McCain's affairs - at what cost?

#101
#101
TennNC said:
I guess I do draw the line at what I consider to be someone's private life. I don't care if they're president. - there are certain things every human being deserves to keep to themselves and those they love most.

Does the job they're interviewing for require them to not cheat on their spouse? Should we care to know if they ever experimented with drugs? How about if they ever protested against something? How about if they ever got fired from a job? How about if they were ever abused? Are those the types of questions we should be asking to determine the character needed to lead the free world?

How about wisdom, confidence, love of mankind, and ability to motivate? I'll consider those more important than whether someone has controlled his libido.
Click to expand...

Bottom line is the POTUS is a job that demands your attention 24/7. It consumes your life while serving as commander in chief. If a man is distracted by extramarital affairs he is failing in his duties.
 
#102
#102
MG1968 said:
some of the people telling us that John Edwards' affair is not important and is a private matter are the very people who were convinced that George W's drunk driving conviction should have disqualified him from being President.
Click to expand...

Not this voter.
 
#104
#104
allvol123 said:
A thorough employer will seek to find out your financial and criminal background records, perhaps not love life, but certainly private affairs. And they have asked me and I did offer it up.

Why are you so against knowing someone lies to the people they are supposed to care about most? How do you justify this as a person that will make correct decisions for his country?
Click to expand...

I'm against forcing someone to open up their innermost private experiences to the public, regardless of who they are. It's not my business, and it distracts us from what matters.

Whether or not someone lies to their family to protect them from hurt and shame and sadness from an affair does not predict whether they will lie to US citizens about something that has a direct impact on our lives. Look no further than our current administration for proof on that one.
 
#105
#105
TennNC said:
In the case of the current president, this does not apply. See Crawford, Texas, for proof.
Click to expand...

As the president you have people with you 24/7 ready to give any briefing needed. Even while away from the white house you still have a schedule and have little time free from your duties.
 
#106
#106
KB5252 said:
As the president you have people with you 24/7 ready to give any briefing needed. Even while away from the white house you still have a schedule and have little time free from your duties.
Click to expand...

So, if he's busy having sex with his wife or with someone else, they'll still interrupt if necessary, correct? What's the difference? Or should the prez abstain while in office?
 
#107
#107
TennNC said:
I'm against forcing someone to open up their innermost private experiences to the public, regardless of who they are. It's not my business, and it distracts us from what matters.

Whether or not someone lies to their family to protect them from hurt and shame and sadness from an affair does not predict whether they will lie to US citizens about something that has a direct impact on our lives. Look no further than our current administration for proof on that one.
Click to expand...

We're not forcing anyone to open up anything. By choosing to serve the public, in essence you choose to open yourself up. As I said, most people open themselves up when applying for a job...drug tests, personal background checks etc...

So, past behavior is not a way to judge future behavior? So if you were buying a house and you learned that the neighbor next to the house has a conviction for child molestation, you'd not use this to make a judgement about the person and your choice to buy the house?
 
#108
#108
TennNC said:
So, if he's busy having sex with his wife or with someone else, they'll still interrupt if necessary, correct? What's the difference? Or should the prez abstain while in office?
Click to expand...

So you don't think a president would be distracted while worrying about things like his affair being leaked to the press? Don't things like leave a president wide open to being compromised, for example if the info got into the wrong hands and a "favor" was asked in exchange for keeping quiet? I admit it is a stretch but reasons such as this are why we need to vet our choices and make sure we elect moral men and women!
 
#109
#109
allvol123 said:
We're not forcing anyone to open up anything. By choosing to serve the public, in essence you choose to open yourself up. As I said, most people open themselves up when applying for a job...drug tests, personal background checks etc...

So, past behavior is not a way to judge future behavior? So if you were buying a house and you learned that the neighbor next to the house has a conviction for child molestation, you'd not use this to make a judgement about the person and your choice to buy the house?
Click to expand...

On the first graf, that's precisely what I'm saying - we've become more concerned with a candidate's sexual history than their leadership history. They are forced to be prepared to have their lives completely exposed. And I don't think it's healthy for anyone.

Apples to apples on these comparisons. A criminal record absolutely is public information - you break the law, it's no longer a private matter. Cheating on your spouse won't get you thrown in jail (at least not where I live).
 
#110
#110
Just imagine how easy Clinton could be bought on some Asian excursion. But yeah, why should his pattern of behavior matter.
 
#111
#111
KB5252 said:
So you don't think a president would be distracted while worrying about things like his affair being leaked to the press? Don't things like leave a president wide open to being compromised, for example if the info got into the wrong hands and a "favor" was asked in exchange for keeping quiet? I admit it is a stretch but reasons such as this are why we need to vet our choices and make sure we elect moral men and women!
Click to expand...

I gave up this hope a long time ago. It's an ideal that just doesn't really fly in today's world. The sooner I let go of it, the better off I was. Sad but true.
 
