For some reason it’s being treated on TV as big news that twice divorced Rudy Giuliani’s third wife has been married twice before (Yawn). They also mention Rudy’s nasty divorce from wife two and his adulteries in both marriages.
Okay…
There are reasons I wouldn’t vote for Giuliani perhaps- I’d have to see who he’s running against and what kind of deal he makes with the Religious Right and all that first… but I couldn’t care less that he’s been divorced or even that he’s been divorced twice. It means that he’s not good at being a husband, but then I’m not interested in marrying him. How many times he’s been married is no more of an issue for him than it would be if I were looking for an accountant or a dentist- I want them to do my taxes and clean my molars and that’s it. Apparently, there are people who disagree.
Adultery bothers me a bit more on a personal basis. It would probably drive a wedge in my friendship with somebody to learn they were adulterous (particularly if they left their spouse for somebody else), but Giuliani’s not my friend and I don’t know jack (or care to) about his relationship with his wives or kids- I don’t admire divorce but I just don’t feel it’s my business. Not really a factor and I don’t think that the fact somebody committed adultery necessarily means they’d be a corrupt or bad politician. I don’t take my moral values from public figures and can’t imagine anybody who does.
OTOH, the fact that Gingrich has been divorced twice, married three times, and is a self-admitted adulterer makes me want to have his ass kicked. It has nothing to do with the divorces themselves (although serving papers to your wife in chemotherapy is a shitty thing to do- but that’s a separate issue from the divorce in and of itself) but the fact he preaches family values and railed against Clinton’s adultery and yadda yadda- it’s his hypocrisy and set of double standards and clear willingness to deceive his public and… well, the fact he’s an immoral bastard (for the hypocrisy, not the divorces). The fact he was a deadbeat dad does bother me as that speaks to character far more than “I had a relationship that didn’t work out” or even “I can’t keep my fly zipped”- it means he shirked a major responsibility and was evidently able to live with himself quite happily.
However, I would never vote for Gingrich under any circumstances.
How much does a political candidate’s checkered past where sex and marriage are concerned (political and financial scandals and the like are separate) bother you? What that is not illegal (or at least not criminal) would bother you the most in a political candidate’s personal life?
Prety much depends on the hypocrisy factor. If they are promoting ‘Family Values’ as part of their political reality, then yes, it would bother me. Otherwise, I would look at it as no big deal.
The problem I have with Guiliani is the hypocracy factor - if he and his second wife had simply divorced when they realized that they weren’t a good match, I’d have no problems with that part of his record. I’m a bit less happy with the willingness to continue a sham marriage, complete with mistress living with Rudi in Gracie Mansion, for years, because of the fear of politcal fall-out from divorcing. I just don’t understand how anyone could think that would be less disturbing than simply having the gonads to say, “We made a mistake, and are ending our marriage.”
On a more general level, I have problems with a politician who gives the impression of sacrificing all his or her personal life to meet public perception requirements - I’d rather a politician who would say, “This is who I am, if you don’t like it go bugger a fireplug.” Which isn’t something I think I’ll be seeing anytime in the near future.
People who lead us should be a cut above avarage if they’re going to make the big decisions.
Given the average statistics for adultery I think it would be very hard to have a complete political body that didn’t include adulterers. However someone stupid enough to get caught is probably not suitable.
Being a bad spouse doesn’t automaticly make one a bad politician. In fact, being a good politician may automaticly make one a poor spouse.
It’s too bad the public feels they have a right to peer into the bedrooms of their public officials, The government peering into the bedrooms of the public isn’t very well received.
Giuliani’s social issue politics are too lefty for me, but I don’t really care about his adultery.
Gingrich’s political stances totally rock in my universe, but his adultery bugs the hell out of me, tho not as much as his botching of his role as Speaker. I hope to God he doesn’t become the GOP nominee, but I do hope he’s part of the nominee’s circle of consultants.
