How in tarnation is Petraeus’s potato sack poster wife for Puritan living supposed to compete with this fuel-injected sex machine? There isn’t a man alive who would pass up a chance at tapping that harlot if his only alternative was Miss Massachusetts 1687. You may as well dangle a chunk of raw meat in front of a starving lion’s maw and expect it to sit still for twenty years.

Look, I’m not claiming Broadwell is any raving beauty. She’s probably around a 7, adjusted for age. And she has that incipient manjaw going on, a classic tell of the late stage America, careerist shrike tankgrrl female with clit dick. But in relation to the wife, she’s a hard 10. Hard enough to cut diamond. If your wife — and I say this with the utmost clinical detachment — is utterly unbangable, then a 7 prancing around your office day in and day out, year after year, in high heels, pencil skirt and a sexpot squint will test the resolve of the most religiously indoctrinated or divorce theft-averse man. Every day you don’t expel yourself in the tramp’s come hither wicker is one more day you drag yourself home to suffer in stark contrast the sad, depressing sight of the Michelin Ma’am dutifully holding down the home post. Your guilty thoughts will eat you alive either way, so you may as well enjoy the benefits of the burden of that guilt.

http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2 ... idelity-risk-curve/

November 18, 2012

Am I the only person in the world who could not care less if David Petraeus was shagging his biographer? I mean, don't get me wrong. I'm reading all the stories, because I'm a shameless hypocrite just like every other gutter-brained internet browser who maintains a proud interest in quality news. Plus, it's impossible not to be absorbed by the sheer magnificence of the military strategy and time-management skills on display as the US army chief juggles an entire army, a muscular mistress, an apparently rigorous simultaneous relationship with a ''social-liaison officer'' in Tampa and the wildcard factor of some shirtless FBI agent to boot.

It's organisationally impressive, at the very least - surely there must be a military braid for that level of hand-eye co-ordination.

But should it really be the end of his career?

The US Defence Secretary, Leon Panetta, has announced a military ethics review, after being questioned about the whole intrigue during his Australian trip this week. Panetta's travelling companion, Hillary Clinton, didn't have much to say about Petraeus, but there's a woman whose life would have been made much, much easier had her husband restricted himself to a spot of discreet biographer-rogering and left it at that.

Unlike president Bill Clinton, Petraeus didn't fib, squirm or dissemble when he was busted. Having already discontinued the affair, he announced that he had failed his own and the army's moral standards, and marched himself briskly out of the building. No whining interviews about how everybody else was doing it. No self-pitying departure-lounge press conferences sobbing about how one goatish lapse had overshadowed all the other great work he'd done.

Why was it so head-spinningly weird to see a major public figure cop it sweet in such a prompt fashion, without staying to argue the toss about whether the resignation was entirely unavoidable?

Oh, yeah - right. It's because that pretty much never happens. It's incredibly rare for a public figure, having succumbed to an indulgence, to respond by forbidding himself further indulgence.

Which is what, funnily enough, makes Petraeus quite a loss to public life. Sometimes the best test of a person is not the wrongdoing they commit - everybody sins to some extent - but the way they handle it.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/po ... .html#ixzz2CYaWmbYI