Skip to main content

View Diary: Wisconsin Recall Results - Republican Primary Winners Are a Joke, Right? (155 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  *swapped spouses* (5+ / 0-)

    Honest question, I keep seeing writers talk about this:

    "Her second noted accomplishment is having "swapped spouses" in a manner of speaking. She divorced her first husband in 1993 and remarried in 1995 to her current husband, Arthur Simac. Their ex-spouses eventually married each other. But she's pro-family. Weird."

    It's an unusual circumstance, yes, but how is it anti-family? If the two couples are close friends and spend a lot of time together it is possible they could acknowledge they've made a mistake and they'd be better suited with the other couples spouses.

    Nothing I've seen written about Simac's situation really goes beyond it being "weird." Is the suggestion here that she's not really pro-family because she had a divorce or is the suggestion here that they were swapping partners sexually?

    I'm only challenging the use of this factoid because it really doesn't seem to be sticking without more juicy facts. Whenever a blogger or commenter brings it up the response is "so? she remarried and has raised 9 kids with her new husband!"

    In the conservative mindset she made the right life decision, no matter how odd the circumstances may have been, by divorcing the partner she was with so she could raise her family with the right partner.

    Unless we find out she still takes part in 70s-era style key parties I'm not sure the husband swap is worth focusing on.

    I'm completely open to hear counterpoints in an attempt to make the discussion stronger.

    I have nothing to say.

    by calistan on Wed Jul 20, 2011 at 05:29:16 AM PDT

    •  You raise a good point. (5+ / 0-)

      For me, it's not that she divorced her first husband, it's the hypocrisy of her self-stated opposition to gay marriage. I'm sure she was all for the Wisconsin amendment passed a few years ago defining marriage as between "one man and one woman", but she's just another hair-splitter. She can't see the plank in her own eye but is quick to point out the speck in another person's eye.

      Her own life history should make her sympathetic to the struggles that other people have in forming meaningful, permanent relationships.

      I was also trying to convey that her situation is being talked about a lot here. It may only be "unusual", but a lot of people think there's more to it than just a coincidence. It strikes voters as weird. Maybe it shouldn't, but it does, again because of the apparent hypocrisy.

      It's not that easy being green.

      by Giles Goat Boy on Wed Jul 20, 2011 at 07:04:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  'Pro-Family' encourages voters to think the other (8+ / 0-)

      candidate is somehow 'anti-family'. Furthermore, the marriage 'one-man/one-woman' types always forget to add 'at a time' to their hair-splitting nonsense. Consider that Newt Gingrich thinks of himself as 'pro-family' and so does his third wife.

      These people aren't against divorce (well, not to the point of legislating no-more-divorces laws), even though divorce can be damaging to children.  But they think that their opinions on other people's potential marriages are more valid than that of the individuals who want to be married, while being outraged that anyone should look askance at their own relationships...sequential spouses, children out of wedlock, or what have you. It's as if they believe that having married opposite sex persons somehow insulates them from any criticism or even attention.

      www.belgravehouse.com and www.regencyreads.com

      by wonderful world on Wed Jul 20, 2011 at 07:22:44 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site