Notes on Politics: Jenny Sanford Goes Public and Gets Critiqued

Jenny Sanford -- the soon-to-be-ex-wife of South Carolina Gov. Mark "Don't Cry for Me Argentina" Sanford -- has been all over the media promoting her memoir, Staying True, about her life with the man who humiliated her by going on national television and tearfully declaring that his mistress was his "soul mate."

Sanford's the anti-Good Wife, the lead character of a CBS drama about a wife who has remained married to her philandering politician husband (who slept with prostitutes) who's incarcerated on charges of political corruption. Jenny Sanford decided she wasn't going to put up with her husband's insane behavior any longer, after several attempts to reconcile with him. So she's divorcing Mark Sanford and wrote a book about their experiences together. Jenny Sanford, who took time off from her career to raise the Sanfords' four boys and provide political advice to her husband, says she wants to return to work soon, but in the meantime, she's promoting Staying True and fielding criticism for doing so.

When she appeared on MSNBC's Morning Joe this morning, co-host Mika Brzezinski said that Jenny Sanford "chose a public route with this book" and asked how her four children are handling all of this publicity. Sanford responded, rightfully so, by pointing out that it was her husband who made this all public in the first place, whose e-mails to and from his lover were read from coast-to-coast. "It would not have been my choice to bring this scandal out in the light," Sanford said. (She also appeared on The Daily Show where she was asked a similar question.)

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Going ahead and writing this book has made Jenny Sanford the target of criticism and public debate about her own level of responsibility for her predicament and whether she's hurting her children by speaking out publicly:

On Huffington Post, there was an entry debating whether she should've stayed with her cheating husband.

The Washington Post pinned the blame on Sanford for putting up with mistreatment, with writer Ruth Marcus commenting, ". . . [T]he most disappointing part of Staying True is that, consciously or not, Jenny Sanford reveals her own complicity -- not in facilitating her husband's affair, but in allowing herself to be treated so badly for so long."

PunditMom was likewise disappointed in Jenny Sanford after reading excerpts from her memoir, saying, "By marrying [Mark Sanford] and allowing her sons to see her treated in such a casually neglectful way, it sure doesn’t seem like she stayed true to herself or to her obligation as a parent to give her children an example of what a healthy marriage should look like . . . Clearly, their marriage was lacking. One could say, well that’s just between them, but it isn’t — they have four sons who’ve watched and learned about what a woman is willing to put up with for the sake of keeping her man, even a louse who acts like he couldn’t care less."

The same criticism could and has been lobbed at Hillary Clinton -- who also wrote a book mentioning her husband's mistreatment -- as well as at other wives of male politicians who've not only publicly discussed their husband's infidelity but remained married to the men who have treated them poorly, and in full view of their children. I'm of the mind that it's really, really difficult to say what you, personally, would do if you were Jenny Sanford or Hillary Clinton. It makes me uncomfortable to judge women as strong (or good role models) based on whether they stay or leave their cheating husbands, or whether they put their own story out into the public sphere or suffer in silence (like Silda Spitzer).

I keep thinking of Elizabeth Edwards who wrote her own memoir detailing her response to learning that her husband John had cheated on her, and decided that she'd stay married to him. A year later, after all manner of scandal and searingly awful personal details have come out about Elizabeth and John Edwards and John's mistress (and his love child), and the couple has announced their separation. Am I going to judge Elizabeth Edwards for writing her book, talking publicly about the pain John caused her and her decision to stay with him in 2009, and now, a year later, she's changed her mind? Nope. I'm not Elizabeth Edwards. And I'm not Jenny Sanford nor am I Hillary Clinton. I feel for all of these women and hope that they, and their children, can somehow find some peace amid the wreckage caused by their cheating husbands.

Image credit: Jenny Sanford's web site.

Say What? A 'Gilmore Girls' Movie? Is This a Joke?

Entertainment Weekly’s Michael Ausiello is usually on the mark when it comes to intel on all things TV. So when I read his report that the creative genius behind the fast-talking quirkfest that was the Gilmore Girls, Amy Sherman-Palladino, had said that not only did she not watch its series finale (she left the show before the final season), but that she had other season-ending plans for the characters AND that she wouldn’t reveal those plans because there might be a movie in the future, I went, “Hold on, what? A movie? Is this like the ghost that is an Arrested Development movie, which keeps getting discussed forever but never actually happens? Or is this like a Sex and the City movie that’ll actually see the light of day?”

