RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


kdsub -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 9:30:14 AM)

Yea I guess we need to use some scales when judging people… their faults weighted against their contributions.

As bad as adultery is I don’t think a person, man or woman , should be judged on only one weakness or fault. We all have many if we admit to it.

But we also have the right to judge people by the way the scale moves.

Butch




Moonhead -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 9:30:48 AM)

Which is why the profession attracts so many undesirables.
[:D]




Lucylastic -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 9:31:28 AM)

Im gonna disagree with you , its simply because THEY want to legislate morality
lets keep it in the realm of politics
Doctors aren't in the business of deciding what laws people have to live by, they can only suggest ways to live. One is free to find another doctor if you dont like his opinion




tazzygirl -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 9:32:44 AM)

quote:

FBI Director J Edgar Hoover had the adultery goods, it is reported, on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Speaks to the question, I think.


Which he told MLK's wife... and got pissed when the marriage didnt fall apart.

As I said, they sit on that information until it is politically prudent for them to reveal it.

Did it hurt Coretta? Some who were close to her said yes... but that she also felt the movement was bigger than their personal problems.




tj444 -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 9:33:51 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess
Again, Bernie Madoff was faithful to his wife.

Was he??? not according to some.. there was apparently an article about his trysts in the New York Times and even a book Madoff's Other Secret about his adultery.. [8|]

http://www.newser.com/story/68470/despite-sex-and-scandal-madoff-books-are-a-bust.html
http://www.divorcesaloon.com/2009/08/18/bernie-madoff-250000-pay-off-to-secretary-to-hush-adultery/




Owner59 -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 9:49:07 AM)

FR:

There are so many standards for what fidelity is.

There are real people who allow their SOs to have other relationships but still maintain long term,loving primary relationships.As long as everyone is TRULY ok with these types of arrangements,I see nothing wrong with that at all.It`s usually the acception though.

And one should know that even today,most people would NOT be OK with poly relationships.Though I don`t agree that other`s peoples business is mine,I understand why others wouldn`t be so liberal.For some conservatives,the thought that it would be consensual makes it even more hedonistic and shameful.The "what would they say" meter would red-line.

I`ve also seen a few marriages break up because of poly activities.It`s not for everyone.

The standard though for most men who have outside relationships, is cheating.There is no doubt about that and the narrative from the time we started sharpening sticks w/ rocks is men think with their little heads.So with that backround,people are naturally suspicious and won`t think about poly in positive terms.



But a cheater is a cheater.

Many men and some women will have affairs that kill their marriages.Many couples though survive affairs and don`t break-up.Again,it`s their business what they do and crush anyone`s testicles in a vice for putting down other people for NOT leaving their spouses, after an affair.


There are things more important than ones`s lust,pride or the neighbor's opinion.Like kids or someone with an illness.If they want to stay married,I say support and upleft them.It`s none of your fucking business anyway,get a life and worry about your own relationship(or lack of one)!



Some guys are just going to say anything to have their cake and eat it too.ANYTHING.Promise it won`t happen again,go Herman Cain and deny deny deny,claim it was a one time "thang',whatever it takes.No amount of appeasement will satisfy them.It`s like a kid in a candy store.

Eventually they will lose all respect,even from friends and family.But what are you gonna do?


As far as having affairs and fitness goes,I`d have to say what I said about needing to be a military veteran to be POTUS.It doesn`t matter, either way.

There is no evidence that bush jr. or Richard Nixon had outside relationships but they were probably our 1st and 2nd worst presidents in modern history.And there`s nothing that says guys who did step out,were poor leaders or not successful.

BUT,no one is going to tolerate a clear hypocrite/habitual offender though.The Daily Show clip showing newt pandering to the "family values voters" about the sanctity of marriage and about how he wants to "protect the family",etc. was as nauseating as it was hilarious.




fucktoyprincess -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 10:09:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
FBI Director J Edgar Hoover had the adultery goods, it is reported, on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Speaks to the question, I think.


Thanks for this example. What a loss in leadership if MLK had been discredited for adultery. Great people make great change. We should search for greatness, and understand that adultery is not really part of the equation of greatness.




fucktoyprincess -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 10:12:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Did it hurt Coretta? Some who were close to her said yes... but that she also felt the movement was bigger than their personal problems.


A great example of why leaders deserve a private sphere. How he and his wife chose to deal with their personal issues speaks volumes about good leadership.




tazzygirl -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 10:19:18 AM)

A great difference. King wasnt there to preach abouit family values and be elected. He was there for race relations and freedom. His personal life had nothing to do with his political one.




