# The Nanny Kaputs Kerik's Nomination for Homeland Security ... Yeah, Right **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 11, 2004, 4:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262 "2004-12-11T04:31:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2004, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/81 "2004-12-15T15:11:53Z")
I would remind freind **Ascenray** that the techniques involved in the Lewinsky-Clinton imbroglio were of _French_ origin. For any right-thinking American, this would be quite enough. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2004, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/82 "2004-12-15T15:35:32Z")
> [@New Iskander](#): > > [A Republican source said some White House officials found it highly suspicious that Kerik was not aware of a potential problem with a nanny who left the country very recently.](http://slate.msn.com/id/2110976/) IOW, Kaus did not say _he_ had seen evidence that the nanny problem existed. He did not say _his source_ had seen evidence that the nanny problem existed. He did not say _his source’s source_ had seen evidence that the nanny problem existed. He said his source’s source _found the whole thing suspicious_. Not exactly the same thing, y’know? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2004, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/83 "2004-12-15T15:40:21Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > Oh, this is rich. A Republican is caught up in a sex-and-corruption scandal and _somehow_ it becomes Clinton’s fault. \*\*Apos \*\* started blaming Clinton and \*\*Loopydude \*\* started about sex scandal as just another diversion, so I thought I was on a safe ground, but apparently not; apparently, one has to have the proper credentials to talk candidly about St Bill. > [@acsenray](#): > > Are you suggesting that Clinton’s sexual infidelity was not about sex at all? You got me there. Everybody knows that Clinton was selling national secrets to ChiComs, running drugs through airfield in Arkansas and murdered Vince Foster, but that’s exactly the point: _everybody knows that_. So what he was really trying to hide? ---
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2004, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/84 "2004-12-15T15:41:58Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > He said his source’s source _found the whole thing suspicious_. Not exactly the same thing, y’know? :rolleyes: Are you reading me backwards? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2004, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/85 "2004-12-15T16:35:53Z")
> [@New Iskander](#): > > Are you reading me backwards? Would probably make more sense than forwards. My point was, so far we have only Kerik’s word as the basis for the existence of a ‘nanny problem’. You have not contradicted this: that is, you have not put forward any evidence that anyone else besides Kerik has ascertained that Kerry employed a nanny that he didn’t properly handle the taxes on. Like Josh Marshall, I don’t need to know the name or SSN of the nanny; I don’t need to see copies of her W-2s. But before I believe this story, I’d like to know that some reasonably credible witness has independently verified what Kerik claims. But to the best of my knowledge, not even Alberto Gonzales, who was in charge of the vetting, has claimed to have seen those sorts of things with his own eyes. IOW, AFAWCT, all _he_ has is Kerik’s word on this. For that matter, let me ask this: have we seen any evidence, other than Kerik’s word (or the word of other people who have no evidence themselves besides Kerik’s word), that Kerik even _had_ employed a nanny, that that nanny has left the country, or that the nanny was from Mexico? My point isn’t that I care about these particulars; my point is that Kerik still appears to be the sole source of _all_ nanny-related information. And Kerik is still not credible. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2004, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/86 "2004-12-15T17:14:28Z")
Geez people: whoosh. I wasn’t seriously blaming Clinton (though obviously Regan has grounds to do so: after all, she DID apparently feel that his behavior sent a corrupting message that, apparently, affected her), just reliving the nostalgia and hypocrisy. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2004, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/87 "2004-12-15T17:48:08Z")
On that note, this just in… [http://www.nypost.com/commentary/32781.htm](http://www.nypost.com/commentary/32781.htm) > [@](#): > > …He’s maniacal. Insane," a terrified Regan confided in a pal. Kerik, she said, had Regan followed to Los Angeles. He showed up at her house. Threatened her. … OK, this is the _New York Post_, after all, and its all just an unseemly scandal, but its not about the sex! ---
**Author:** ![pantom](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/34f0e0/32.png) [@pantom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pantom)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2004, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/88 "2004-12-15T17:50:04Z")
Thanks **Apos**. I had no idea who this Regan person was. Pretty whacked. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2004, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/89 "2004-12-15T17:50:29Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > My point was, so far we have only Kerik’s word as the basis for the existence of a ‘nanny problem’. You have not contradicted this: that is, you have not put forward any evidence that anyone else besides Kerik has ascertained that Kerry employed a nanny that he didn’t properly handle the taxes on… And Kerik is still not credible. Why do you assume that I was trying to contradict anything? I agree with everything that was said here re. Mr. Kerik and his nanny by you and others. I’m just joking around a little. And before you castigate me for not being serious, we are looking at the bottomless pit of national politics, lined up with distorted mirrors, where nothing is what it seems and only few people have some clues that open some of the doors some of the time. So joking around may be the only way to remain sane. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2004, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/90 "2004-12-15T18:31:39Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > …but its not about the sex! In the spirit of leaving no stones unturned, how much of sex is really about the Sex? Huge part of it is about power and social prestige, as demonstrated by common expression, “Who do I have to sleep with (to get ahead socially or professionally)?” > [@](#): > > The Kerik-Regan pairing may look unlikely — she’s Vassar-bred, he’s a high-school dropout. But two friends used almost identical terms to describe the duo. “They are male and female versions of the same people,” they said of the “power-addicted” couple. What a mess. ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2004, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/91 "2004-12-15T23:18:13Z")
