School marm Perdue issues a warning

Well, Bev, you really got 'em skeered now. Yessiree. Those state troopers who have been taking out their testosterone on young women, both motorists and Highway Patrol secretaries, using their state phones to send titillating text messages, drinkin' and drivin' (no doubt just for research) and cozying up to politicians in hopes of a plum promotion are on notice now.

Yessir, one more violation, and you'll ... you'll frown at 'em and tell 'em that was a no-no! "No, no, no! You can't take your pants off while on duty." "No, no, no! You can't get caught drivin' drunk. Perception is reality, and if you are perceived to be drunk, well you just might be drunk, and then I'll have to call a press conference and tell the whole state that I'm disappointed in you, and you wouldn't like that, would you?"

I'm sure what really skeeers 'em is having to sign this new ethics pledge. Why men who fool around with other men's wives and beat their dogs and pull political strings and wiggle out of drunk driving arrests fear nothing more than having to sign an ethics pledge. I'll bet they're all quaking in their spit-shined boots. And all this talk about "zero tolerance"? They've gotta be sweating that one. After all, they've seen what "zero tolerance" means in Raleigh; it's the rough equivalent of "you better not get caught, but if you do you better have a good excuse."

You've really shown what you're made of, Bev. We know you wanted to be the Education Governor, just like Jim and Terry and those guys, but they didn't get to be E.G.'s by talking to subordinates like they were second-graders and then giving them a second-grade punishment. Are you gonna make Col. Randy Glover write 100 times "I must not blame the news media when my troopers get caught with their pants down"? The only thing missing at Wednesday's news conference was a 12-inch wooden ruler for slapping someone's hand. Make a note for the next news conference, OK?

We all remember that campaign commercial you ran in 2008, the one with all the cute (and ethnically diverse) school children leading cheers for Bev Perdue ("She's got a Ph.D.!"). But we really didn't think you'd try to run the state as if it were a second-grade classroom. Even a second-grade teacher should be able to recognize when the kids on Safety Patrol are arrogant and misbehaving and need to be replaced. Did you skip that class in grad school, or do you think the Safety Patrol guys are just too cute to be fired?

Bev, instead of portraying an irked school marm, you should take a lesson from another North Carolinian, who never became governor (he would have been a great one) but was a great education administrator (despite not having a Ph.D.) Bill Friday, president emeritus of the UNC system, turns 90 on Tuesday. When he had to reprimand subordinates at the university (thanks to N&O columnist Jim Jenkins for this tidbit), he would remind them, "Remember, you and I work for the people of North Carolina. All of them." I'll bet that's a better ethics pledge than the one you're asking troopers to sign, Bev.

Entertainers exempted from moral code

The News & Observer has offered a lousy "Point-Counterpoint" of columnists dueling over the issue of David Letterman's sexual affairs with female subordinates. This is not the only ethical/moral incident that should be beyond debate, and the fact that many Americans consider this a debatable issue or are willing to give the late-night comic a free pass makes a statement about our principles, or lack thereof.

The other prominent moral indecisiveness has to do with movie director Roman Polanski, who pleaded guilty to the rape of a drugged, underage girl in 1977. He had been in exile in France since fleeing the United States until he was arrested recently on a fugitive warrant in Switzerland. Since that arrest, many of Polanski's colleagues in the film industry have expressed outrage that this talented man should be subjected to punishment for molesting a child 32 years ago. This moral dilemma has even been lampooned in the liberal-leaning comic strip Doonesbury.

First, Letterman: The comedian's sex life would not have come to light, apparently, had it not been for an ill-conceived extortion attempt by a CBS news producer, who allegedly demanded $2 million or he would produce a play or a book or something revealing Letterman's habit of bedding his subordinates. Letterman refused the extortion demand, had the alleged blackmailer arrested and admitted a vague outline of his offenses on his late-night show.

Since then, many Letterman defenders have said that his sexual habits are nobody's business. He's not a politician, he wasn't jeopardizing national security, and nobody "got hurt," except maybe his wife, whom he wed recently after a long-term relationship. In most corporations, however, what Letterman allegedly did would be severely punished. Since the 1970s, and particularly since the 1991 sexual misconduct allegations against Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas, most corporations have established written policies forbidding sexual relationships between superiors and subordinates. Some would contend that any such relationship is, by definition, coercive. After all, the subordinate's livelihood is dependent upon the superior's good favor. Many lawsuits have been filed alleging that sexual favors were demanded or expected or that raises and promotions hinged on sexual submission.

Author Michael Crichton, in his novel "Disclosure," turned the tables on the sexual harassment debate by having a fictional female superior demand sex from a male subordinate and then file a false sexual harassment claim against him. The novel was turned into a movie featuring Demi Moore and Michael Douglas.

After claiming for years that all superior/subordinate relationships are toxic, many people are willing to give Letterman a pass because ... well, he's a comedian, and he even makes mea culpas funny, and creative types are different, and nobody's complaining ... are they? My guess is that if Letterman were the manager of a 7-11 and these affairs with subordinates came to light, he'd be fired on the spot.

As for Polanski, his defenders cite the length of time since the incident with a 14-year-old and his generally law-abiding life since then. The victim is reportedly no longer interested in testifying against Polanski; she'd rather forget about that episode. But the court record shows what can only be termed inexcusably reprehensible conduct on Polanski's part — drugging and raping a girl well below the age of consent. Obscure men who have committed similar offenses are wearing the indelible, lifetime label of "sexual predator."

I don't know that David Letterman should be fired and banished from late-night television or that Roman Polanski should spend the rest of his life in prison, but I do think society has lost its moral compass when it allows celebrities a different set of moral and ethical standards than the rest of us.