Headlines

NYT

Hmmmmmmm

Published: July 13, 2012…

My wife is having an affair with a government executive. His role is to manage a project whose progress is seen worldwide as a demonstration of American leadership. (This might seem hyperbolic, but it is not an exaggeration.) I have met with him on several occasions, and he has been gracious. (I doubt if he is aware of my knowledge.) I have watched the affair intensify over the last year, and I have also benefited from his generosity. He is engaged in work that I am passionate about and is absolutely the right person for the job. I strongly feel that exposing the affair will create a major distraction that would adversely impact the success of an important effort. My issue: Should I acknowledge this affair and finally force closure? Should I suffer in silence for the next year or two for a project I feel must succeed? Should I be “true to my heart” and walk away from the entire miserable situation and put the episode behind me? NAME WITHHELD

Read the Article

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 Next »

Dump her.

Mimzey on November 9, 2012 at 10:43 PM

Don’t expose the affair in any high-profile way. It would be different if this man’s project was promoting some (contextually hypocritical) family-values platform, but that doesn’t appear to be the case

So in other words, only expose the affair in some high profile way if the man is a Republican politician. Good job concealing the agenda, New York Times.

vegconservative on November 9, 2012 at 10:43 PM

CIA Director BetrayedU?

stvnscott on November 9, 2012 at 10:44 PM

Take her advance in the divorce.

KingGold on November 9, 2012 at 10:44 PM

Paula Broadwell’s husband?

sharrukin on November 9, 2012 at 10:44 PM

Is Paula Broadwell married? Also, it doesn’t seem like one would say “manage a project whose progress is seen worldwide as a demonstration of American leadership” to describe CIA director unless you were trying to be very cryptic, which is possible.

Mark1971 on November 9, 2012 at 10:45 PM

Don’t expose the affair in any high-profile way. It would be different if this man’s project was promoting some (contextually hypocritical) family-values platform…

Give me a Fluking break. Wrong is wrong for cripes sake. That is some unbelievably obnoxious liberal spin on that advice. Can’t be hurting the cause by exposing a scumbag now, can we?

Now, who wrote the letter to the hypocritical piece of shite NYT advice columnist? Anthony Weiner?

NotCoach on November 9, 2012 at 10:46 PM

Also, it doesn’t seem like one would say “manage a project whose progress is seen worldwide as a demonstration of American leadership” to describe CIA director unless you were trying to be very cryptic, which is possible.

Mark1971 on November 9, 2012 at 10:45 PM

Yep, I’m thinking Anthony Weiner wrote the letter. Easy to mistake Hillary for a man.

NotCoach on November 9, 2012 at 10:47 PM

Is Paula Broadwell married? Also, it doesn’t seem like one would say “manage a project whose progress is seen worldwide as a demonstration of American leadership” to describe CIA director unless you were trying to be very cryptic, which is possible.

Mark1971 on November 9, 2012 at 10:45 PM

she is married with a kid

commodore on November 9, 2012 at 10:48 PM

“The future doesn’t belong to those who disrespect the Prophet of Allah” project is vital.

BL@KBIRD on November 9, 2012 at 10:49 PM

I heard on twitter that the affair ended in July and lasted for a year.

ninjapirate on November 9, 2012 at 10:50 PM

So in other words, only expose the affair in some high profile way if the man is a Republican politician. Good job concealing the agenda, New York Times.

vegconservative on November 9, 2012 at 10:43 PM

Good job admitting socons are hypocrites.

lester on November 9, 2012 at 10:51 PM

Here’s another Hmmmm, on twitter:

Pete Hoekstra ‏@petehoekstra
Patreaus resignation will get worse. There’s more here than meets the eye.

juliesa on November 9, 2012 at 10:51 PM

I read that Hoekstra tweet earlier. I don’t know if he’s really in a position to know what’s going on behind the scenes anymore.

Mark1971 on November 9, 2012 at 10:53 PM

Here’s another Hmmmm, on twitter:

Pete Hoekstra ‏@petehoekstra
Patreaus resignation will get worse. There’s more here than meets the eye.

juliesa on November 9, 2012 at 10:51 PM

He better leak some inside info on the Obama regime.

the_nile on November 9, 2012 at 10:55 PM

Or you could just kill the SOB outright.

MikeA on November 9, 2012 at 10:55 PM

typical alinsky nyt answer…your subjugation to the noble cause in honorable…right…read Witness…soviets spies had to do that too

r keller on November 9, 2012 at 10:56 PM

“Over-the-top honorable”

Ah, I see. Or rather, I don’t.

wte9 on November 9, 2012 at 10:57 PM

Re: Hoekstra

More than meets the eye? Cause quite a lot is meeting my eye.

wte9 on November 9, 2012 at 10:58 PM

Seems like this Petraeus story would be a good one for some journalist to make a solid career move on. Do we have any journalists here in Venezuela?

