| Author |
Message |
    
Debra Davidson
Citizen
Username: Peanutslady
Post Number: 28
Registered: 5-2005
| | Posted on Tuesday, August 9, 2005 - 11:22 pm: | 
|
I feel very strongly that what goes on in politicians personal life must remain private. A politicians private life is none of our business at all. The only time a politician’s private life can be made public is when it affects his or her ability to perform the job they were elected to do. When a politician doing an excellent job and what is going on their private life is not affecting his or her ability to perform the job they were elected to do. The politician’s private life must remain private. Things that have happened when a politician was in High School and or Collage must be kept private. They were young and inexperienced. Today they may not feel the same way they did back then. We all have skeletons in our closets and things we are not proud of. These are things we all want to keep private. That is the same way politician’s feel. Politicians
Are human just like you and I. Politician’s deserve the exact same respect that you and I want as citizens of this country. I’m so sick and tiered of people digging into a politician’s past to look for things just to have something to say that will affect there ability to perform the job they were elected to do and to ultimately ruin there political career, just because they have different views then the person doing the digging. It is called mudslinging and it is very mean and nasty to do to someone just because you have different views then they do. Again I feel very strongly that if a politician is do a great job and keeping their private life out of their job. We must keep the politician’s private life private. What goes on in a politician’s private is none of our business and it must stay that way. Private.
|
susan1014
Supporter
Username: Susan1014
Post Number: 903
Registered: 3-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 12:00 am: |
|
Why the South Orange thread instead of Soapbox??
On one level, I will agree that politicians deserve some level of privacy, but where to draw the line is the issue.
A consensual affair with an adult who is not an employee? May well not be the public's business, as long as it doesn't impact public security or political positioning (but what about JFKs alleged mistress with the Mafia ties?)
A consensual affair on the part of a politician who runs and legislates from a major family values platform? A same-sex affair from a supporter of homophobic positions? I think these are public domain issues.
A consensual "affair" with an intern? Getting involved with an office intern is a major lapse of judgement in any organization, and is evidence of a certain lack of good sense.
Occasional drug use or an abortion in college? None of our business, I think.
Addiction as an adult? A risk that I want to know about, although I may choose to vote for a recovered addict.
Cheating on taxes? Major traffic violations? Speaks to the candidate' respect for the law that he/she desires to write.
A record of domestic violence or unpaid child support? Speaks to moral structure and behavior under pressure.
If nothing else, a politician probably should have no secrets so deep that they open him/her to the possibility of blackmail. This may mean that the standard of disclosure is higher than it otherwise ought to be, but I'd rather have the press finding out a candidate/politician's skeletons than a blackmailer (whether foreign, political or corporate). |
Just The Aunt
Supporter
Username: Auntof13
Post Number: 2087
Registered: 1-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 1:10 am: |
|
I think he's upset about Corzine... |
thegoodsgt
Citizen
Username: Thegoodsgt
Post Number: 860
Registered: 2-2002
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 8:09 am: |
|
This could be an interesting discussion. The basic question is, how does a person's character (reflected in the decisions the person made throughout life, as well as the way he/she has managed the consequences of those decisions) affect his or her ability to make decisions on behalf of those he/she represents?
I think of the question in personal terms. Would I trust this person to manage my personal finances? Or -- gender, affection, and love aside -- is this the kind of person I would marry? Maybe this is all too hypothetical, but for me, it provides simply another method of assessing a candidate or politician. |
Brett Weir
Citizen
Username: Brett_weir
Post Number: 811
Registered: 4-2004
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 9:36 am: |
|
The politician who runs for office based upon his/her lifestyle, personal achievements, or other aspects of what is generally considered private may expect severe scrutiny, and rightly so. If a person seeks to attain public office and makes public statements regarding themselves in such an effort, it is reasonable to expect that the statements and the person making them will be examined from every possible angle.
That said, there is an undefined line of civility that is usually only apparent AFTER it's been crossed... |
Stuart0628
Citizen
Username: Stuart0628
Post Number: 104
Registered: 2-2003
| | Posted on Wednesday, August 10, 2005 - 10:44 am: |
|
What about a consensual affair with a non-elected village official? 
Susan has largely hit the nail on the head with what's public domain and what is not. There isn't one litmus test for what the public has a right to know and what it doesn't, but maybe we can boil it down to a few:
o Taking advantage of one's office to facilitate an affair/law violation is bad.
o Using public dollars to facilitate an affair/law violation is bad.
o Hypocrisy is bad.
o Doing bad things to innocent people (or even putting innocent people in harm's way) is bad.
o The rest is none of our business.
I would hasten to add, though, that if an official is asked point blank about youthful indiscretions and s/he has had some of those, they should be responding "none of your business" rather than "I had no indiscretions." |
|
Closed: New threads not accepted on this page