It must be about his grace, charm and good looks, huh?

Power is the greatest aphrodisiac, it has been said. Added to which, the more affluent and powerful a man or woman happens to be, the more likely they are to drop pants/panties for somebody who has been attracted to their power and/or wealth. In other words, if you're rich, you're going to screw around relative to your position in life, and the richer you are, the more opportunities you are going to get.

So, while the rest of us fret about whether our breath is kissing sweet, whether we might think about changing our hairstyle, or worry because we don't look remotely like George Clooney or Charlize Theron, rich and powerful shits can look like toads, have the personal hygiene of a dumpster-diver, and the manners of Homer Simpson, and they will get laid left right and centre. And, they will get laid by some mighty fine looking people. Don't seem right, do it? It's one of those revelations about the lies our parents told us of the nature of "cheaters never prosper." In fact, it's mainly the non-cheaters who don't prosper, as we see around us all the time. Bill Clinton, on the other hand, can have the most charming oral sessions with thong-flashing Miss Monica, and walk away virtually unscathed. Oh, a bit of public embarrassment, but no big deal. But, for the less than affluent and powerful, the opportunities diminish notably, with the most impoverished being the most upstanding (as it were) in the carnal extracurricularity department. Does this mean that po' folk are more fastidious about their morals. Probably not. They just don't get the opportunities because their circumstances don't provide the allure.

Take the case of British Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott, and his girl-toy Tracey Temple (pictured on the front of the scandal-sheet above). I mean, this is a bloated 67-year-old male who would make the average mud-fence look good, and she, at 20-plus years younger ain't so bad. Do you think it was his huge charm that attracted his erstwhile (very) private secretary?
I think not, but maybe I am just being cynical. I believe her desire to carry on with the man was based by the fact that (until he's turfed as a result of the scandal) that she was attracted by the fact that he held the #2 position in the UK.

But there is more to it than that. He is no doubt an alpha male, and she is, equally no doubt, an alpha female. In terms of genetic positioning they will have intrinsic proclivities towards each other because the 'strong' and successful survive so (not that they are intending to have any if Mrs. Prescott has anything to say about it) any offspring would be equally strong and dominant.

And, the rest of us will have to persist in worrying about our personal freshness and maybe getting cosmetic surgery, or at least have our teeth bleached.