If they didn’t, I wouldn’t. But the ones who do, I do. As has been noted, it’s the hypocrasy factor. Certainly most pointedly in the case of those who want to tell people who they are allowed to get married to. And telling it to people who may very well have more of a maritail committment then they do. Shows a lack of character, that.
As long as they stay out of my bedroom I’ll stay out of theirs
I don’t care if a candidate has bheen married once or ten times. I do care if they lie about it, or try to play the “famly values” card. I guess Judy forgot about her first marriage.
That’s a really good point, imo. I’d add "How they handle it if they’re caught.
As I’ve said before I will never understand why a man as brilliant and political a creature as Clinton did the “I did not have improper relations with that woman” speech, but I remember thinking “Boy you had sho nuff better be telling the truth”. A confession to something vague (“I have brought pain to my family in an intensely personal matter that is being exploited solely for political gain”) and a request to leave his personal life alone for decency sake would have gone twenty-thousand times better, and if I was a 30 year old in Montgomery AL who had never been in a political race and could figure that one out how could a Rhodes scholar who’s been in politics for decades not know it? Will never understand it and that mars his legacy many times more than the knowledge that a middle aged man took a consentual sex offer with a willing intern half his age.
Divorce - doesn’t bother me - I don’t consider it any of my business. Adultery only bothers me if they have been using the “family values” platform - like Gingrich. I’d vote for a bag of spiders before that man would get my vote. His actions have shown he is incapable of keeping his word - “in sickness and in health” doesn’t seem to mean much to him. And he’s a hypocrite.
The Clinton situation pissed me off. Yes, he lied - to a question he never should have been asked. I didn’t vote for him for First Husband. I consider his bedroom (or office) behavior to be between him and his wife. Southern men lie about sex all the time to protect the women they are cheating with! Hell, Clinton always said JFK was his role model - he didn’t do anything JFK didn’t do! I don’t think the sex life of a politician is anyone’s business as long as what they do is with another consenting adult - unless they are playing the family values card. Then if they cheat it becomes the public’s business.
Divorce can happen for a lot of reasons. But adultery I see as a serious indication of a person’s character, and I’d really kind of prefer my political leaders to have good characters. However, I’m also completely cynical about any political leader’s character–so it sort of evens out, but on the whole it’s bad.
In an ideal world it would bother me. I think politicians are like most extremely wealthy and powerful men in that there is a certain sense of entitlement and normal rules don’t apply to them. Chris Rock said men are only as faithful as their options and I think that’s true in a lot of cases. They have a lot more opportunities to cheat or meet people.
Simply cheating bothers me a little less than the politicians that dump their wifes and move on while preaching family values.
Just to add to the chorus, I don’t care about any politician’s personal life, as long as they’re staying out of mine. I know a lot of people like to paint it as a partisan issue, but it’s not. I don’t care that Bill Clinton cheated on his wife. But if Al Gore did it, it would give me pause, because he and Tipper have always taken the “family first” pose. I don’t care that much about Rudy “Never Forget I was Mayor on 9/11” Giuliani’s infidelity (although it certainly doesn’t EARN him any points), but Newt Gingrich failing to pay his child support is definitely a big deal.
I don’t think that it’s too much to ask that people live up to the standards that they presume to apply to (and desire to enforce on!) everyone else.
That’s what I loved about Newt’s unpology earlier this month: “I have failed to live up to my own standards, certainly to God’s standards” or words very close to that.
Then they’re NOT your standards Newt: they’re at best your ideals, more precisely your demagogic bloody-shirt talking points in the Mencken definition of the word. Your standard by definition is something you actually do, you know, like criticizing queers and praising Christian values while repeatedly ignoring what Jesus said about not remarrying after a divorce and forcing your cancer-patient ex-wife and the mother of your children to beg for charity from her church- HOW THE HELL DO PEOPLE LIKE THIS GET ELECTED!!!
Like Lawoot, I couldn’t care less about whether they’ve had divorces… unless they’re running on the “Family Values” shtick. Then I actively vote against 'em.
