody would ever know what that person said.

"I think we've already determined what kind of woman you are. Now we're discussing your price."

Anyway ...

So, while I'm bothered by Beech's euphemistic handling of her arrangement, I can't disagree with Melinda Henneberger, another XX Factor writer, who suggests that business relationships like Beech's "further [blur] the definition of prostitution."

How so? The definition has been blurred since, well, probably since "the world's oldest profession" started. It's not a "distant cousin ... of prostitution" at all; it's the prettier sister.

Belatedly, I'd like to agree with those who point out that it's her decision, and that prostitution should be legalized. What I was reacting to in my first post was the silliness of pretending that's not what this is.

Andrew, I'm curious about why -- in your view -- Spitzer's behavior was a bigger disgrace. Granted, I was seriously unimpressed with a state governor (and former state Attorney General) engaging in illegal and politically-stupid behavior. But personally, I think it's if anything somewhat less disgraceful than dishonest and illegal manipulation of the investments of thousands of people.

But then, I don't think prostitution should be illegal, and I think so-called "white collar" thieves should be treated like any other thieves, so maybe I'm biased.

Prostitution is the same as many other crimes in the US (and many other places). How it is treated by the legal system has a great deal to do with the socio-economic class of the participants. Rich people snorting a line of cocaine at a party are engaging in behavior that's just as criminal as a couple of guys sharing crack in a back alley. But the latter are far, far more likely to end up in jail than the former.

The behavior of Melissa Beech and her "benefactor" is arguably as illegal -- in the spirit of the law, at least -- as a streetwalker and a john. But the former are protected by the exchange of financial value for sex being less blatant ... and by it involving people who are financially much better-off.

Why is anyone stupid enough to believe that bullshit story about the birth certificate?

I doubt more than a small fraction of the people harping on the myth are actually stupid enough to believe it. That's not why they bring it up.

on a more realistic note, one of the scary things about it all is the fact that 'flying solo' is actually very dangerous. the reality is that the business is based on violence perpetrated by men whose job is to prevent women from going solo.

Yup. All the more reason to make it legal.

Of all the women who I know who have been in situations like this...

...ALL of them, not just a few, but ALL, have difficulties having >real< relationships afterwards.

How big is your data sample?

Also, I imagine it's tough to honestly know how much of their difficulties with "real" relationships has to do with their previous sugar-daddy relationships. Certainly lots of people without that history also have difficulties with real relationships.

Perhaps a burning cross would be a nice touch, too.