Gores splitting up?

Parent Cafe
61

<p>

</p>

<p>Why? I don’t get it. What’s so wrong about them being amicably separated or divorced? Why is being together and potentially miserable such a better state of affairs? </p>

<p>Again, I’m biased because of my parents’ situation – but my parents loved and treated one another very well for 25 years of marriage, and when they separated, it was all amicable. I think they’ve raised their voices to one another maybe 5 times in those 25 years (and yes, I do know a lot of the behind-the-scenes). Their parting was completely amicable. No arguments over money, who was to get what, none of that. They’re both happy now – my mom dates and does her own thing, my dad has his new lady friend who is a nice woman – and this weekend, as a matter of fact, my dad is coming up here for a family event and we’re all going out together. They even still “coordinate” on big gifts (for example, they went in together on a large gift for my sister).</p>

<p>I contrast that with my H’s parents, married 50 years and with frequent fighting and tension, and I would take my mother’s situation over my MIL’s in a heartbeat.</p>

<p>I wish the Gores the best. It’s quite possible that this will be as civilized as I am describing for their grown children and grandchildren. Better they part on good terms, IMO.</p>

62

<p>I don’t think that is going to happen Mom2. I believe as media savvy as they are, they were probably separated for months already. I think you will see them be officially divorced very quickly. </p>

<p>If you look back over the past few yrs he has been busy doing his thing and she has never been with him. The media has never cared about their marriage like they do the Clintons, thus it was under the radar. They cared about his carbon footprint!</p>

63

<p>Pizzagirl, I don’t get it either. Why would I “want” two total strangers to remain married if that’s not what they want? Who are we to say a couple “should” stay and work it out? </p>

<p>Perhaps they just ran out of gas. Life is short-maybe they want to live out the rest of their lives differently than they have up until now. It’s their business and I have zero stake in it.</p>

64

<p>Yeah. His carbon footprint. Which must be considerable. 9 million dollar mansion in Montecito, homes in Nashville and Washington, DC. A farm in Tennessee and an apartment in San Francisco. And flying private jets around the country. Maybe Tipper just got tired of living with a big hypocrite.</p>

65

<p>I think as two smart, interesting, accomplished people with wide circles they will each meet a peer and have happier lives. There’s nothing like a fresh romance to put a skip in your step, spark up life and make you feel young and reenergized. Second chances can be very good.</p>

66

<p>I’m neither approving or or condemning private jets, but this made me think … Presidents and VPs get Secret Service protection for life, correct? (Which I don’t begrudge one bit to any of them) Could a former VP really fly commercial like the rest of us peons, from a protection / security standpoint?</p>

67

<p>I think that Nixon flew commercial jets after he left office.</p>

68

<p>Both of them are in their late 50’s or early 60’s. They might live another 25 or 30 years. </p>

<p>If they choose to get divorced, you can’t say they didn’t “try”. They did the work. But their marriage was a lot different than ours. We lead normal, private lives.</p>

<p>They have chosen to move on. We shouldn’t judge. I wish them the best and that both of them find happiness in their new lives.</p>

69

<p>Pizzagirl, I don’t think that VPs get SS protection for life, and the protection for former presidents was recently limited to a certain number of years.</p>

<p>I wish the Gores well.</p>

70

<p>Don’t we all know of a LOT of “empty nest” divorces? Seems like these days instead of asking “how’s your wife?” I should ask “are you still married?” </p>

<p>Years ago, when you were 60, you thought you had maybe another 5 years left, why bother with a divorce. Now you maybe have 20 or 25 good years left, why not pursue happiness (rather than, as someone said, stability)?</p>

71

<p>

</p>

<p>Right. And I do think it helps when there is plenty of money. If Grandpa is working in California and Grandma is working in DC, they can both fly in for grandchild’s graduation, married or not.</p>

72

<p>Former presidents get SS protection for life (as well as their wives) Nixon refused it and paid for his own. </p>

<p>I don’t know what former VPs get.</p>

<p>Anyway…back to topic…</p>

<p>I just don’t like seeing the destruction of marriage. I understand when there is abuse and such.</p>

<p>I guess some would like the vows to change from “till death do us part,” to “till I need to find a more exciting romance elsewhere.”</p>

73

<p>

</p>

<p>I wonder whether vice presidents get protection. As for former Presidents, I recently had lunch in the same restaurant as George H.W. Bush, who had discreet but definite protection. I noticed the “protection” before I noticed the “protected”.</p>

74

<p>My ex-husband and I divorced almost 4 years ago after 20 years of marriage. It was terrible - although we managed everything as well as we could so the kids felt as little as possible disruption and hostility. </p>

<p>I have a favor to ask of all of you. Most people who divorce after a long marriage do have their reasons. Whether these are reasons you’d agree with or not, just bear that in mind. But what I really want to say is that many of you who are so against divorce, ostensibly because of what it does to kids, actually make it HARDER on the kids whose parents do separate.</p>

<p>Much of the pain of divorce is shame. The taboo against it doesn’t always stop it, and almost always adds awful feelings of failure and embarrassment to something that is already painful. If we as a society could actually move to a mode where divorce was assumed to be possible, we actually might find ourselves with more successful marriages. And kids who are less damaged by marriages that fail.</p>

<p>For example, we should ALL have to get divorced before we get married. That would be a quick lesson in the reality of finances. It would also help uncover the hidden power balance that exists in many marriages. Also consider this. If divorce were considered POSSIBLE then we’d not keep so many secrets about our marriages.</p>

