Ya know, I just never saw what all the hub-bub was about the tiger suit. A guy has school age kids, clowns around with them, and sends a silly pic to his staff during the holidays to share the mirth. Would it have somehow been less "scandalous" if he were playing Guitar Hero, or singing karaoke and mugging like Mick Jagger? Nobody would have given it a second thought because we've all done something like that. Seriously, I have had some hard ass bosses in the past, and a little evidence of how goofy they were - actually human! - would have been nice. And that's all I have to say about that.

I ask this question very carefully and I appologize in advance if I use the wrong words or appear to be speaking inappropriately. I also appologize for the spelling.

As a Washington resident I don't have a dog in the next Oregon legislative race, but in light of the fairly bizarre and apparently false accusations against the French guy from the World Monetary Fund or whatever, why does everybody immediately assume that the accusations against Wu are truthful and that he is a rapist or sexual predator or criminal or whatever? I don't want bad people to be running my country regardless of which state they represent, but I am also somewhat fearful / skeptical that lies can be told for political purposes.

Full disclosure - I worked for Senator Brock Adams in WA who was also accused of "diddling" the babysitter of friends or family or whatever. I am not sure whether proof was offered or accepted in that instance because I quit paying attention after the accusation. Wu seems like a bit of a loose canon or perhaps a full fledged nut-job, but I hate to see everyone concluding he is a sexual criminal or predator without specific evidence.