“Just keep ’em barefoot and pregnant.”

This morning, I read two accounts of the Paul Wolfowitz/Shaha Riza “scandal” at the World Bank. At least, I think they were about the same thing — they so little in common, I wonder if they were about two different couples with the same name.

The first was from the Boston Herald. According to columnist Dale McFeatters, Riza was little more than a modern-day Elizabeth Ray, Wolfowitz’ concubine that he kept around (and gave raises and promotions to) to feather his own nest and keep her happy.

The other account is from the Opinion Journal. In that piece, former World Bank Director Robert Holland talks about a two-career couple, both highly driven, who tried to follow all the rules and abide by all the protocols without having to choose between their jobs and their relationships — and were sabotaged by those they thought they could trust to act honorably.

So, which account is more credible?

Well, one of them relies on innuendo, snide remarks, stereotypes, and cheap shots. The other uses personal experiences and knowledge, facts, quotations, citations, and lays out a very compelling theory as to why this “scandal” broke now — and how.

So, which to believe? Normally, I’m not swayed by titles and credentials. But in this case, I’d have to say that Mr. Holland’s account is far, far more plausible.

Democrats Wage Information Warfare
Laughter, the best revenge