I am convinced that the Congressional offices are full of dealers and hos.

May 19, 2004 8:48 AM

The sensationally sordid Staff Ass sex scandal. Young DC congressional staff assistant starts juicy blog. (edited cache). Blog describes carryings on with many men, including a married Bush appointee who pays her for sex. Washington's most amusing and best read new blogger, Wonkette, links to it, picking out choice quotes. Within hours, the blog is gone, the girl is fired. Now another blogger outs the girl's boss as a Republican Senator. Fun!
posted by CunningLinguist (167 comments total)

Sordid is right. And that is one stupid girl (I'm assuming she wanted to keep her job).
posted by orange swan at 8:59 AM on May 19, 2004

What a wonderful story.
posted by ColdChef at 9:02 AM on May 19, 2004

Heart-warming stuff.
posted by The God Complex at 9:03 AM on May 19, 2004

I rather like the Wonkette blog though, so thanks for that CL.
posted by orange swan at 9:08 AM on May 19, 2004

this is all the fault of those disgusting same-sex marriage homos. now thier egregious behavior is actually breaking down the moral infrastructure of Our Nation's Capitol.
posted by quonsar at 9:08 AM on May 19, 2004

I'm assuming she wanted to keep her job

If it weren't for Monica Lewinsky, I'd go right out and say that I think this way because there's no way anyone smart enough to get an entry-level job in a politician's office would be stupid enough to do something like this. But I digress.

I'm assuming she didn't want to keep her job at all. If this is all true, this girl was smart enough to realize that there's a lot better alternatives to a $25,000 salary- like deliberately writing about her personal life with a political-gossip angle in what would, at her inevitable discovery and firing, almost guarantee a book deal.

I'm not on anyone's side with this, and i'm not trying to villify her in any way, but she's writing about selling sex to politicians. "Suprise" at people taking notice of that sort of gets a few blinks from this end.

As for Wonkette, the news and commentary is pretty good, but... okay. I get it. You like cock and ass. Really, that's not getting boring at all.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 9:13 AM on May 19, 2004

the moral infrastructure of Our Nation's Capitol.

/me snickers uncontrollably
posted by trondant at 9:13 AM on May 19, 2004

This is very good news! No outsourcing for that chick. Free market enterprize intead of relying upon the govt for money (enough to live on); good use of tax-payers money rather than going to the Military. Why does anyone want to become an intern/staffer in DC? So they can get to the center of the govt and get fucked directly rather than by proxie?
posted by Postroad at 9:14 AM on May 19, 2004

naive girl being used for sex by six guys... Seems to think she's the one in charge and a sex in the city character from reading her blog... Gets fired for being (and not knowing that she really is) very stupid..

As far as I can tell she was only selling (ass) sex to one guy... She gave it away for free to the interns and co-workers in her office.
posted by crank at 9:19 AM on May 19, 2004

It's hysterical (and she's stupid for blogging about it)--who is the senator that only does anal with her? Is it DeWine? (I'm betting DeLay or someone of that ilk)
posted by amberglow at 9:20 AM on May 19, 2004

You like cock and ass. Really, that's not getting boring at all.

Well, to be fair, I think women talking about anal sex will always be interesting.

But I digress. I'm not surprised that shit like this is going on, simply because it's DC, and power will lead people to do all kinds of crazy shit. But here's an interesting thought: for years, having sex with a powerful/famous/rich man and threatening to expose him was probably a profitable blackmail scam. These days the rewards of exposing him probably outweigh the rewards of the blackmail. Just a thought. What it signifies I'm not sure.
posted by jonmc at 9:23 AM on May 19, 2004

including a married Bush appointee who pays her for sex

We apparently need the Defense of Marriage act and Federal Marriage Amendment now!
posted by mathowie at 9:27 AM on May 19, 2004

"Well, to be fair, I think women talking about anal sex will always be interesting."

You're damn right Jon, I'm thinking about posting this little nugget in the AskMe thread about dating: A man who tries to fuck you in the ass when you are sober does not love you. He should at least take you out for a few drinks to spare you the pain.
posted by eastlakestandard at 9:31 AM on May 19, 2004

Republicans are boring through the moral fabric of this great nation like weevils.
posted by troutfishing at 9:31 AM on May 19, 2004

Republicans are boring...

you coulda stopped there, trout.
posted by jonmc at 9:34 AM on May 19, 2004

why isn't Drudge all over this story?
*snicker*
ah, the sour taste of moral equivalency.

I blame Ted Kennedy
posted by matteo at 9:34 AM on May 19, 2004

I so v. much hate the v. (foo) construction that I'm v. consumed with the urge to break shit all over the office. Yet somehow I read the whole thing.
posted by furiousthought at 9:35 AM on May 19, 2004

shit like this is going on, simply because it's DC

unlike the rest of the planet? Monkeys are the same no matter what the day job is.
posted by stbalbach at 9:42 AM on May 19, 2004

stbalbach: proximity to power ups the ante on that score, is all I was saying.
posted by jonmc at 9:49 AM on May 19, 2004

My vagina is ready for Congress.
posted by dfowler at 9:52 AM on May 19, 2004

Didn't you read the links? It's not exactly your vagina they want.
posted by Ignatius J. Reilly at 9:55 AM on May 19, 2004

re: A man who tries to fuck you in the ass when you are sober does not love you. He should at least take you out for a few drinks to spare you the pain.

