I'm not asking because I really do not give a shiat.

I've been studiously avoiding the details of this whole Petraeus shiat-blizzard, because everything outside of "super effective general resigns over consensual adult sexual relationship" just seems so transparently salacious and petty and irrelevant. I don't GIVE a shiat who these women are.

Then this would be a good time to stop writing.

She has a point. There is a double standard. But in this case it's also true that the public already knows who Petraeus is. And (because of the obvious power differential) they dont have to dig too deep to try to figure out his motivations. These women are an unknown and its not completely clear what their motivations are. It is possible that Broadwell fell in love with him but there are so many other possible motives that speculation is inevitable.

I admit it's hard to divide out the salacious crap, but the whole situation does reveal some serious flaws. Military starfarkers seeking personal privilege. Poor scrutiny leading to potential intelligence vulnerabilities. A roguish (and shirtless) FBI agent who went crying to a buddy in Congress. The point at which the Commander in Chief was informed. There are some lessons to be learned here that I'm afraid will be subsumed by the soap opera.

It's really amazing that an affair causes media soul-searching when it comes to their soft treatment of Petraeus. Not the consequences of going to war or military surges, but- an affair. Wow.

And who among us hasn't been a honey hungry dickzilla in heat at some point?

Diogenes: I admit it's hard to divide out the salacious crap, but the whole situation does reveal some serious flaws. Military starfarkers seeking personal privilege. Poor scrutiny leading to potential intelligence vulnerabilities. A roguish (and shirtless) FBI agent who went crying to a buddy in Congress. The point at which the Commander in Chief was informed. There are some lessons to be learned here that I'm afraid will be subsumed by the soap opera.

Well said on all points.

Diogenes: I admit it's hard to divide out the salacious crap, but the whole situation does reveal some serious flaws. Military starfarkers seeking personal privilege. Poor scrutiny leading to potential intelligence vulnerabilities. A roguish (and shirtless) FBI agent who went crying to a buddy in Congress. The point at which the Commander in Chief was informed. There are some lessons to be learned here that I'm afraid will be subsumed by the soap opera.

Someone on MSNBC said that this whole thing sounds like if EL James and Tom Clancy wrote a collaborative novel:

"50 Shades of Red October"

Please refer to the South Park episode "Sexual Healing".

I'm just surprised by the existence of skanks that chase Generals. It sounds like the setup to a scene on the General's desk with Jill Kelly.

/cue the casio beat
/yes, i'm aware i missed an e

Why is nobody asking whether David Petraeus is a honey-hungry dickzilla in heat?

Lessee. Married, two women on the side. I'ma go with:

Is Dickzilla related to Fartzilla?

Today I learned two phrases, "Chubby Bunny" and "Butt Chug". I would probably just refer to David Petraeus as a spinal column in a uniform.

quickdraw: She has a point. There is a double standard. But in this case it's also true that the public already knows who Petraeus is. And (because of the obvious power differential) they dont have to dig too deep to try to figure out his motivations. These women are an unknown and its not completely clear what their motivations are. It is possible that Broadwell fell in love with him but there are so many other possible motives that speculation is inevitable.

If Broadwell hadn't gone bunny-boiler, the story probably never would have surfaced. That gives a reason for a double standard.

Meanwhile, I've read other articles talking about men cheating, claiming that women are more moral. So who are the men cheating with?

Now gawker is republishing jezebel's crap? Soon it will be an even bigger vortex of suck.

Because nobody but you gives a fark, that's why.

Is there a collection of all the FARK band names?

Well at least he's not a Crazed Sex Poodle.

Number 3 in GIS for "Dick Zilla":



Most of the rest were pretty much what you would assume.

My issue with positions of responsibility and affairs, the generic answer says they are more liable for blackmail rather than point out that if you cheat on/be dishonest with your wife, is there actually anything you will NOT be dishonest about?

anotar: My issue with positions of responsibility and affairs, the generic answer says they are more liable for blackmail rather than point out that if you cheat on/be dishonest with your wife, is there actually anything you will NOT be dishonest about?

anotar: My issue with positions of responsibility and affairs, the generic answer says they are more liable for blackmail rather than point out that if you cheat on/be dishonest with your wife, is there actually anything you will NOT be dishonest about?

Well, seeing how Bill Clinton got to serve out his term of office, I'm still not seeing the reason that Petraeus has to go. Maybe political power is exempt, while political appointee is not?

I'll be Lisa Simpson and give the answer to the question no one asked; Because one look at his wife makes it clear why he would cheat on her. Not saying he should have, but I understand.

Jezebel continues to be the lowest form of journalism setting women back 30 years.

Marshal805: I'll be Lisa Simpson and give the answer to the question no one asked; Because one look at his wife makes it clear why he would cheat on her. Not saying he should have, but I understand.

Ding, ding, ding we have a winner!

I think "honey-hungry dickzilla" is kinda obvious. Most men fark women who aren't their wives because they wanna fark someone who isn't their wife.