Iamsemisweet -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 10:23:14 AM)

I absolutely agree that public officials should have a privacy zone.  I suppose that is one reason why I excused Bill Clinton for lying about his stupid affair with that idiot Monica.  He shouldn't have been asked the question in the first place.  Instead of lying, I wish that he had said that, but he didn't.  What does bug me is the hypocrisy shown by the right wingers who pander to the bible thumpers and then have various sordid affairs on the side.  If you spend a lot of time insisting that other people should conduct their lives in a particular manner, than you better be walking the talk yourself, as far as I am concerned.  With some of these guys, Elmer Gantry comes to mind, without the sheer hunkiness that was Burt Lancaster.




fucktoyprincess -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 10:24:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
One is free to find another doctor if you dont like his opinion


Last I checked we are still a democracy, and when people don't like an elected politician because they feel he has done a bad job, they are free to vote him out. That is the equivalent of finding someone new. No one is President for life (unless they changed the Constitution while I wasn't looking).




tj444 -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 10:33:21 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML
FBI Director J Edgar Hoover had the adultery goods, it is reported, on Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Speaks to the question, I think.


Thanks for this example. What a loss in leadership if MLK had been discredited for adultery. Great people make great change. We should search for greatness, and understand that adultery is not really part of the equation of greatness.

MLK was not an elected politician, he was a private person. Huge difference imo..




fucktoyprincess -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 10:33:59 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

A great difference. King wasnt there to preach abouit family values and be elected. He was there for race relations and freedom. His personal life had nothing to do with his political one.


Well, he was a clergyman. I would have thought that would have held him to a high standard within his own community on an issue like adultery. He also used his influence as part of the clergy to mobilize African-American and white clerical support.

I am glad MLK was not de-railed by his community for adultery despite being part of the clergy. I am glad his community was willing to see past his personal life to the bigger picture.

But my point, again, is not about the hypocrisy of conservatives like Gingrich (everyone is in agreement about that), but about the overall topic of adultery and fitness for office, and the concept of a sphere of privacy for elected officials.

And my larger point is simply how many good politicians do we lose because people are too scared to even enter the profession given the lack of a private sphere?




tazzygirl -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 10:35:16 AM)

quote:

MLK was not an elected politician, he was a private person. Huge difference imo..


He was quasi-private. Not elected, but very much a part of the political environment at the time. A mover and shaker without needing any votes.




Lucylastic -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 10:37:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
One is free to find another doctor if you dont like his opinion


Last I checked we are still a democracy, and when people don't like an elected politician because they feel he has done a bad job, they are free to vote him out. That is the equivalent of finding someone new. No one is President for life (unless they changed the Constitution while I wasn't looking).

nope you are right they arent, but have you ever tried getting rid of a politician outside of the Pres?
voting someone out isnt as quick as changing doctors
getting laws changed takes even longer.
that is why the doctor/ politician is not a fair analogy, in my opinion




fucktoyprincess -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 10:38:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

MLK was not an elected politician, he was a private person. Huge difference imo..


I understand he was not elected. The issue is what makes a good leader. The point is simply that adultery is not indicative one way or the other about leadership qualities. I am sure MLK would ALSO have made an excellent elected public official. And maybe if he hadn't been assassinated, maybe he would have pursued an elected position somewhere. Who knows? The fact remains that adultery tells us ZERO about someone's professional capabilities.








tazzygirl -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 10:40:41 AM)

quote:

The point is simply that adultery is not indicative one way or the other about leadership qualities.


Nope, the act of adultry isnt. The handling of the subject once its discovered is.




Lucylastic -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 10:44:26 AM)

whats a smart man to do when he discovers his wife has rumbled him and could hurt him politically?
claim he ASKED or wanted an open marriage.




tazzygirl -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 10:47:34 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

whats a smart man to do when he discovers his wife has rumbled him and could hurt him politically?
claim he ASKED or wanted an open marriage.



In all these accusations of adultry, all the scandals, all the hurt... the one that has truly shown a great ability to act with much dignity is Chelsea.




Musicmystery -> RE: Fitness to Serve for Public Office (1/20/2012 10:54:58 AM)

quote:

any studies that link propensity for adultery to other crimes that would render someone unfit for public office


Studies that link ________ to fitness for office don't exist, because it would be a priori an opinion piece.

To be president, for example, you need to do four things:

1) be at least 35
2) have no felonies
3) be a natural born citizen
4) get a majority of electoral college votes

That's it.

Note that number 4 is subjective. It's a race for prom queen. Nor do the electoral college people have to follow the popular vote or even party preferences. One elector voted for Reagan in 1976.






Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
3.320313E-02