If it hurts, you're not doing it right. Unless, of course, you like pain, and then you're doing it right.
posted by Irontom at 10:03 AM on May 19, 2004

Just so you all know, I'm "T".

/Disclosure
posted by mcgraw at 10:05 AM on May 19, 2004

I know I'm hot and all, but no pictures please!

What a thoroughly detestable woman... actually "female" is a better term, cuz that's no woman. She pretty much embodies everything horrid that a female person can embody, IMO. And clearly, there are lots and lots of girls like this out there, whoring. Yes, I said whoring, because that's what she was doing - and will likely continue to do for the rest of her pathetic, insipid life. How many women do this, and think it's perfectly all right to do?

I'm all for women's sexual freedom, but as pointed out that's not what this is. This is a dumbass chick whoring herself out and acting like it's the OMG TOTALLY RAD COOL THING TO DO, FER SHERR!!! LIKE, I LIKE MONEY AND I NEED CUTE SHOES, SO I DO MARRIED GUYS FOR MONEY, BECAUSE I LIKE MONEY!!!

Guh. Disgusting. Pardon me while I puke.

on preview... geez, I'm so disgusted by this I can't even come up with some snide anti-Repub commment. What's the world coming to...
posted by zoogleplex at 10:11 AM on May 19, 2004

According to Wonkette, people have already e-mailed her with "job offers" and a potential book deal for this girl.
posted by mojo80 at 10:12 AM on May 19, 2004

furiousthought, do the world a favor and take the extra half second to type VERY out, v. is incredibly irritating.

Otherwise, why are all of these guys in power too cheap to pay a hooker who'll keep her mouth shut? Instead they have to jab subordinates who will, inevitably, figure out that they can use the sex against them.

By the way, Mike Devine, the presumed backdoor lover, was on the committee to try and impeach Clinton. But I'm sure that was totally different!
posted by fenriq at 10:14 AM on May 19, 2004

who is the senator that only does anal with her? Is it DeWine? (I'm betting DeLay or someone of that ilk)

Well, the guy who only did anal isn't identified as a senator, only as a "sugar daddy." Another guy who is allegedly paying her for sex is the Chief of Staff of a governmental agency.

(on preview: fenriq, I don't know on what basis you claim that Mike Devine is "the presumed backdoor lover." The context of her posts would suggest otherwise. Seems to me you're on pretty thin ice.)
posted by pardonyou? at 10:17 AM on May 19, 2004

Quite amusing.
posted by widdershins at 10:19 AM on May 19, 2004

pardonyou?, I tells 'em like I sees 'em. So what if he didn't have anal sex with her, he's one of the ones that DID have sex with her.
posted by fenriq at 10:20 AM on May 19, 2004

I guess I'm just old fashioned, fenriq. Before I imply that United States Senators are paying to have anal sex with their staffers, I like to have, you know, some sort of evidence to support that claim.
posted by pardonyou? at 10:31 AM on May 19, 2004

Otherwise, why are all of these guys in power too cheap to pay a hooker who'll keep her mouth shut? Instead they have to jab subordinates who will, inevitably, figure out that they can use the sex against them.

You're not as powerful as you think if you still have to pay people to fuck you. And if you're stupid enough to hire hookers, you're stupid enough to not consider those questions.
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 10:33 AM on May 19, 2004

So what if he didn't have anal sex with her, he's one of the ones that DID have sex with her.

When did she say her boss was one of her....ummm, interests (anal or otherwise)?
posted by jalexei at 10:35 AM on May 19, 2004

yeah, i thought it was his buddies/pals/co-conspirators.
posted by amberglow at 10:38 AM on May 19, 2004

Unless I missed something above, I can't believe I'm the first one to raise the Kaycee flag on this one. AFAIK, there is zero real word corroboration here.
posted by Mid at 10:40 AM on May 19, 2004

DeWine was her boss, not one of her lovers. At least, that's how I read it.
posted by MrMoonPie at 10:43 AM on May 19, 2004

Re: Kaycee -- Wonkette has a new post up retracting part of the story. Also, Wonkette references the bogus "monkeyfishing" story at Slate -- likely a tipoff that she thinks this might be fake.
posted by Mid at 11:04 AM on May 19, 2004

One last point: what would be really wild would be if the whole thing was a hoax specifcally designed to troll Wonkette!
posted by Mid at 11:09 AM on May 19, 2004

I have no idea if the girl is real, but her anecdotes are all much too giggly and tidy to reflect what's really going on in her life. She writes like that girl who wrote the "i've never had good sex with a vegetarian" article that miguel linked to the other day.
posted by bingo at 11:25 AM on May 19, 2004

"He wants us to get tested together so we can stop using condoms. Isn't that sweet?"
...
"If you're like me and you're decorating a new apartment (because your boyfriend kicked you out), you need to stop hatin' on Martha: her stuff is the cutest!"

