All the kids are trying to guess the Senator.
Glenn Thrush in Politico:
Times columnist David Brooks says he has first-hand knowledge of senatorial libidos — referencing an unnamed, presumably male Republican Senator who planted a hand near his personal no-fly zone.
John Cole “Letting Bobo’s Eagle Soar”
Doug J. , linking to Thers at Atrios‘s place, whose linking to himself linking to Ann Althouse.
What!? Perhaps the Republican Senator just periodically patted him on the thigh and technically the fingers extended into the inner part. The fact that Brooks put up with it, to me, indicates that was all it was. Why would he just think I was like, ehh, get me out of here. What stopped him from leaving? Or are we seriously to think some Senator had Brooks in an intimate grip all night and Brooks did nothing but think about how he didn’t like it?
(Is anyone genuinely startled that Brooks would have submitted to sexual abuse on the part of an abuser in a position of power…? I sure ain’t. I’d have hit the guy, and if it had been her, my wife would have hit the guy, and neither of us would have done squat to protect a sexual predator: which is part of why, I suppose, we’re just bloggers, not Elite Opinion Journalists. Dude, David, if you’re telling the truth, you’re protecting a monster — speak up, asshole. Because sure as hell there is someone else who needs to be spoken for, and who has a hell of a lot more to lose than you do by going public. I mean, the more I think about this — ha ha, a Senator gropes you in a public place, but no names, they’re all like that — I mean, Christ, this gets less funny and far more revolting.)
Here is our old op-ed friend David Brooks, who has turned a lovely shade of Holiday Orange, talking about the sexy night when some old Republican senator was just putting the moves on anybody within old-man groping distance … even David Brooks!
Which Republican senator had his hand on David Brooks’ Badonkadonk all night, under the banquet table? An easier question might be, which GOP politician isn’t playing grab-ass with other men under the banquet table? Oh and this nice teevee lady a) calls Brooks a day-drunk, and b) says that while his column is nothing special, his brief appearance on a cable-news chat show was just sup
Meanwhile, this was on Drudge and everywhere else:
Some report that this was a 16-year-old attendee of the J-8 Conference, an auxiliary event for teens around the world to the G-8 conference arranged by the UN. I’m sure Obama would not have known her age or her membership in the group; I doubt he even knew of the J-8 gathering. The object of the joke here is Obama, not the young woman, but let’s try to keep this in mind.
Obama may be the President of the United States of America but that doesn’t mean he can’t be scrutinized in the media for objectionable behavior if he’s acting inappropriately (just ask Bill Clinton).
While Barack’s “incident” is pretty much harmless compared to that of his previous Presidential counterparts, it is fuelling headlines today and has led many to question the intentions of the new President.
Conor Friedersdorf states “He’s innocent!”
Ria Misra in Politics Daily:
The video Bonnie points us toward seems to show pretty clearly that Obama wasn’t checking anyone out — though I’m also in agreement with Mia that, if he was looking, meh. Mostly, though, I’m just hoping that the next G8 headline I come across doesn’t read “Gr8: Barry and Nick BFFs!”
UPDATE: Malkin on the Obama photo
But the tizzy over the “ogling” photo is unfair.
I just watched the video and it’s clear to me he wasn’t even paying attention to the young girl in the wine-colored dress. Obama was helping another young woman down the stairs and glancing down to grab her hand. You can see him talking to the young woman (black sweater, printed skirt) while the supposed temptress made her way up in the other direction.
UPDATE #2: Conor Friedersdorf at Sully’s place on Brooks
UPDATE #3: Julian Sanchez on Obama:
A big part of the value of privacy is that it creates a space in which we’re not called upon to justify ourselves. There are all sorts of things you’re willing to say and do among your close friends that you’d be far more hesitant to do in public, or on film, because your friends have a context within which to understand your words and behavior—and they know that soundbite or snapshot doesn’t define you as a person. Outside that intimate circle, one disclosure may require a cascade of further disclosures to provide that context to those who might otherwise misjudge you: The photograph gives the wrong impression, so you’d better hope there’s video handy to correct it. Not a terribly big deal for public officials, who fully expect to surrender substantial privacy when they take office, but potentially a growing issue for the rest of us as routine photography and videotaping of ordinary social interactions becomes ever more commonplace.
Around The Sphere 
Pingback: What We’ve Built Today « Around The Sphere