Originally Posted by QBNCGAR
Jim - I certainly understand where you're coming from, but we'll simply have to agree to disagree.
I'm honestly not obsessed with Clinton - I'm certainly puzzled by the fact that he gets lionized while Republicans get castigated, based on whether or not the given abhorrent behavior was 'legal'. Your standards are far lower than mine.
I don't mean this as an insult, but applying the standard we're discussing, I think a lot of the people who don't want to hold elected officials to a high standard are they themselves reticent due to concerns of hypocrisy. It's amazing to me just how much we'll let people get away with, as long as we've done it (or are friendly with someone else who has). After all, the only thing worse than a scumbag, is a hypocritical scumbag - right? That is a recipe for the rapid decline of our civilization, my friend.
The deal with Newt wasn't a big story, because as you pointed out, he has been married three times. Who of us isn't friends with someone who has divorced? Usually the 'marriage' is over far before the technical details of a legal decree have been finalized...in that situation, is dating someone else really cheating? I can certainly see those shades of gray. But somehow, Bill and Hillary are still "married". To me, that speaks VOLUMES about both of them as people (let's not forget that there was more than one episode with Monica, and more than one "Monica" episode).
Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. I'm more obsesesd with Clinton apologists and voters. To me, that lot are a truckload of fucking turnip truck morons, because this fact has escaped them completely.
To more specifically address your question regarding Newt, and other scumbags, I typically reserve judgement until the story is a bit clearer. I'm not sure of the timelines involved with Newt, but from what I recall, he definitely made the shit list. I think he's a very smart guy, and should probably still provide some form of consultative support to the GOP, but I don't think he's worthy of elected office.
Say what you want about Romney, he too believes that elected officials should be held to a higher standard. Anyone who doesn't isn't being genuine - they're positioning themselves to avoid appearing hypocritical...either they unapologetically supported a scumbag in the past (and thusly must continue supporting scumbag behavior), or they themselves have had momentary lapses of reason (and thusly can't hold anyone else to account for doing the same).
Pretty soon, we'll all be scumbags, because nobody will be left to stand up and say "I'm not a scumbag, and I think we can all do better than being a bunch of scumbags."
I don't believe there are enough of those kinds of humans you have prescribed for the job. And, I base that on the fact that very few elected government officials exhibit those characteristics. I understand your point, I just put it in the same category as living on a budget. I would like only the best things in life, but I can not afford them, so I compromise to some level of what I can afford that does not offend my sensibilities or perceived needs.
I live by the "do unto others as you would have others do unto you" logic. If my non-criminal, personal life is off limits to the government, so to are the personal lives of the officials in the government. When I break a law I void the agreement. When a government official breaks the law he voids the agreement. Entrapment aside.
I don't understand the hang up on this issue with sex. Maybe it is Illinois. Similar laws, known as Blue Laws around these parts have been revoked specifically because they insert the government where it doesn't belong. Doesn't mean more Yankees are committing adultery than people in Illinois. Or more Yankees are gay. It means Yankess have decided they don't want the government spending their tax money interfering with the private affairs of citizens. Kind of a conservative concept. Now some Blue Laws are still on the books. Like you can't by beer or alcoholic beverages after 8 pm, and never on Sunday. That is still on the books because liquor store owners like it. They don't have to stay open, instead the population is trained to buy enough booze to last the weekend during normal business hours.
Good luck measuring public officials elected to office with your standard. Where does it end? What if the guy jacks off twenty times a day, every day? Or isn't married and likes 3-ways. Or, what if he just lives with a woman who likes multiple partners too? Or if he is married and they both like multiple partners all at the same time? Where is the edge of what your standard allows?