Originally Posted by
Dan Druff
Duncan Hunter, the "other" scandal-ridden Congress member from California, has resigned today.
His name was frequently brought up by Democrats when the matter of Katie Hill was discussed, with the supposed claim that "misogyny" and "the patriarchy" were responsible for the increased focus upon Hill for her wrongdoings, when Hunter's were worse.
I will agree that Duncan Hunter did worse things than Katie Hlll. He and his wife misappropriated $250,000 worth of campaign funds for personal use, for things such as private school tuition, expensive vacations, and transportation for a pet rabbit (lol).
However, the final joke was on his wife, because he also used some of the money to get hotel rooms for at least 5 different extramarital affairs, including with one of his own staff members.
He and his wife were both indicted in 2018, but he still refused to resign from Congress.
By comparison, Katie Hill had sexual/romantic affairs with a staffer and a campaign worker -- though only the one with the staffer was actually illegal. Both of these people were being paid by Hill's campaign for a long period of time while these affairs occurred, including the campaign worker who questionably stayed on as a "consultant" long after Hill was elected. However, Hill's overall financial misdeeds were only minor at worst, whereas Hunter was straight up stealing campaign funds for personal use.
So why did Hill's situation get more attention? Was it misogyny or the patriarchy at work? Not really. It's the same reason missing young white women get tons of attention in the media, whereas missing men are virtually ignored. The reality is that the media is obsessed with the stories of young white women -- especially when they're in danger/distress or if it involves sex in some way. Hill's story fascinated people because it involved a fairly attractive 31-year-old Congresswoman who had a bisexual threesome relationship with her husband and a female worker, and then dumped them both to start banging a male staffer. That's pretty much perfect tabloid-type fodder, whereas Hunter's story, while worse, was also quite typical/boring. We've seen a million stories over the years of politicians misappropriating campaign funds, or cheating on their wives. We hadn't yet seen one of a young female Congresswoman having a three-way bisexual relationship involving a campaign worker.
But back to Hunter. He's the son of Duncan L. Hunter, who served in the House for 28 years, also in California. He represented northern San Diego County and small portions of Riverside County. He's a Republican. The guy seems like an entitled asshole who rode into Congress on his father's coattails at the age of 32, and never really developed any kind of real moral code. In the last election, despite absolutely crushing his Democratic opponent in the polls in his very red district, Hunter accused the guy of being a Muslim attempting to infiltrate Congress. In reality, his Arab opponent was Christian. Also, when attempting to establish a naval base tour in order to legitimize a family trip to Italy paid by campaign funds, Hunter said that the Navy can "go fuck themselves" when they couldn't squeeze him in during the dates he wanted.
I'm not going to defend this guy at all. He should be out of Congress, and in fact should be in jail. I agree that he was far worse than Katie Hill, but unlike some on the left, I don't believe this makes Hill innocent in any way. Two different scandals, just one more severe than the other, and the less severe one was more "interesting" of a story.
Reply With Quote