OMFG! My ass is, like, totally a semen depository. LOL! Degrade me! I'm not human! ;-)
posted by Civil_Disobedient at 11:26 AM on May 19, 2004

furiousthought, do the world a favor and take the extra half second to type VERY out, v. is incredibly irritating.

Ya think?
posted by furiousthought at 11:56 AM on May 19, 2004

This represents some of the worst that the human spirit has to offer. Whether this particular account is bullshit or not, I saw and was privy to enough of this kind of crap in my years on Wall Street to know that it actually does happen and happen frequently. More often than not, sex is paid for in access, gifts or other services, but cash does happen as well. It goes without saying that, in the long term, this kind of thing almost never ends up in anything positive for the one trading their services away.
posted by psmealey at 12:05 PM on May 19, 2004

Re: Wonkette -- She's kind of the Howard Stern of the washington political world. Not only that, she's a redhead and looks great in a Little Black Dress(tm).
posted by SpecialK at 12:31 PM on May 19, 2004

FWIW, Wonkette now confirms that this was not a hoax - if someone who originally posted the story can be said to "confirm" it. T(The "real reporting" stuff is extremely funny to devoted Wonkette fans - or even those who read her Big Media (NYT?) profile a couple weeks back.)
posted by soyjoy at 1:32 PM on May 19, 2004

Someone is floating a name.
posted by CunningLinguist at 1:42 PM on May 19, 2004

SpecialK - link to a picture please? I am all about redheads who look good in little black dresses...
posted by Irontom at 1:49 PM on May 19, 2004

The thing that's really the most offensive to me about this is that whoever the girl is, she's probably gonna get a book deal, a crapload of cash, and substantially more than 15 minutes of fame out of this; essentially, she's going to get handsomely rewarded for being a dumb slut prostitute. Not that it's the first time that's happened to anyone... but still.

What kind of a message does THAT send to all the "cute" or "hot" young women out there, huh? I'm glad I don't have daughters, and that my 21-yr-old sister is a math geek with a good steady boyfriend.

This doesn't do much for the advancement of women's equality and rights, I'm afraid. A damn shame.
posted by zoogleplex at 1:55 PM on May 19, 2004

Apparent Friendster profile. (scroll down)


Occupation:
Professional girlfriend

Companies:
U.S. Government

About Me:
The only "boss" I listen to is Bruce Springsteen, which is probably why I got fired from my last job. um, yeah

Who I Want to Meet:
Discreet and reliable drug dealers in the DC metropolitan area.
posted by CunningLinguist at 2:03 PM on May 19, 2004

Hey, we're all Encyclopedia's Brown. This is fun!

Her last log-in was on April 25th.
posted by mcgraw at 2:12 PM on May 19, 2004

Hey, we're all Encyclopedias Brown. This is fun!

Her last log-in was on April 25th.
posted by mcgraw at 2:12 PM on May 19, 2004

Yikes! Trying to remove that damn apostrophe in "Encyclopedia's".

No picture on that Friendster profile, btw.

She's "half-Korean/half-honkey" [her words] and she might just appear in this picture.
posted by mcgraw at 2:14 PM on May 19, 2004

Argh, on preview! Ya beat me, mcgraw... well I'll post anyway

Heh... I looked at the Friendster account of the name mentioned in CunningLinguist's link (below the blurb with it someone comments that that name has a Friendster account) and it sure looks like the right girl...

Occupation: Professional Girlfriend
Interests: Anorexia, tanorexia, breeding dogs for fun and profit, not exercising
Companies: US Government
Favorite TV Shows: I Want a Famous Face, That's My Bush!, Are You Hot?, America's Next Top Model
Who I Want To Meet: Discreet and reliable drug dealers in the DC metropolitan area.

Oh yeah, that's her. What a winner! What a quality human being!

No photo though.

She has one friend testimonial, here's a choice bit: "_____ is thin and gorgeous. She also happens to make a mean casserole and tasty cupcakes, although whatever ridiculously restrictive diet she is (unnecessarily) on at the moment usually prohibits her from enjoying them."

(shudders)

Friendster says I am "not closely connected with ______." I couldn't be happier!
posted by zoogleplex at 2:15 PM on May 19, 2004

Irontom - triangulating on a face
posted by troutfishing at 2:16 PM on May 19, 2004

What a quality human being!

Um, yeah, OK, we get it awready, zoogleplex.
posted by soyjoy at 2:19 PM on May 19, 2004

Hey, we're all in this together, zoogleplex! Excellent!
posted by mcgraw at 2:20 PM on May 19, 2004

I think she's the cheerful, Asian girl seated third from the left, below the lady with the pink purple thing thing.

Yes, I am "Timmy". I am also "Timmo".
posted by mcgraw at 2:22 PM on May 19, 2004

trout, Irontom wants to see Wonkette's pic. :)
posted by zoogleplex at 2:25 PM on May 19, 2004

Sorry soy, I'll shut up now. This shit hits a nerve with me.
posted by zoogleplex at 2:26 PM on May 19, 2004

Cunning - I believe that's the (rumored) name of the person who did the firing, not our heroine/whore, depending on slant...
posted by jalexei at 2:41 PM on May 19, 2004

Ooops, nevermind - but it does look like her name has vanished from the comments -
posted by jalexei at 2:47 PM on May 19, 2004

Irontom, there's a pic of her (Wonkette) on the site, about a conservative function she went to.
posted by amberglow at 3:21 PM on May 19, 2004

Yeah, d'oh, I found it earlier, but I can't find it again ... Amberglow, remember what day the story was from?
posted by SpecialK at 3:35 PM on May 19, 2004

Back.
posted by timothompson at 3:37 PM on May 19, 2004

it was recently...definitely within a week or so i think.