Rational Thought on November 9, 2012 at 11:02 PM

Seems like this Petraeus story would be a good one for some journalist to make a solid career move on. Do we have any journalists here in Venezuela?

Rational Thought on November 9, 2012 at 11:02 PM

That would be a negative.

Kataklysmic on November 9, 2012 at 11:06 PM

@Heminator: Since Romney didn’t win, narrowly averting saddling this country with the morality of the 1950s, why did Petraeus have to resign?

donkichi on November 9, 2012 at 11:06 PM

If Bush was in charge, they would have tracked this guy down, sniffed the whole thing out and exposed it to the public in the most damaging way possible.

WisCon on November 9, 2012 at 11:06 PM

***

He is engaged in work that I am passionate about and is absolutely the right person for the job. I strongly feel that exposing the affair will create a major distraction that would adversely impact the success of an important effort.

***

So this guy is so enamored of Obama and intent on getting Obama re-elected that he’s willing to sit in silence while a high-ranking Obama official is schtupping his wife?

Do we call this guy a Baracuckold?

BuckeyeSam on November 9, 2012 at 11:19 PM

If Bush was in charge, they would have tracked this guy down, sniffed the whole thing out and exposed it to the public in the most damaging way possible.

WisCon on November 9, 2012 at 11:06 PM

The woman’s kid would be followed to school, and classmates would be interviewed for backgroung.

BuckeyeSam on November 9, 2012 at 11:22 PM

Guns don’t kill people. Husbands who come home early do.

CurtZHP on November 9, 2012 at 11:24 PM

Do you admire this man so much that you haven’t asked your wife why she keeps having sex with him? I halfway suspect you’re writing this letter because you want specific people to read this column and deduce who is involved and what’s really going on behind closed doors (without actually addressing the conflict in person). That’s not ethical, either.

AP’s Hmmmmmmmm needs more mmmmmm’s

aquaviva on November 9, 2012 at 11:24 PM

This is grotesque. The advice here is that he has a moral obligation to expose the hypocrisy of a “family-values” politician, but otherwise it’s “beyond honorable” to keep it a secret.

theperfecteconomist on November 9, 2012 at 11:26 PM

My wife is having an affair with a government executive.

who gives a whoop?

Joseph Russo III on November 9, 2012 at 11:31 PM

Your wife is having an affair with a person you happen to respect. Why would that last detail change the way you respond to her cheating? Do you admire this man so much that you haven’t asked your wife why she keeps having sex with him?

Yeah. If Mrs. Broadwell was getting extra meat from Sam the butcher on The Brady Bunch, wouldn’t you have belted him in the brisket by now?

Ladysmith CulchaVulcha on November 9, 2012 at 11:44 PM

she is married with a kid

commodore on November 9, 2012 at 10:48 PM

Two kids:

http://www.porcelainonsteel.com/2010/03/honored-role-part-15-paula-broadwell-arc-of-a-driver/

And a lot more. Petraeus is a very accomplished man. She’s also in a league of her own:

A dual major in systems engineering and political geography, Paula ran cross-country and track, and competed in the high jump. She earned 12 varsity letters. “West Point was an intense and empowering experience. Everything is about performance. It fueled my passion for competition and developed my foundation for understanding the entire instrument of military power and its employment.”

Participating in a summer cadet exchange program in Israel solidified Paula’s desire to work in international, and foreign affairs. Graduating number one in physical fitness in West Point’s Class of 1995, a class whose size numbers 1015 with 87% men, and a passion for international travel and intelligence firmly cemented, Paula selected Military Intelligence Corps. She chose an initial posting to Korea to serve as a platoon leader on the DMZ.

Assignments of increasing responsibility followed in Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. They included the command of an International Defense Intelligence Agency Document Exploitation Unit in Bosnia and as a senior intelligence and security officer for the largest Military Police Battalion in the Army based in Mannheim, Germany. All of which served to spark an interest in covert military operations.

lester on November 9, 2012 at 11:49 PM

Sorry but it’s not my entorely fault. She throws herself at me. I still want you on our leadership team and if you could just look past this small indiscretion then we can get big things done. Phew, OK, I’m glad I got that off my chest. Now back to me and your wife’s 3rd hour of passionate sex. See you at the office tomorrow BTW I’ll be in late.

