aceman67

I was talking with one of my friends, an American living in Israel, and we started talking about who will win the presidential election. I said it'll either Obama or Clinton, and that McCain doesn't have a snowballs chance on the surface of the sun.

Well, once I said Clinton, it immediately brought up the Lewinsky scandal, and that any woman who stays with a man who cheated on her isn't fit to lead a country.

So, I was like, what?

It is seriously beyond all my comprehension why the hell something like that would determine if someone is fit for public office. The scandal aside, what Clinton did was wrong, he broke the law by lying under oath.

Now here's where I stop understanding things: In Canada it would have been a non issue, a media circus yes, but the whole problem would have never have made it to court (and has such, no chance of lying under oath), and last I checked, adultery isn't illegal in the United States, grounds for divorce, yes, but not illegal.

Canada has had its fair share of Prime Ministers who have had problems. Our first Prime Minister, the Right Honorable Sir John A. MacDonald, was a chronic Alcoholic, and was known to be drunk while in office. Even the best Prime Minister we ever had, Pierre Trudeau had issues, he was a womanizer and it was public knowledge that he beat his wife. Did this affect how they did their jobs? No, in fact, both men were reelected.

So I ask this: What is the big deal with knowing our leaders personal lives, then basing their eligibility to carry out public office on it?

__________________

Arrianna

It is only a deal if what they have done shows a lack of integrity. If they will lie and cheat on their family why should they care less about constituents they have never met? Since they are supposed to represent me I want a leader that will give a care about me too.

If their personal actions have nothing to do with that I couldn't care less and feel it is nobodies business.

__________________

l Stone Hold l Now We're Cooking! l

aceman67

I'm more concerned about a leader who will get the job done and look after the interests of their constituency.

I want a leader who can do their job regardless of what is going on at home or in their personal lives. There's something to be said about putting aside their lives and personal interests and putting their full effort into serving their office.

__________________

Arrianna

So am I, that is why I want someone with integrity. If they have no integrity I have no guarantee they will care about their job or their constituency instead of just lying to everyone and getting as much power and money out of it as they can.

__________________

l Stone Hold l Now We're Cooking! l

Shodokan

I think the personal lives of our leaders has nothing to do with us. Bill Clinton did nothing illegal and the media should have left it alone. That was his business and not ours. I voted for Obama but I wanted to tell his wife to shut up when she said Hillary shouldn't be president since her husband cheated on her.

And Arianna just because someone gets drunk or has a girlfriend while they're married doesn't mean they don't have intergrity. As long as they do they're job while they do have intergrity.

__________________
____________________________________________

Astaroth

My answer to that would be political rival-ship.......
It is about power in politics and the more the person had power the more enemies he or she is going to have and the more their enemies want to ruin them.....and the best way to do that is to catch them doing something they are not "supposed" to do and put it through the media and then the rest is history....the news will spread like wild-fire through TV and through newspapers.....and then that person is finished..because no matter if the scandal is true or not....his or her image was ruined....and that was the prime goal for the political enemies....

__________________

aceman67

I like how you ignored my second statement, Arianna.

If you had the choice between someone who lacked personal integrity when it came to his family life, but would lead the nation into a golden age of prosperity, or a person who embodied every family value that you held dear and had the integrity of ten men but knew that they were an imbecile (Two extremes, I know, but you get my point), which would you choose?

And Shadokan, I want to know how you voted for Obama when the democratic ticket hasn't even been set yet.

__________________

P.R. Princess

umm i dont really see a big problem really like with the Prime minister being a drunk and stuff i just hope he wasn't drunk when he was making decisions thats when i say there is a problem. like if they keep their lives seperate i dont see a problem.

and what happens in their life is their own business. Now unless he the president like kills someoen then we should know but like people cheating on other people we have it all the time. So i dont think it should matter just because Clinton was president. it happens. i say get over it .

__________________

Arrianna

Actually it does if they have a girlfriend (or paying prostitutes etc.) since part of integrity is honesty. Having a girlfriend when you have committed to be loyal to a single person, your wife or husband, is not being honest. Again if they will lie and cheat on the person that is supposed to mean that much to them why wouldn't they do the same to you.

I didn't see how it was necessary since, again, if they don't have integrity why would I believe that they will put any effort into their job that doesn't benefit them personally. Given the choices you presented I would rather have an imbecile since with our system of government an imbecile can't do much damage but a selfish politician who cares more for their own profit and gain can do a great deal. Just look at the mess Clinton left the CIA and military in. Buuuut... I don't live in Canada and if I didn't live in the US and had those options I would be considering supporting a 3rd party candidate... or starting a revolution.

__________________

l Stone Hold l Now We're Cooking! l

Shodokan

I'm not in the mood to explain how my country runs their primary elections. You can look that information up yourself.


Is it lying when your wife knows about your girlfriend Arianna? Or are you saying it's morally wrong to have a girlfriend?

That's not what he's saying Arianna. He's saying would you rather have an incompetent person in charge who screwed up everything or a person who was married and had a girlfriend and ..... I don't know smoked weed. And was a great leader who did his job right. When I say did his job right I mean not using his power for selfish reasons like you're suggesting. Or are you saying it's physically impossible for someone in that scaranio to do that?

__________________
____________________________________________

lebasiara

No, I don't think the personal lives of the politicians should be of our concern... not to the point where they cannot go out to eat as normal people. However a person's life can actually tell if the person is actually going to handle the whole country (or state) at the best; and I think the voters have the right to know what kind of person is going to run the country.

On the Clinton scandal, yes we know and of course he knows what he did was wrong and we should not take it out now. It has nothing to do with his wife whatsoever... but if clinton would have run for president again (if he could) his past life would have say that he is not actually very capable handling the country why? because if he cannot even control himself nor his household... how can he run an entire country?

__________________

Awesome sig Yasmine ^_^ I appreciate it thank you very much ^_^