So, more importantly, who's Senator Rear Entry? (and 50 bucks says it's a Repub) ; >
posted by amberglow at 3:52 PM on May 19, 2004

here
posted by amberglow at 3:54 PM on May 19, 2004

. . . how to put this delicately? Hmmm. OK: I have not had my rack checked out so brazenly and so often since I stopped going to Cozumel for Spring Break. What is it with the cultural conservatives? They're all Ken-Starring me and shit. (wonkette rocks)
posted by amberglow at 3:55 PM on May 19, 2004

The only "boss" I listen to is Bruce Springsteen, which is probably why I got fired from my last job.

When I was a wee kid, my friend's older brother came up to us after having just bought the Born in the USA album and said, "Some people don't like to kiss their boss's ass, but I'll kiss mine." He pressed his lips against the CD case and for some reason it became etched in my mind forever.
posted by john at 4:04 PM on May 19, 2004

Why do I get the feeling that if this were a guy who had fucked several women at work and written about it, you all would be high-fiving him on studliness and his coming book deal, but because this is a woman, she's necessarily a "slut", and thus somehow dirty or undeserving?
posted by beth at 4:25 PM on May 19, 2004

Why do I get the feeling that if this were a guy who had fucked several women at work and written about it, you all would be high-fiving him on studliness and his coming book deal, but because this is a woman, she's necessarily a "slut", and thus somehow dirty or undeserving?

This thread went 67 comments till someone pulled the old "why do I get the feeling that if..." switcharoo!
posted by crank at 4:32 PM on May 19, 2004

Actually, we don't have to wonder "why do I get the feeling that if...?"
posted by transona5 at 4:45 PM on May 19, 2004

If she is in that picture and list of folks that mcgraw linked to, 10-1 says she's got to be the one who gave her name as "Sadie-Jo Smokey". (Swear to God...second to last entry.)
posted by LairBob at 4:59 PM on May 19, 2004

Why do I get the feeling that if this were a guy who had fucked several women at work and written about it, you all would be high-fiving him on studliness...

she claims to have accepted money for sex.

it's prostitution, beth. do you high-five prostitution?
posted by mcgraw at 5:00 PM on May 19, 2004

McGraw: This probably isn't news to you, but somewhere over the past twenty-five years or so, we've apparently learned that pornography, prostitution, and the use of sex as a weapon were all empowering to women -- and not degrading, as we were once lead to believe....

Yep. Empowering. Yep.....
posted by lodurr at 5:27 PM on May 19, 2004

and more wonkette pics.

(it sure is hard to find pics of here that are more than a few pixels wide,
she gets a lot of by-line space, but very little photo coverage)
posted by milovoo at 5:28 PM on May 19, 2004

Why do I get the feeling that if this were a guy who had fucked several women at work and written about it, you all would be high-fiving him on studliness and his coming book deal, but because this is a woman, she's necessarily a "slut", and thus somehow dirty or undeserving?

Don't you hate it when you engage in wild speculation because it fits your agenda/worldview, and it promptly blows up in your face? You go girl, tilt at those windmills!
posted by TungstenChef at 5:37 PM on May 19, 2004

beth, I wouldn't. I think the guys who are paying this woman for use of her are just as slimy as she is - they also participate in perpetuating a corrupt system of practices. A guy doing this at work is abusing his position, most likely... and if he's married, he's an asshole squared.

To me, it's ugly on both sides. Honest, hard-working people have to slog through a world of that shit, and it's galling.
posted by zoogleplex at 5:39 PM on May 19, 2004

Amen, zoobleplex.

Stereotypes aside, this kind of behavior is just fucking gross, whether initiated/perpetuated by men or women, whether for cash, services or trade. The rest of try to abide by principles and integrity, and this sort of thing debases us all.
posted by psmealey at 5:42 PM on May 19, 2004

The wonkette's a hottie.

I'm just sayin'.
posted by jonmc at 5:50 PM on May 19, 2004

but because this is a woman, she's necessarily a "slut",

Nope, she got paid so she's a whore. Sluts do it for free.
posted by jonmc at 6:25 PM on May 19, 2004

Just to clear up an earlier post, the Swamp City blog posted a name - leading to the Friendster profile - and has since removed it.
posted by CunningLinguist at 6:52 PM on May 19, 2004

No one's explained how this woman is different from Tucker Max, except for accepting money for sex. Both of them got in trouble for writing about their sex lives with outwardly squeaky-clean public figures. But Metafilter seems to think it's pretty cool that he exposed these phony moralists, and she's written off as a pathetic whore. And Washingtonienne actually had the bigger scoop - it's not necessarily hypocritical for a teen-abstinence-supporting pageant contest to sleep with someone as an adult. Now, if her platform had been good taste in men...
posted by transona5 at 7:02 PM on May 19, 2004

Prostitution is legal and regulated in some european countries, which seems very grown up and healthy to me. It doesnt happen in the UK, but I wouldn't object if it did.

