Beauty and the Beast
Two stories this week have photos: the sexy mayor of Arlington, Ore., and the idiot robber using a bottle of cologne as a weapon. First, the moron. Subscribe for Free! You knew I meant the robber, right? Yes, well. Here's his story: The Smell of Failure An employee of a video store in Akron, Ohio, was standing outside talking with an employee of a nearby tanning salon when a man approached them. The man was wearing a hooded sweatshirt and a scarf covering his face; he indicated he had a gun in his pocket and ordered the two men to go inside. When the video employee turned to go in, the tanning employee jumped the robber. In the resulting fight, the robber's "gun" broke; it was a bottle of Stetson cologne, blackened with a permanent marker. The contents spilled all over the robber, who the two employees held until police arrived. Michael Kaminski, 41, was charged with aggravated robbery and carrying a concealed weapon -- a knife. (Akron Beacon Journal) ...He's not completely incompetent: he knew which weapon was more deadly. I just love his mug shot, which demonstrates both what a classic moron looks like, as well as the beating he got from his victims:
After the Beast, we have Beauty: Expectation of Privacy Carmen Kontur-Gronquist, the mayor of Arlington, Ore., was indignant that local residents found a photo she posted on her MySpace page. It shows the very fit politician wearing only a black bra and panties standing by one of the town's fire trucks. Why did she expect privacy online? "That's my space," she said. "That's why they call it MySpace." Voters recalled her from office, 142 to 139, with virtually all of the town's registered voters casting a vote. (Pendleton East Oregonian) ...It's not often that voters object to a politician proving she has nothing to hide. The photo:
There was a bit of argument from readers over the story. Some of the bigger papers, up in Portland, reported that residents were upset with the mayor over other issues, involving her management of a municipal golf course, and allegedly ignoring open meeting laws when she conducted city business. The photo, they said, was beside the point. Also, they note she didn't post the photo herself, that it was designed to attract men for dating, and thus she obviously didn't have any "expectation of privacy". Well, the somewhat more local newspapers concentrated on the photo over the other issues, and what's her "That's why they call it MySpace" statement about if not that it's not any of the public's business? In any case, I do stand by my summary of the source article I identified -- two, actually, here and here (Sorry: the stories are now old enough to require payment to see them). Certainly one does lose detail when reducing more than 700 words of news coverage to 80. One of the details left out to save space included her quote, "Just because I have a political seat [doesn't] mean I [don't] have a private life." -- she indeed does address the privacy issue. As to the exact reason(s) the townspeople (barely) recalled her, you'll have to ask them. With a vote that close, there were obviously mixed feelings in town. If I was voting, I certainly wouldn't condemn her for a tasteful photo -- would you? But I might give her the thumbs down if I thought she was a poor manager, since that does speak to the task she was hired for. The photo doesn't. Blog Updates
|
Most Recent Comments
The gal sure did show a major lack of knowledge regarding MySpace, of course, and seriously poor political judgment.
If, as seems to be the case, she did this (1) while working at the fire department (and thus with legitimate access), (2) did so on her own time, and (3) entirely at her own expense -- so what?
The charges she mismanaged a golf course and violated open-meeting laws -- those are more important, especially the latter (since poor management isn't itself against the law, while ignoring meeting requirements is).
BTW, while I don't care for President Bush myself, what's he got to do with this story? We're talking a small-town mayor clear across the country, not some senior Administration official with strong influence in the Oval Office. (I even read a similar blast in a discussion forum in which people were discussing the results of a *sporting* event, one not at all controversial or involving allegations of anything. Sigh.)
Posted by: Mekhong Kurt, Bangkok, Thailand | April 11, 2008 11:08 PM
His point regarding the president is that nowadays, in our society sex is seen as something bad and a reason to impeach someone from public office but blatantly ignoring the constitution and sending thousands of young people to pointless deaths is perfectly acceptable.
The point is that the citizens of this country are a bunch of misguided idiots and we get what we deserve.
Posted by: JD, Oakland CA, | April 13, 2008 12:51 AM
I lived in the Washington DC Area for over 20 years. My house was blocks away from the DC Maryland line so naturally our neighborhood was full of politicians, professional lobbyists, and lots of government workers. And not just Federal government, but state and local employees as well. That said, I've observed time and time again that if someone is a schnook in his or her public life, they are pretty much the same thing in their personal lives as well and vice versa.
Very few people have what it takes to be more than one person for in public and another in private. I've known people (and politicians) who do play to whatever audience is handy but that sort of thing tends to break down over time. Or maybe the folks who can do that convincingly wind up working in the black world. Espionage, security, law enforcement and intelligence work employs a lot of people. In fact, I suspect there are more spooks than any other kind of government employee but demographic profiles don't contain that information. Politics probably gets what's left over.
Now for Mayor Kontur-Gronquist posing in boy cut panties, six pack abs, and push-up bra in a municipal fire truck. Everything about that inept "portrait" (because it IS a portrait) makes a bold but unintentionally amusing statement about her fantasy life. It doesn't matter that it may have happened several years ago. What we see is a wannabe superhero with a spray-on tan posing in her underwear. I suspect she naively expected it to speak powerfully to her leadership ability, resident sex symbol and advertisement about the benefits of a Gold's Gym membership. Instead, we think she should have consulted a competent political advisor. He'd have advised her against posting this disastrous low budget beefcake/cheesecake photo. After he peed his pants laughing.
As for who paid for the pictures and were public funds tapped for the bill: it doesn't matter. Mayor Kontur-Gronquist probably paid for these amateur photos out of her own pocket. What matters is that she's posing with something that belongs to the city. That plops the whole thing into a bad and possibly illegal judgment call UNLESS she consulted with the city legal advisor AND had written permission before she did it. It doesn't really matter when the photo was taken.
In essence, she appropriated public resources and took something that didn't belong to her. Now as mayor, she represented the city in a way that at least part of the electorate finds objectionable and embarrassing. And she made that image available to anyone in the world with internet access. She was not merely representing herself in that picture, the fire truck prop made it a public statement made with public resources.
Mayor Kontur-Gronquist should never have posted the photo on the web to start with, but she definitely should have yanked this off her web page before she even ran for mayor. These are some big mistakes, but she would probably have reduced the repercussions if she'd responded with humility and humor, admitted to making a ridiculous mistake and rode things out. Her "creative" defenses make her seem venal and stupid. It's like Larry Craig trying to recall his guilty plea and rewrite the history of what really happened in that airport toilet. We the public know better and all the verbal puffery in the world just convinces us otherwise.
Many public figures who've been caught in an embarrassing or compromising position declare he or she should be judged solely on performance as a public servant. However, when it comes to public office holders, poor judgment in one area invariably ripples out into other areas, plus the lapses in judgment continue getting worse. If Mayor Kontur-Gronquist can't see how her conduct was inappropriate here, then there's no way she's going to be able to navigate the complexities of leadership required for city government.
Posted by: Barbara in Utah | April 15, 2008 3:05 AM