But because women's motivations for farking someone are not always strictly sexual, those motives are up for "debate." Esp. when the power/income/fame differential is so significant.

My question is why 40-something women behave like middle schoolers (or one of them did, at least). From what I can tell, if either one had acted with the maturity adult women are supposed to possess, nobody would have found out about any of this shiat.

Note: When you ask the FBI to investigate emails being sent to a high-ranking general, they investigate ALL the emails, not just the ones you're worried about. And if you don't want people to think you're trying to hump the general, maybe you don't send him thousands of "flirtatious" emails.

Just saying, there are different tones you use when communicating with people. When you're communicating with a general you are not married to, maybe cut down on the frequency of the messages and keep it strictly business when you do communicate.

TFA also contains the phrase "hookerish, jizz-misting snatch-hound" which is much more awesome.

Gulper Eel: And who among us hasn't been a honey hungry dickzilla in heat at some point?

Some of my best friends are honey hungry dickzillas.

/dont judge

Yah, it's a mystery no one's wondering if a man is likely to nail a woman who all but sits on his face. Why is no one ferreting out the answer to that enigma??

1. Because of he changed mufflers at the local Midas shop, no woman as attractive as Paula Broadwell would bother wih him.

2. Because all men are dickzillas to some extent.

Because if men truly will fark any attractive woman that allows them to, then it is up to the women to decide whether the farking happens. I mean, that is the paradigm, right, that women always decide, and that any women can get laid if she wants to, and that it is only men who go through sexual droughts unwillingly?

Marshal805: I'll be Lisa Simpson and give the answer to the question no one asked; Because one look at his wife makes it clear why he would cheat on her. Not saying he should have, but I understand.

She is a 60 year old lady! Give me a break. Looks have nothing to do with the ability to keep it in your pants, especially when cheating means losing so farking much. He easily could have gone on a date with Mary Palm and her 5 sisters thinking about her instead.

I'll flip it as well, why would she want to bang a 60 year old man? A man who could easily be her Dad. Ewwww. Especially when her hubby is cuter than him IMHO.

cherryl taggart: anotar: My issue with positions of responsibility and affairs, the generic answer says they are more liable for blackmail rather than point out that if you cheat on/be dishonest with your wife, is there actually anything you will NOT be dishonest about?

anotar: My issue with positions of responsibility and affairs, the generic answer says they are more liable for blackmail rather than point out that if you cheat on/be dishonest with your wife, is there actually anything you will NOT be dishonest about?

Well, seeing how Bill Clinton got to serve out his term of office, I'm still not seeing the reason that Petraeus has to go. Maybe political power is exempt, while political appointee is not?

He's the head of the CIA and can NOT have affairs due to honeypots, blackmailing, etc.

shortymac: Marshal805: I'll be Lisa Simpson and give the answer to the question no one asked; Because one look at his wife makes it clear why he would cheat on her. Not saying he should have, but I understand.

She is a 60 year old lady! Give me a break. Looks have nothing to do with the ability to keep it in your pants, especially when cheating means losing so farking much. He easily could have gone on a date with Mary Palm and her 5 sisters thinking about her instead.

I'll flip it as well, why would she want to bang a 60 year old man? A man who could easily be her Dad. Ewwww. Especially when her hubby is cuter than him IMHO.

Money and/or power.

Going to have to get that on a shirt.

scanman61: shortymac: Marshal805: I'll be Lisa Simpson and give the answer to the question no one asked; Because one look at his wife makes it clear why he would cheat on her. Not saying he should have, but I understand.

She is a 60 year old lady! Give me a break. Looks have nothing to do with the ability to keep it in your pants, especially when cheating means losing so farking much. He easily could have gone on a date with Mary Palm and her 5 sisters thinking about her instead.

I'll flip it as well, why would she want to bang a 60 year old man? A man who could easily be her Dad. Ewwww. Especially when her hubby is cuter than him IMHO.

Money and/or power.

That's just as dumb as saying "well his wife is ugly".

shortymac: I'll flip it as well, why would she want to bang a 60 year old man?

See this guy?



Henry Kissinger plowed his way through Diane Sawyer, Candice Bergen, Jill St. John, Shirley Maclaine, and Liv Ullman in their primes, despite looking like Henry Kissinger.

shortymac: Marshal805: I'll be Lisa Simpson and give the answer to the question no one asked; Because one look at his wife makes it clear why he would cheat on her. Not saying he should have, but I understand.

She is a 60 year old lady! Give me a break. Looks have nothing to do with the ability to keep it in your pants, especially when cheating means losing so farking much. He easily could have gone on a date with Mary Palm and her 5 sisters thinking about her instead.

I'll flip it as well, why would she want to bang a 60 year old man? A man who could easily be her Dad. Ewwww. Especially when her hubby is cuter than him IMHO.

I believe they're called "daddy issues."

Also, power is an aphrodesiac.

None of this stuff's particularly new nor surprising.

If you look throughout history all great men have been full of lust.

CigaretteSmokingMan: If you look throughout history all great men have been full of lust.

FTFY

/Great men just have an easier time.