I find the policies of the US govt (amongst others) to be more immoral than the personal decisions of a low grade employee in D.C. Who is this woman harming (other than - maybe - herself)?

Who does any whore harm?
Many folk have thought about using a pro, in a lonely moment, at some point in their lives. So what? So what if you feel it's sordid?

Are the Puritans still in control over there?
posted by dash_slot- at 7:21 PM on May 19, 2004

"To whom does any whore do harm?" would be better english (",)
posted by dash_slot- at 7:24 PM on May 19, 2004

No one's explained how this woman is different from Tucker Max, except for accepting money for sex...

seriously, what the fuq are you talking about?
posted by mcgraw at 7:35 PM on May 19, 2004

No one's explained how this woman is different from Tucker Max, except for accepting money for sex. Both of them got in trouble for writing about their sex lives with outwardly squeaky-clean public figures. But Metafilter seems to think it's pretty cool that he exposed these phony moralists,

I'd hesitate before assigning such lofty motivations to either Tucker Max or this anonymous woman. More likely they did it for the kicks and the notoriety and the book deals. Showing up phony moralists is nice, but i don't buy either of them as moral crusaders. Nice try, though.
posted by jonmc at 7:40 PM on May 19, 2004

Are the Puritans still in control over there?

Pretty much, yes. (scroll up for proof)
posted by milovoo at 7:41 PM on May 19, 2004

jonmc - I completely agree. Neither of them are crusaders against hypocrisy. Both of them are pathetic attention whores.
posted by transona5 at 7:45 PM on May 19, 2004

Both of them are pathetic attention whores.

And we live in a society that sends the message that if you cant acheive legitamite fame, notoriety and infamy will do. Why else do we know these people's names? That fact that the world flaunts their indignation dosen't explain away the amount of time we spend sifting the thru the minutia of their sordid misadventures.
posted by jonmc at 8:04 PM on May 19, 2004

But alot of women adopt this breezy attitude towaards dating and sex in their blogs. Maybe they're really thaat blaze about it -- but really I think they're just too young to be making the decisions they're making and are hiding their insecurities behind an attitude of "fuck it world, this is what I've got here and this is what I'm making of it." Sure, it's easy to call her a ho, but her blog is just one of many facades we all use. I find it interesting that so many people are so upset about the money for sex = WHORE part, when it does seem that there are lots of judgment calls that she could be making that are more questionable on a moral scale. It's just sex. Seems like the public figures who are connected to her are even worse than her, because they in theory represent some sort of moral authority. But, whatever.

I thought people hated Tucker Max pretty uniformly, too, unless I'm misremembering. He was mean, though. This woman is just promiscuous, and really jaded about relationships. She doesn't seem to be actively trying to hurt people, which was why I thought Max garnered so much scoorn.
posted by onlyconnect at 8:19 PM on May 19, 2004

I don't know--i'm not trashing her so much i'm trashing the guys (senators? reps?) that paid her.
posted by amberglow at 8:24 PM on May 19, 2004

I don't care if she has sex for money. And I don't care if senators are paying her for sex, either. Does the fact that they're paying for sex make them "bad" senators? I think that a man demeans himself by paying for sex (usually), and I would think that guys that "powerful" would be able to get plenty of it for free, and the girl herself seems like a truly obnoxious person whom I would not want to meet. But I have a hard time getting morally worked up about any of this. So people are fucking each other and paying each other and writing about it. Whoopdie doo.
posted by bingo at 8:46 PM on May 19, 2004

Does the fact that they're paying for sex make them "bad" senators?

Depends on what their senatorial stance on paying for sex is. If they're crusading to legalize prostitution across the country, of course it doesn't. Otherwise...
posted by soyjoy at 8:52 PM on May 19, 2004

Irony abounds.

"Why do I get the feeling that if this were a guy who had fucked several women at work and written about it, you all would be high-fiving him on studliness and his coming book deal, but because this is a woman, she's necessarily a 'slut', and thus somehow dirty or undeserving?"—Beth

On several occasions you've expressed the view that sex without love is wrong and have been judgmental about those who engage in it. Yes, that included yourself, but it's a little strange of you to suddenly join the free-love camp.

However, I agree with your complaint here. So she's fucking lots of guys and writing about it. One of them gives her money, and she likes getting money for it. Big fucking deal.

Newsflash: people have sex. They have anal sex. They have sex with people they love, and they have sex with people they don't love, and they have sex when it's convenient, and they have sex when it isn't. Can we just stop with all the self-righteous judgments about other people's sex lives already? Okay, sure, I expect it from cultural conservatives, but it comes quite easily from pretty much everyone else, assuming their own personal hot-buttons are pushed.