BoxHead1 on November 9, 2012 at 11:58 PM

entirely my

BoxHead1 on November 9, 2012 at 11:59 PM

btw, petraeus is a republican, isn’t he? just for the record.

sesquipedalian on November 10, 2012 at 12:14 AM

I wonder how long the FBI knew about this and sat on it…

d1carter on November 10, 2012 at 12:14 AM

btw, petraeus is a republican, isn’t he? just for the record.

sesquipedalian on November 10, 2012 at 12:14 AM

Yes, yes he is. I understand the appeal of leftism now. If you don’t aspire to live certain standards you can never fall. When you believe in nothing other than bribing the electorate in order to cling to power no one can ever call you a hypocrite. And the icing on the cake is on you still get to be the hip, cool, caring, and tolerant ones. Very seductive.

Kataklysmic on November 10, 2012 at 12:22 AM

Yes, guys…. She’s married with kids too

Can.I.be.in.the.middle on November 10, 2012 at 12:24 AM

+My wife is having an affair with a government executive. His role is to manage a project whose progress is seen worldwide as a demonstration of American leadership.

-Don’t expose the affair in any high-profile way.

Let´s imagine this article was written four years earlier

Dear Abby,

My husband is a prominent member of the Republican party. He is having an affair with another woman. What do I do?

Sincerely,
Concerned in Arizona

————————————–

Dear “Concerned in Arizona,”

Please just send us the pictures. We’ll take care of it for you.

Yours truly,
Dear Abby of the New York Times

Glenn Jericho on November 10, 2012 at 12:26 AM

btw, petraeus is a republican, isn’t he? just for the record.

sesquipedalian on November 10, 2012 at 12:14 AM

At least he’s one of the near extinct few who doesn’t babble nonstop about sanctity of marriage while cheating.

You want a true republican? Newt Gingrich.

lester on November 10, 2012 at 12:34 AM

And the icing on the cake is on you still get to be the hip, cool, caring, and tolerant ones.

Kataklysmic on November 10, 2012 at 12:22 AM

funny thing is, it’s all true.

sesquipedalian on November 10, 2012 at 12:35 AM

btw, petraeus is a republican, isn’t he? just for the record.

sesquipedalian on November 10, 2012 at 12:14 AM

Would that be republican, as in “Colin Powell is a republican?”

In light of how ridiculous the circumstances surrounding the official announcement are, the “truth” has to be absurd.

An Objectivist on November 10, 2012 at 12:48 AM

The CIA isn’t a family values organization?
[T]he truth will make you free.

Seth Halpern on November 10, 2012 at 12:53 AM

To bad Petraeus couldn’t have emulated real democrat values, like leaving a woman to drown in a car, or committed perjury and suborned perjury like those great and noble democrat statesmen. He would have been lionized by the dims.

Thomas More on November 10, 2012 at 1:02 AM

So now everyone is going to dig into this woman’s poor husband’s life to see if he was benefiting from the affair also. That’s just weird.

Cindy Munford on November 10, 2012 at 1:49 AM

From Instapundit’s site

Plus, blog comment of the day:

Okay. Just so we’ve all got our history right:

1990′s: Use an ill-timed military exercise to divert attention from the botched handling of an extramarital affair.

2010′s: Use an ill-timed extramarital affair to divert attention from the botched handling of a military exercise.

Cindy Munford on November 10, 2012 at 2:01 AM

Dear NAME WITHHELD,

You sound like a passive-aggressive wuss. Are you also in love with your wife’s lover? Are you holding out for more fringe-benefits?

In the end you’ll realize that affair was obvious to both and only confirmed what was already-apparent. You couldn’t put in the back-work of a senior citizen.

The idea of a man penning some passive-aggressive letter to an advice column would be stricken from most scripts for incredulity. Men don’t act like boys when another man threatens their household. At least take of your white gloves and slap him.

Capitalist Hog on November 10, 2012 at 4:09 AM

That’s just weird.

Cindy Munford on November 10, 2012 at 1:49 AM

Journalism feeds off of information and readership. The story isn’t over so there’s still info. And you will read every word once it’s printed. Or you’ll read a blog post that summarizes it and pretend you don’t consume lamestream-media.

Capitalist Hog on November 10, 2012 at 4:11 AM

So now everyone is going to dig into this woman’s poor husband’s life to see if he was benefiting from the affair also. That’s just weird.

Cindy Munford on November 10, 2012 at 1:49 AM

Wouldn’t the sales of the book she wrote be how he benefits? That was my thought when I read this.

Meanwhile, I would imagine Pete Hoekstra (retired US House member, chair of the intelligence committee for many years) has enough connections to have an idea how many shoes are go to drop on this whole benghazi thing as well as what mud Patreus is wallowing in. Too bad he was so slandered and outspent in the recent MI Senate race by the 2 term useless incumbent. He could have been useful being a voice in DC right now.

karenhasfreedom on November 10, 2012 at 4:28 AM