> [@New Iskander](#): > > Everybody knows that Clinton was selling national secrets to ChiComs, running drugs through airfield in Arkansas and murdered Vince Foster, but that’s exactly the point: _everybody knows that_. So what he was really trying to hide? His anger at right-wing morons who keep spreading such unsubstantiated nonsense, I’d wager. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/92 "2004-12-16T01:13:12Z")
I haven’t visited this thread for a few days, but it sure does look now like this is a major FUBAR by Bush et al. No excuse that they couldn’t have vetted him better than they did. Very sloppy… very, very sloppy indeed. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 4:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/93 "2004-12-16T04:44:23Z")
It’s not sloppy: he proved himself the most loyal and partisan man they knew, and that HAD to mean he was good for the job. ---
**Author:** ![annaplurabelle](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/919ad9/32.png) [@annaplurabelle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/annaplurabelle)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/94 "2004-12-16T04:57:19Z")
Funny though how they are able to dig up the most obscure dirt on any number of their adversaries… A quick google alone on Kerick would have been enough to give pause. Most of this was common knowledge in NYC. Public record fills in the blanks… Perhaps it’s less frightening to think of it as simply sloppy vetting. To err is _human_, after all… ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 5:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/95 "2004-12-16T05:14:32Z")
> [@annaplurabelle](#): > > …To err is _human_, after all… True. But to _really_ screw things up bad, you gotta be a dumbfuck. Conservatives wet their pants over the tough, no-nonsense, hard-headed guys. They just swoon over iron-ass pricks, perhaps because they’re secretly effeminate. Yeah, that’s probably it. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 6:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/96 "2004-12-16T06:36:06Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Conservatives wet their pants over the tough, no-nonsense, hard-headed guys. They just swoon over iron-ass pricks, perhaps because they’re secretly effeminate. Yeah, that’s probably it. But, these touch, no-nonsense, hard-headed guys are, themselves, conservative. Are they, too, “effeminate”? I’m trying to udnerstand this theory in more detail… ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 7:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/97 "2004-12-16T07:01:09Z")
Well, the search to prove a negative goes poorly, I’m sad to report: > **[Mystery Woman in Kerik Case: Nanny (Published 2004)](https://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/16/us/mystery-woman-in-kerik-case-nanny.html)** > > One secret after another has tumbled out since collapse of Bernard B Kerik's nomination as homeland security secretary, yet nanny, who is central figure to scandal, remains shrouded in mystery; neither White House nor Kerik camp has discussed any... On a side note, the search to prove a nanny is going just as poorly. However, it seems that Kerik seems to have scrambled out of a lot of odd things as soon as it became clear that his life would be getting some scrutiny. [http://www.nypost.com/business/32731.htm](http://www.nypost.com/business/32731.htm) ---
**Author:** ![rjung](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/45deac/32.png) [@rjung](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rjung)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 8:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/98 "2004-12-16T08:34:18Z")
> [@John Mace](#): > > But, these touch, no-nonsense, hard-headed guys are, themselves, conservative. Are they, too, “effeminate”? I’m trying to udnerstand this theory in more detail… One word: _Overcompensation._😃 ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/99 "2004-12-16T16:06:03Z")
Just so. But I think its worth while to make a subtle distinction, between _authoritarian_ and _conservative_. The authoritarian is more of a personality type than a political viewpoint, he gravitates to organizations that reflect that personality, the military, the police, etc. The Chinese Communists, for instance, are authoritarian, not conservative, being Marxists. The authoritarian is more likely to fall victim to such overcompensation as friend **rjung** points out. Persons secure in thier rock-solid masculinity, for instance, will select screen names that reflect intellectual prowess and capacity, those with more tenuous grounding might opt for screen names that reflect medievel weapons, or hammers, things of that sort. Not implying anything, you understand. Just saying. ---
**Author:** ![Loopydude](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/e56c9b/32.png) [@Loopydude](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loopydude)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2004, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262/100 "2004-12-16T17:06:18Z")
Or they might pick names that make them look like an idiot in general, such as myself. Can we take it easy on the sissy jokes? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-nanny-kaputs-keriks-nomination-for-homeland-security-yeah-right/279262.md?page=6)