Granted, reading Washingtonienne's blog (as cached at Wonkette's site) made her seem very much like the kind of person I'm not attracted to—a general tone of intense shallowness is pervasive. Even if she's hot, I don't think I'd want to ass-fuck her just because it'd be so much more fun with a genuinely interesting person. Or, put differently, I'd be thinking, "Yeah, she's hot, but I really don't like this person." So, yes, I had a negative reaction. Not because she's a "whore", but because she doesn't seem very likeable.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 9:10 PM on May 19, 2004

I hope everyone who is either involved with this story, or hypes it as some amusing, "Oh-ho-ho, aren't the various degenerates of the corridors of power sooooo sophisticated and/or beautiful?" burn to death in radioactive fire.

The people that propagate this (the senators and appointees,) and the people that buy into it (Washingtonienne and Wonkette, who seems to think it's all so grown-up to be secret prostitutes to men who would have no problem grinding them into dust,) disgust me on numerous levels. It maintains the old-boys club mentality, it fundamentally undermines feminism in the worst way, and it enrages me that these spoiled children of privilege ("...how can anybody live on $25K/year?" Somebody better call the wahmbulance,) squander their advantages in one of the worst ways possible, establishing themselves as lackeys to the powerful in order to indulge their basest, most hedonistic impulses at the expense any real responsibility inherent in their positions.

I hate the arrogance that comes from people in these situations, (and their groupies,) that my life, and the lives of most of my friends and enemies is meaningless, little and immature because we don't conduct ourselves like obscenely wealthy high-schoolers.

I have no problem with, (and in fact, advocate for,) real, honest, safe and legal and protected prostitution, or sex as free or judicious one wants it, even on the job, but when it's entwined in these circumstances, (namely, the secrecy, quid pro quo, and hypocrisy, to name a few things, that can exist on Captiol Hill, especially in these situations) it shows how deeply disturbed all the people involved are.

On preview: It looks like I'm accusing Wonkette of doing the same things that Washingtonienne did, and I'm not, but I am accusing her of celebrating them.
posted by Snyder at 9:40 PM on May 19, 2004

Don't they know about the health consequences of teh buttsecz!? [/111]
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:26 PM on May 19, 2004

Wonkette has a new link to this Washingtonienne archive.

Also, the Washington Post is getting in on the act.
posted by mcgraw at 7:21 AM on May 20, 2004

Morning links:

Cleveland Plain Dealer story. (Sen's hometown paper)

Unredacted copy of the Washingtonienne blog

"I have a "glamour job" on the Hill. That is, I could not care less about gov or politics, but working for a Senator looks good on my resume. And these marble hallways are such great places for meeting boys and showing off my outfits."

on preview: crud.
posted by CunningLinguist at 7:23 AM on May 20, 2004

But alot of women adopt this breezy attitude towaards dating and sex in their blogs.

That's because it gets guys to read it. The novelty of hearing a relatively intelligent woman waxing rahpsodic about ballsucking can be quite inticing at first. But it gets old real quick.

I know I'm hot and all, but no pictures please!

That line is like something a 15-year-old girl who's just discovered that her boobies can make boys do her bidding would say. I found it annoying then, and it's even more annoying from grown women.
posted by jonmc at 7:24 AM on May 20, 2004

If that Washington Post link don't work (possible registration block), try this.
posted by mcgraw at 7:28 AM on May 20, 2004

hear hear, Snyder and jonmc.
posted by zoogleplex at 9:24 AM on May 20, 2004

Heh.



Washingtonienne.com
posted by CunningLinguist at 10:27 AM on May 20, 2004

"I have a "glamour job" on the Hill. That is, I could not care less about gov or politics, but working for a Senator looks good on my resume. And these marble hallways are such great places for meeting boys and showing off my outfits."

Sounds like 90 or so percent of the staffers I've encountered around here. Worthless, over privileged, spoiled little shits. Think Paris Hilton without so much money or "glamour" or Reese Witherspoon in Election, without brains or ambition.
posted by Pollomacho at 11:12 AM on May 20, 2004

cunning : > (very smart of them)
posted by amberglow at 12:05 PM on May 20, 2004

Grammar Note:

The sensationally sordid Staff Ass sex scandal

In this link title, "Ass sex," needs a hyphen. It should read: "Ass-sex."

Otherwise, this is an exceptional fpp, CunningLinguist.
I'm ready to call it "perfect," despite the missing hyphen.
posted by mcgraw at 12:30 PM on May 20, 2004

Grammar Note:

In this link title, "Ass sex," needs a hyphen.

In this sentence, the comma after "sex" is superfluous.

Otherwise, this is an exceptional Grammar Note, mcgraw. I'm ready to call it "perfect," despite the extra comma.
posted by mcgraw at 12:38 PM on May 20, 2004

Humor Note:

Just tryin to be funny. Failed.
posted by mcgraw at 1:32 PM on May 20, 2004

"Staff Ass" is a shorthand term of art (ahem) that staff assistants like Washingtonienne use to describe themselves. It doesn't modify sex, as in "ass-sex."

Given the focus of the story, though, it's an understandable mistake.
posted by jeffmshaw at 1:33 PM on May 20, 2004

It doesn't modify sex, as in "ass-sex."

I believe the poster was making a delectable play on words there, jeffmshaw. Check the username.
posted by soyjoy at 1:56 PM on May 20, 2004

That's a delicious double-meaning by the cunning one, to be sure. But I wondered why the term "Staff Ass" was capitalized when I read the FPP and wanted to be sure everyone as wait for it anal as me knew, too.