#112
#112
TennNC said:
On the first graf, that's precisely what I'm saying - we've become more concerned with a candidate's sexual history than their leadership history. They are forced to be prepared to have their lives completely exposed. And I don't think it's healthy for anyone.

Apples to apples on these comparisons. A criminal record absolutely is public information - you break the law, it's no longer a private matter. Cheating on your spouse won't get you thrown in jail (at least not where I live).
Click to expand...

Ummm...I agree with the company wanting to check me out. It is smart for them to do so and for them to do it to all other potential hires. If you have nothing to hide, then no need to worry.

Ok, you want to hide behind the criminal thing huh? Ok another example. Say the neighbor just enjoys watching his teenage daughter shower, I don't think that is illegal. You cool with that? Not going to make a judgement there?
 
#114
#114
allvol123 said:
Just imagine how easy Clinton could be bought on some Asian excursion. But yeah, why should his pattern of behavior matter.
Click to expand...

what are you talking about? what impact did Clinton's affairs have on his ability to lead, other than a completely useless, wasted investigation and distraction prompted by Linda Tripp and led by the GOP congress? There was absolutely no reason for us to ever know about that - had no bearing on anything except him, lewinsky, and his family.
 
#116
#116
TennNC said:
I gave up this hope a long time ago. It's an ideal that just doesn't really fly in today's world. The sooner I let go of it, the better off I was. Sad but true.
Click to expand...

I believe we all have to an extent. And that is precisely why we have what we have today in all levels of government.
 
#117
#117
TennNC said:
sounds like you're retracting on an earlier post that McCain's affairs are immaterial to this election.
Click to expand...
not at all. I'm saying that it has to help Obama if your point about where our major concerns lie is correct. Clearly, if we discount real qualifications like leadership and experience, Obama gets a boost, no?
 
#118
#118
TennNC said:
what are you talking about? what impact did Clinton's affairs have on his ability to lead, other than a completely useless, wasted investigation and distraction prompted by Linda Tripp and led by the GOP congress? There was absolutely no reason for us to ever know about that - had no bearing on anything except him, lewinsky, and his family.
Click to expand...

Are you serious? You honestly don't recognize how easy a man like this can be bought out? A man that would trash his promises to his family for some unattractive bimbo. Do you understand the quality of arse some foreign government could supply him?
 
#120
#120
allvol123 said:
Ummm...I agree with the company wanting to check me out. It is smart for them to do so and for them to do it to all other potential hires. If you have nothing to hide, then no need to worry.

Ok, you want to hide behind the criminal thing huh? Ok another example. Say the neighbor just enjoys watching his teenage daughter shower, I don't think that is illegal. You cool with that? Not going to make a judgement there?
Click to expand...

Ummm...I agree with the company wanting to check me out too - until it gets into my private life. That's why it's private. I keep it out of my public life. Who cares if someone has something to hide?

One of our resident attorneys can make the call, but I believe that too is illegal. another example?
 
#121
#121
TennNC said:
what are you talking about? what impact did Clinton's affairs have on his ability to lead, other than a completely useless, wasted investigation and distraction prompted by Linda Tripp and led by the GOP congress? There was absolutely no reason for us to ever know about that - had no bearing on anything except him, lewinsky, and his family.
Click to expand...

It was his actions that led to all the investigations, especially after playing word games after he was caught. All that distraction led to the accelerated development (that went unchecked) of many of the issues we are dealing with today. Would they have still happened? Probably so but we will never know to what extent they could have been curtailed.
 
#122
#122
TennNC said:
Ummm...I agree with the company wanting to check me out too - until it gets into my private life. That's why it's private. I keep it out of my public life. Who cares if someone has something to hide?

One of our resident attorneys can make the call, but I believe that too is illegal. another example?
Click to expand...


I am pretty sure that people who hire other people to watch over large sums of money and resources do not like people that hide things.

It is illegal? What is the ilegal part about it?
 
#123
#123
allvol123 said:
Are you serious? You honestly don't recognize how easy a man like this can be bought out? A man that would trash his promises to his family for some unattractive bimbo. Do you understand the quality of arse some foreign government could supply him?
Click to expand...

No. If it didn't happen while Clinton was in office, it's unlikely to happen.
 
#124
#124
KB5252 said:
It was his actions that led to all the investigations, especially after playing word games after he was caught. All that distraction led to the accelerated development (that went unchecked) of many of the issues we are dealing with today. Would they have still happened? Probably so but we will never know to what extent they could have been curtailed.
Click to expand...
so you really buy the drivel that the ongoing investigation kept Clinton from actually doing his job? I don't buy it in the least. That was just lame politics to try and make the fact that he lied to a grand jury go away.

I'm not concerned about him protecting his family from the truth, but once it got to the grand jury, he knew full well it was time to tell the truth, but he couldn't do it.
 
#125
#125
TennNC said:
No. If it didn't happen while Clinton was in office, it's unlikely to happen.
Click to expand...

You are making a huge assumption to say you know everything that went down with Clinton while he was in office. I am 100.000000% sure you do not know.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top