I won’t be able to top Jon Schwarz: “I guess when you spend all day at work blowing up weddings, it’s hard to know when to stop.” Obviously. But I can try.
Petraeus must have been incredibly conflicted. The CIA is “the tip of the spear”, but he’s the architect of the Surge.
Conservatives are outraged, and trying to create a scandal by framing this as an excuse to avoid testifying about the Libyan consulate attack. The name of the scandal? Bang-ghazi.
Drone surveillance or it didn’t happen.
O christ what is this, fucking Andrea Mitchell. No, Petraeus didn’t do that, too, he’s not an objectivist so he doesn’t hate himself enough to stoop that low. But, in the more general sense: fucking Andrea Mitchell.
Call it power-worship, call it the emotional response of an authoritarian when her hierarchy wobbles a bit, call it the pain of one Villager seeing another get cut down (which just is not supposed to happen), call it knowing Petraeus socially on a personal level, but that kind of simpering response is exactly the problem with the centrist media. Petraeus is part of the club so when he fails, even if its entirely his own doing, it’s a “tragedy”. Christ on a crutch. It’s not just that only bad things involving the people Mitchell represents with stuffed animals at her imaginary tea parties with the pink pot and cups generate an emotional response. It’s the militaristic deep-throating. All the people he’s killed devising and enacting military strategies that increase the destruction of entire societies to make wars more politically palatable, well, a “life of valor” is measured by such deaths, and they certainly do not cause tears to spring to the eyes, and words to catch in the throat, of Andrea Mitchell. That’s why she’s there. That and because she lets Alan Greenspan do the same things to her with a clarinet that he did to Ayn Rand. With the same clarinet, too. And you can’t wash those things, not really.
And with that, more jokes:
Proposed names of the Petraeus biography rejected in favor of All In: The Education of General David Petraeus
Humping It: The Rise of General David Petraeus, In and Out of the Military
The Hard Thrust: How General David Petraeus Bucks Convention
A Commitment to Honor: General David Petraeus and Restoring Honesty to Military Strategy
David Does Dawlatābād
Petraeus is extremely competitive and his career aspirations know no bounds. How fucking attracted must he have been to Broadwell to put all that at risk? There must have been some *very* dark psycho-sexual stuff going on between them, like Broadwell putting on brown body paint and Petraeus fucking her using a robotic dildo he controls from three thousand miles away.
Petraeus’ pet names for his and Broadwell’s genitalia are “the military-industrial complex” and “America”, respectively.
It’s hard to know how many times Broadwell came, because Petraeus counted every time she moaned as an orgasm. Amnesty International is attempting to compile a complete list of Petraeus’ ejactulations, although there are obstacles to collecting data.
Those aren’t as funny though as these actual lines Broadwell wrote in the biography:
I took full advantage of [Petraeus’] open-door policy
Petraeus progressively increased the pace until the talk turned to heavy breathing
But it just starts to get weird with this NYTimes Ethicist column from July in which Chuck Klosterman gives advice to someone whose letter begins “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.)” Probably a coincidence, but still . . . I agree with this Slate guy (damn you, Petraeus, how many lives must you ruin) that in any event Klosterman says some insightful stuff about the letter-writer probably having ulterior motives and wants some specific people to read about the scenario and deduce what’s going on. He better hope it’s just a coincidence, otherwise he’ll be getting a one-way flight to Diego Garcia where someone will enact a clear, hold and build strategy on his rectum.
And my stars, this Daily Show interview of Broadwell from January. She talks about her husband, and . . . it is too obscene, knowing what we know now, I cannot embed or discuss it, there are limits.
In all seriousness the announcement of the affair and the resignation (on a Friday, no less) are intended to encourage jokes like this and a tittering focus on naughty bits that obscure the enormous institutional faults that took place, and the extremely messy issues that crop up when the federal domestic criminal investigation branch is snooping on the foreign intelligence service. Try to focus on the important stuff. And keep Holly Petraeus in mind, David’s wife, not only for the personal cost she’s paying for someone else’s mistake but because she’s has been doing yeoman’s work at the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. It might turn out that she’s the vector for the largest damage to American political institutions that this incident causes, and there’s no strategy David should be able to implement that can win back our hearts and minds after that kind of collateral damage.