I, for one, would love to see some fresh Gilmore material on the silver screen. I miss those wise, loquacious Gilmores and wasn’t quite satisfied with how the show ended. (They live on in repeats on ABC Family.) When the series wrapped in May 2007, Kelly Bishop, who played Emily Gilmore with exquisite aplomb, told the Washington Post that she felt as though the finale didn’t provide an adequate conclusion to Gilmore Girls and was “disrespectful” to the show’s many fans. “I felt like the bottom dropped out,” Bishop said.

While we fans wait patiently for any glimmer of news about even the mere possibility of a Gilmore Girls film, GG alumni have been popping up on a wide variety of TV shows:

Roles have been particularly plentiful for Rory’s old boyfriends. Rory’s first love Dean (Jared Padalecki) has been starring in The CW drama Supernatural (about Lucifer, demons and the like) for several years. Rory’s second boyfriend, Jess (Milo Ventimiglia) has had the most high profile role of all the Gilmore alums to date, starring in NBC's Heroes as Peter Petrelli, a man who absorbs superpowers of others. (Ironically, the woman who plays Peter Peterelli’s mother Angela -- Cristine Rose -- played Rory’s grandmother, Francine Hayden for two Gilmore Girls episodes.)

Rory’s final boyfriend – who proposed marriage to her at a party celebrating her graduation from Yale, and then she shot down his offer -- Matt Czuchry is a supporting character on CBS’ The Good Wife, playing a smarmy, over-confident young defense lawyer competing against Julianna Margulies. In recent The Good Wife episodes, Chilton Academy grad Francie (Emily Bergl), who tangled with Rory in the Chilton student government, also showed up as another junior associate at the defense firm after having appeared in 36 episodes of ABC’s Men in Trees for years.

Lauren Graham -- the queen mama Lorelai Gilmore who’s been in a number of films like Evan Almighty and Flash of Genius – was recently added to the cast of Parenthood, after Maura Tierney dropped out after she was diagnosed with breast cancer. (Tierney’s 44 by the way, an interesting fact for the US Preventive Services Task Force which wants to stop fortysomethings from getting mammograms.) I adored the 1989 film Parenthood and can only hope that the TV show adaptation is a fraction as good.

Among other Gilmore castmates, Lorelai’s ex-husband, Christopher Hayden (David Sutcliffe) appeared in a dozen or so episodes of Private Practice as Kate Walsh’s cop love interest. Others who’ve also appeared on Private Practice include: Lane Kim (Keiko Agena), Miss Patty (Liz Torres) and Sookie St. James (Melissa McCarthy) who’s slated to appear on the medical drama soon, now that her comedy Samantha Who? has been canceled.

Sadly, the only thing I’ve seen of Kelly Bishop was a one episode guest appearance on Army Wives. And we haven't seen a lot of Alexis Bledel, Rory the brilliant, who has appeared in a couple of films (the Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants movies and the poorly received Post Grad this year). I’m still waiting for her to find a new role in which she’ll shine.

Another interesting factoid about Gilmore alums: Several have appeared on Grey’s Anatomy, including: Richard Gilmore (Edward Herrmann), Paris Geller (Liza Weil), Mrs. Kim (Emily Kuroda) and Liz Danes (Kathleen Wilhoite).

Fun Gilmore trivia: Which award-winning actor played a man who took Lorelai Gilmore on one of the most boring dates of all time? Place your guesses in the comments section.

So, Gilmore Girls fans, any interest in a movie?

Image credit: ABC Family.

Suburban Mom's Political Fix: Obama Health Care Speech to Congress

On the speech last night that President Obama gave to a joint session of Congress, I'm going to quote the Washington Post's Tom Shales:

"Obama came across like Jimmy Stewart in Mr. Smith Goes to Washington: a bright-eyed young idealist up against entrenched power, old ideas and obstructionism.

It was also a chance for Obama to go on national television and look presidential again, asserting himself in ways that helped make up for the past few months of perceived defensiveness, of appearing to kowtow to other powers, and of seeming to do more following than leading."