[And yes, great post.]
posted by jeffmshaw at 2:06 PM on May 20, 2004

She called herself a Staff Ass, with that icky blitheness that pervades her blog, hence the caps.

Hyphens? We don need no steeking hyphens!
posted by CunningLinguist at 2:22 PM on May 20, 2004

Clearly she wants a staff in her ass. Paging Gandalf.
posted by bargle at 3:56 PM on May 20, 2004

Is Gandalf a Senator now? ; >
posted by amberglow at 4:19 PM on May 20, 2004

It's not Sadie Jo Smokey, for the record, although if you had followed the story you would have known that by now.
posted by calwatch at 3:51 AM on May 21, 2004

Looks like the staff hasn't lost its staff ass.
posted by CunningLinguist at 5:38 AM on May 21, 2004

Cunning, that link wanted me to login. Can you paste it?
posted by soyjoy at 7:39 AM on May 21, 2004

Good morning.

The picture I made for everybody on this thread:

. . /”'”'”\ .
. J| . . . . K
. c| ‘”`‘” | .
. H . .L . H .
.. E. ,—. W .
. . VVNNN .
. . /==+\ . .
GGGGGGGGGG\ .
posted by mcgraw at 7:43 AM on May 21, 2004

what's that supposed to be? or do i not want to know? (it looks like Abe Lincoln's head) : >
posted by amberglow at 7:45 AM on May 21, 2004

You got it, amberglow!

Wow, I'm glad it came across.

I based it on the third Abe pic from the left -- cached from a site called "heritagesurveys.com/lincoln".
posted by mcgraw at 7:54 AM on May 21, 2004

yay me (and with only 1 cup of coffee in me so far today)! but i didn't lincoln was as much of a gossip as we are ; >
posted by amberglow at 7:56 AM on May 21, 2004

oop--i didn't know lincoln.....
posted by amberglow at 7:57 AM on May 21, 2004

Yeah, what does the roll call link say? CunningLinguist, you tease! :P
posted by onlyconnect at 8:04 AM on May 21, 2004

yeah, you win all the points, amber. (c:

Abe: gossip-monger, surveyor.
posted by mcgraw at 8:04 AM on May 21, 2004

oh, has anyone gotten a copy of the email going around that names all the names?
posted by amberglow at 8:05 AM on May 21, 2004

In defence of the Cunning one, that link worked fine before-- no log-in required.

It's a link to a story similar to this one (from Wonkette)
posted by mcgraw at 8:06 AM on May 21, 2004

Abe: also liked it in the rear? ; >
posted by amberglow at 8:08 AM on May 21, 2004

So then.... Abe and Washingtonienne have more in common than people realized....
posted by mcgraw at 8:17 AM on May 21, 2004

I'm sorry - that Roll Call story opened fine for me at home, but now I'm getting the login demand too.....and bugmenot seems to be down. (If that website goes, I volunteer to lead the riots.)
There wasn't much new except DeWine's office said she wasn't fired - yet.

Abe???
posted by CunningLinguist at 8:32 AM on May 21, 2004

Interview (?) with the person who had relaunched the washingonienne.blogspot page
(I know... this isn't even really her-- just puttin it out there).
posted by mcgraw at 8:54 AM on May 21, 2004

Hi Maury. Sorry for linking to that fake washingtonienne.blogspot page. I just looked at what's up there and it's just stupid. Shoulda read the latest post there first. : (
posted by mcgraw at 8:56 AM on May 21, 2004

USA Today article.
posted by mcgraw at 11:01 AM on May 21, 2004

Washingtonienne fired -- DeWine Press Release (via Wonk).
posted by mcgraw at 11:30 AM on May 21, 2004

An interesting Google cache.
posted by mcgraw at 12:07 PM on May 21, 2004

That didn't work for me mcgraw - what was it?
posted by CunningLinguist at 2:51 PM on May 21, 2004

Which link are you talking about?
posted by calwatch at 3:43 PM on May 21, 2004

The google cache, sorry.
posted by CunningLinguist at 3:53 PM on May 21, 2004

Wonkette pic for those who asked.

She frequently hangs out at a coffee shop near my house, taking calls and blogging and stuff. Kinda funny to watch.
posted by mikewas at 4:03 PM on May 21, 2004

Wonkette scores exclusive interview! Until tomorrow's Washpost anyway.


"I'm not ashamed of anything I wrote in the blog. And people are sad if they're interested in such a low level sex scandal...... I may have to go back to New York. In New York, they love this kind of thing. They'll ask what happened at my last job, and I'll say I was fired for a sex scandal!"