<p>I know this is going to get me flamed, but I don’t mind. I hated having “divorce cooties” after my long-standing marriage ended. We were one of “those couples.” The ones everyone saw as a model. No substance or any other kind of abuse. Just some profound emotional issues that did not get resolved in time. I still feel terribly guilty about it all. But I believe that had I considered the divorce would be POSSIBLE, I would have conducted myself different in the marriage, and perhaps we’d still be together.</p>

75

<p>Today, the Secret Service is authorized by law to protect:</p>

<pre><code>* The president, the vice president, (or other individuals next in order of succession to the Office of the President), the president-elect and vice president-elect

  • The immediate families of the above individuals
  • Former presidents and their spouses for their lifetimes, except when the spouse remarries. In 1997, Congressional legislation became effective limiting Secret Service protection to former presidents for a period of not more than 10 years from the date the former president leaves office
  • Children of former presidents until age 16
    </code></pre>

<p>(Pres Bush authorized that Chelsea Clinton would continue to have secret service protection. I don’t know if she still has it or not.)</p>

76

<p>I didn’t know that. That’s very gracious on Pres Bush’s part. I don’t have a problem with SS-for-life protection being given to any of these people and their families, personally. It’s rounding error in government budgets and they have personal security risks we can’t even imagine. Even today, you know darn well there are nutjobs likely after the Gore kids / grandkids, the Bush twins, etc. that we just don’t hear about.</p>

77

<p>Hey, their famous kiss was ten years ago–lots of marriages don’t last that long in the first place. Things can change a lot in ten years.</p>

<p>I have to confess that I’m pretty cynical about these things, and suspect that there may be another woman in the story. If so, they’ve handled it well by preempting the tabloids.</p>

78

<p>*Why? I don’t get it. What’s so wrong about them being amicably separated or divorced? Why is being together and potentially miserable such a better state of affairs? *</p>

<p>I think for people who are uncomfortable with change, divorce in late middle age in their peer group can be frightening. </p>

<p>Familiarity can be a huge time saver- by staying married not only do you get out of having to find a date for New Years, but you don’t have to keep explaining past experiences or people to your sig other. ( then again- after memory loss sets in…)</p>

<p>I think the same way about the prospect of dating someone more than 10 or so years younger than myself. Not that I am dating( heaven forbid), but I was recently in college with 20 & even 30 somethings, and their ( lack of ) experience regarding the Vietnam war, womens rights movement or even rock music was very different than my own.
Explaining is so exhausting. I am definitely not a teacher, except in limited subjects.
;)</p>

<p>I agree that Al is not very personable- although I have heard he is more charming in person, than in the media- but I do think he is very intelligent and I appreciate his enthusiasm and knowledge of environmental science.</p>

<p>But haven’t they been together since high school? Gah! Unless you are superhuman, that sort of thing would be difficult to sustain for 10 years, let alone 40+, if they just want to be friends, I think they probably deserve it.</p>

<p>I also wouldn’t cite Gore weight gain as reason for divorce however- we don’t know the cause- perhaps he is on medication or has other health issues that have caused the weight gain, and do we really think that of itself is the reason after all the other situations they have weathered in their marriage?
Not likely.</p>

<p>But as someone who has been with her H since 1976, after I meeting him at 18 , I would also point out that it unrealistic no matter how much in love you are initially- to continue to be " in love" for years on end. Certainly not at the same time. ( and without heavy medication) We went through very difficult stages- separation of over a year when our youngest was in grade school- and that was one of the easier ones,( daughter not expected to live- disabilties- depression- other health issues- addiction- abuse- long term unemployment)- fun times :p</p>

<p>But if you look for external reasons to " be happy", IMO, you are less likely to find it on a consistent basis, than if you find it from within.</p>

<p>It is no one’s responsibility for make you happy- that is a bar that is not only unrealistic- but selfish.</p>

<p>A life partner is not going to meet all your needs or even half of them without giving up many of their own & that isn’t the sort of relationship that is healthy or lasting.</p>

<p>I don’t think any one style of looking at mating is right for all people. We also don’t know what would have been the road not taken. I don’t know what my life would have been like had I never gotten back together with H, when I broke up with him before we married & I went away for a trip with another man- but my mother who always had liked H- encouraged him to keep after me ( unlike my H’s parents- who would have bought me a one way ticket to Timbuktu with their pensions if they could)</p>

<p>I know that my kids at times have blamed me for not leaving- because our house was so full of yelling and pain- and I am sorry for that- & I hope I have saved up enough for their therapy.
:o</p>

<p>But now we have reached a stage where we are more willing and able to work on our own stuff and our relationship has probably improved 100%. ( we also have been in counseling together and separate many times)</p>

<p>But while part of me has a commitment to him- similar to the commitment I have for my children- I will always be a part of their lives- no matter what- that isn’t the same thing as saying I choose to always be married to him - no matter what.</p>

<p>We have a lot in common- like the Gores, we have grown up together ( he is 3 years older), but while there is much in common- there are also core differences, that I didn’t see even twenty years ago. If I was still in the mind-set of wanting to get the bulk of my fulfillment through him or alongside him, I would be setting myself up for disappointment and it would be my own fault.</p>

<p>Joy in life- doesn’t come from others- we have to find it in our own hearts.</p>

<p>I also want to add- that whether this is a temporary separation or divorce, it certainly is very refreshing to have it come before any big forced disclosure of scandal.</p>

79

<p>

</p>

<p>I agree in part. But some people have the ability to suck the joy out of every situation…does the spouse really have to live with him/her until death?</p>

80

<p>^^^</p>

<p>I would think such a trait should be able to be identified before marriage.</p>