I think the comparison to Stewart is apt. As an event of pure political theater, Obama was blunt, eager, tough and idealistic and seemed to grab the debate by the lapels and provide overarching themes with which most reasonable people -- Republican or Democrat -- would agree. Who thinks you should be banned from obtaining health coverage because you have a pre-existing condition? Who thinks American families should be bankrupted by their health care bills? Who thinks it's morally right for folks to be unceremoniously dropped by their health insurance company -- even though they diligently paid their premiums and deductibles -- when someone covered by their health insurance policy gets sick, or whose medical bills exceed a cap the insurance company has placed upon the family? I doubt you're going to find folks willing to say that all of those things are okay with them. (And if you do, it'll likely be someone named Mr. Potter, who had a run-in with Jimmy Stewart in another film, It's a Wonderful Life.)

When the president spoke of not adding "a dime to the deficit" with this new health care reform proposal, that he'd ask for a provision to be included in a bill to implement cuts if the promised millions in savings didn't materialize as he believed they would, those are sentiments around which most folks can rally.

The problem is, that's what they are, notions. We have no idea if they're going to eventually be true, no matter how much the president may want them to be because, lest we forget, he's not the one who makes laws. That's Congress' messy, messy, horse-trading job. What if the not "a dime to the deficit" has to be sacrificed in some deal to secure a bill's passage? Then Obama will have made a promise that Democratic senators and congressmen and women couldn't keep.

I went to the US Senate and House web sites and found links to two seemingly prominent versions of health care reform bills -- HR 3200 at 1,017 pages, the Senate bill passed by the Senate Committee on Health at 839 pages -- and haven't yet plowed through them.

Simply put, I'm left wondering what health care reform would really look like beyond the sweeping statements; the outcome of such reform would be very personal because it involves my family's health care. While some people may have liked the sound of the things the president is saying in general about the overhaul of one-sixth of the U.S. economy, when it comes down to the nitty-gritty implementation people, those for and against reform, get wary.

When President Obama last night said "significant details need to be worked out," laughter could be heard, only the president wasn't laughing. What's that old adage, the devil is in the details?

Letterman Doesn't Get It

So David Letterman has now formally apologized to the Palin family for the joke he made about a Palin daughter getting "knocked up" by A-Rod. During his show last night, Letterman went on and on about how people just didn't seem to get the joke he told. He kept saying that he didn't realize that the daughter who appeared at the New York Yankees game with Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin was the Palin's 14-year-old daughter Willow. He thought the girl accompanying Gov. Palin was her 18-year-old daughter Bristol, the one who had the baby and who has appeared on People Magazine's cover offering herself up as a cautionary tale to other teens. (She told the magazine, "Girls need to imagine and picture their life with a screaming newborn baby and then think before they have sex. Think about the consequences.")

During his "apology" last night, Letterman said, "There's no getting around it, but I never thought it was anybody other than the older daughter, and before the show, I checked to make sure in fact that she is of legal age, 18." He added that after seeing a PBS commentator complain about the joke he thought, "Oh boy, now I'm beginning to understand what the problem is here. It's the perception rather than the intent." (Link to video here.)



Beyond the incompetence of Letterman's staff -- they didn't know which daughter was in Yankee Stadium, fact-checking always bites you in the behind if you don't do it -- there's the notion that, at the root of this, it's funny and okay and acceptable to mock an 18-year-old girl for having a baby, to shame her because of her mother's conservative politics and polarizing public persona. It's amusing to make sport of a life-altering mistake for which Bristol is trying to atone by telling fellow teens that life's no picnic now that she's a teen mom.

Letterman is not alone in using the teenaged Bristol Palin's pregnancy as a punch line. A writer at The Washington Post did some digging and discovered that other late night hosts used Bristol's pregnancy more often than Letterman:

"Through mid-March, Leno had made 15 jokes about the Palin daughter's pregnancy, Stewart had told four on 'The Daily Show,' and Letterman checked in with eight, according to an analysis of late-night humor by the Center for Media and Public Affairs, a nonpartisan research organization affiliated with George Mason University.

The comedian most likely to bash Bristol Palin? O'Brien, with 20 jokes at her expense."

Telling a joke that uses the offspring of a politician -- a teenager to boot -- as the butt of a joke, leaves a trail of slimy residue behind. The children of politicians shouldn't be fair game. Do all the jokes you want to about the politicians and celebs who make their living off of garnering public attention, but somewhere, there should be some boundaries which protect the children. (True Bristol's 18, but she can't even drink legally yet.) I'm all for cutting, edgy humor, but maybe the late night comics should choose their targets more wisely. Bottom line: Letterman's protestations and intent aside, he told a joke about a 14-year-old, not the 18-year-old. Not cool.