I hate to say this but I'm starting to like her....
posted by CunningLinguist at 5:05 AM on May 22, 2004

I like her too--ballsy is the word that comes to mind, but that's not quite right ; >
posted by amberglow at 6:23 AM on May 22, 2004

Yeah, my mistake on that one, CunningLinguist. That link has already been posted.--thanks again for the great fpp!
posted by mcgraw at 10:05 AM on May 22, 2004

here's her pic and more on her, and privacy/blogging in general
posted by amberglow at 10:19 AM on May 22, 2004

The WaPo article is terribly disappointing (looks like they ran out of space in the hole). And where's the picture????
posted by calwatch at 10:08 PM on May 22, 2004

calwatch, you're right. What a bummer.
posted by CunningLinguist at 10:14 PM on May 22, 2004

Or a better pic. (of both Wonkette and Washingtonienne)

posted by milovoo at 12:20 PM on May 23, 2004

Oh, the humanity!
posted by troutfishing at 8:53 PM on May 23, 2004

Plus - why do these cheeks look like asses?
posted by troutfishing at 8:54 PM on May 23, 2004

Wow. Somehow, I got very old when I wasn't paying attention. These are children. Wonkette is, like, twelve.

What a weird, wacky world we live in these days. I think I'd find it more comfortable if I was getting some of that ass-fucking these kids are going on and on about. Or a $400 lunch. Something, dammit.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 8:01 AM on May 24, 2004

Is that pic posted above by milovoo a composite? I haven't been following every new development here, but it seems to me that Wonkette and Washingtonienne haven't actually met in person.

I'm curious to see the Washington Post pic. From the one above, she looks only moderately attractive...not worth $400 for a lunchtime tryst, anyway.
posted by bingo at 10:04 AM on May 24, 2004

Not a composite--they actually went out on the town together (and didn't have to pay for their drinks, apparently).
posted by MrMoonPie at 11:17 AM on May 24, 2004

Here's a link to the Washington Post article that includes the picture.
posted by purplemonkie at 11:25 AM on May 24, 2004

Wow. I'm speechless. And y'all know how noteworthy that really is.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 12:10 PM on May 24, 2004

You're speechless at how marginally attractive she is?
posted by bingo at 12:30 PM on May 24, 2004

The interview.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 4:27 PM on May 24, 2004

I'm sorry to report that tonight I dreamt about Ana Marie Cox and Jessica Cutler. And, yes, predictably, there was some hot girl-on-girl action. And then Elizabeth Taylor showed up. My subconscious rocks.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 12:06 AM on May 25, 2004

...[sexual fantasy] And then Elizabeth Taylor showed up.

Butterfield 8 Liz?

Or "White Diamonds" Liz?
posted by mcgraw at 8:08 AM on May 25, 2004

I like the "Reflections In A Golden Eye" Liz.
posted by bingo at 8:20 AM on May 25, 2004

I see what you mean, bingo. Spiegelbild, indeed.
posted by mcgraw at 9:25 AM on May 25, 2004

Jessica is now talking to the NY Post (complete with tasteful pic posing braless blogger by the Capitol)
posted by CunningLinguist at 9:56 AM on May 25, 2004

Apologies in advance for the sexist remark, re: the picture of Washingtonienne:

Wow, that passes for hot in DC? She wouldn't get the time of day in NYC. :-)
posted by psmealey at 11:54 AM on May 25, 2004

Wow, mcgraw. That's...unexpected and strange. Interestingly, it isn't very telling about the movie...although it is not exactly misleading either, since you do get to see Taylor pretty much naked (alas, only from behind).

psmealey: What's sexist? There are hot guys, and there are hot girls. That girl is young and thin and otherwise fairly unremarkable.
posted by bingo at 4:43 PM on May 25, 2004

Why is gawker calling Wonkette a wanna-be porn star? And in the same breath that they talk about her husband. Isn't that a bit harsh? Did she really say something that deserves that?
posted by bingo at 9:47 AM on May 26, 2004

That girl is young and thin and otherwise fairly unremarkable.

Except that she let some guy put his THING in her BUTT, OMFG!!!!!!
posted by purplemonkie at 12:20 PM on May 26, 2004

While walking and talking to us on her cell phone in Georgetown, Cutler spotted a piece of currency on the ground. "I just found a hundred-dollar bill!" she exclaimed. "It's my lucky day!" We'll say.

Did she have to bend over for that hundred dollars, too?
posted by NortonDC at 8:05 PM on May 26, 2004

That was exceptionally funny, NortonDC. Kudos.
posted by Ethereal Bligh at 10:54 PM on May 26, 2004

And this just in: At press time, Playboy called us for her number.

Ugh. No thank you.
posted by bingo at 8:12 AM on May 27, 2004

Sen. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio) on Friday fired a young staffer for "unacceptable use of Senate computers" after she posted her sex diaries on the Internet and raised a hubbub of speculation last week: Who is this wicked woman that calls herself "Washingtonienne"? Was she really bedding six different men or making it all up? And who is the married, high-level federal employee she claims paid her $400 for a lunch-hour tryst?
posted by thomcatspike at 4:07 PM on May 27, 2004

To the detectives here: "Jessica Cutler was fired from her Senate job, after being "outed" by the Wonkette blogger, Anna Marie Cox. (Bill O'Leary - The Washington Post)"
posted by thomcatspike at 4:15 PM on May 27, 2004

Acck, didn't notice the above was already posted.
Should pay attention to the dates better:D
posted by thomcatspike at 4:24 PM on May 27, 2004

Apparently she's popular enough to deserve her own analysis blog breathlessly covering her every move. And you spent how much on an Ivy League education for this?

Interesting commentary on Jessica's veracity here.
posted by calwatch at 1:36 AM on May 28, 2004