| Author |
|
Wayde Murray
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 14 October 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 3115
|
| Posted: 23 November 2008 at 11:44am | IP Logged | 1
|
|
|
That's an excellent point, Marc, although I should say I wasn't thinking of a President as someone who should be held to the standard of the Military Code by an outside agency. I was thinking more that it's a code of honor that the President should be willing to abide by for the same reasons the members of the military are forced to follow it. Anyone having a romantic relationship with a subbordinate will make decisions through the lens of that relationship.
Let's say you worked in the White House and were unfriendly to Monica Lewinski. How does your resume look when you get passed over for promotion or lose your job on what is generally known to be the President's recommendation? Is that a ridiculous scenario? Probably. Then again, Linda Tripp bacame a laughing stock.
The President having a girlfriend on the side is probably business as usual for all I know. The President's girlfriend being employed in any capacity inside the White House is just trouble waiting for an innocent bystander to ruin professionally.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Wayde Murray
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 14 October 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 3115
|
| Posted: 23 November 2008 at 11:55am | IP Logged | 2
|
|
|
Jodi, I certainly respect that attitude. I have to say, though, that's one of the reasons that decent people (for lack of a better term) don't typically run for high office. The higher the office, the more "perfect" every aspect of your life has to be in order to measure up to the tabloid mentality of the general public. For most, the potential cost is too high. For those willing to trade their family's well-being for the sake of their own ambitions, it's easy to see how little they cared for their family's well-being in the first place.
That's probably one of the reasons we get the government we deserve.
Edited by Wayde Murray on 23 November 2008 at 11:56am
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Scott Richards
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 22 September 2005
Posts: 1258
|
| Posted: 23 November 2008 at 11:57am | IP Logged | 3
|
|
|
Since his election, president elect Obama has been very busy getting
ready for his term. Nice to see a man working even when he doesn't
have the job yet!
Just the same as every President elect before him.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Scott Richards
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 22 September 2005
Posts: 1258
|
| Posted: 23 November 2008 at 12:01pm | IP Logged | 4
|
|
|
I didn't just vote against Palin because I think she is a bad mother, I
voted against her because she is the worst possible person to lead this
country
And here I thought you voted for Obama. With the way you worshiped the man, it didn't matter who the Republican candidate was, it could have been the second coming of Christ himself, you were voting for Obama. You didn't vote against anyone.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Marc Baptiste
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 17 June 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 3633
|
| Posted: 23 November 2008 at 12:06pm | IP Logged | 5
|
|
|
Scott,
Well, I can say for CERTAIN that I voted AGAINST McCain AND Palin...
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Jodi Moisan
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 February 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 6808
|
| Posted: 23 November 2008 at 12:19pm | IP Logged | 6
|
|
|
And here I thought you voted for Obama. With the way you worshiped the man, it didn't matter who the Republican candidate was, it could have been the second coming of Christ himself, you were voting for Obama. You didn't vote against anyone.
OK Scott has a really good point. :0)
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Thom Price
Byrne Robotics Member
L’Homme Diabolique
Joined: 29 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 7592
|
| Posted: 23 November 2008 at 12:48pm | IP Logged | 7
|
|
|
I think Clinton abused his position as President, he should have never messed around with a page and should have been censured. (not impeached) If he would have had an affair with another adult I agree with you.
***
Monica Lewinksy was in her early 20s at the time of her affair with Clinton; does that not qualify as an adult? She was also not a page, she was an intern. Are you confusing the Clinton sex scandal with the Mark Foley underage page scandal?
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Jodi Moisan
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 19 February 2008
Location: United States
Posts: 6808
|
| Posted: 23 November 2008 at 1:45pm | IP Logged | 8
|
|
|
No it was Clinton I just mistakenly put page. Even though Monica was 20 I still looked at what Clinton did as creepy because he was old enough to be her dad.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
|
| |
Thom Price
Byrne Robotics Member
L’Homme Diabolique
Joined: 29 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 7592
|
| Posted: 23 November 2008 at 1:48pm | IP Logged | 9
|
|
|
She was 22-24 during the period of her affair with Clinton; a legal adult by any standard.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
| www
e-mail
|
| |
Valerie Finnigan
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 27 March 2006
Posts: 838
|
| Posted: 23 November 2008 at 2:34pm | IP Logged | 10
|
|
|
I don't often agree with Valerie, but I didn't take her post as an
attempt by her to equate pregnant to black, or homely to black, or
anything to anything from the child's perspective, except that the
child now lives on the public stage where the rules of celebrity will
be applied to them, through no fault or action of their own.
-----------
I think Wayde's the only one who understood exactly the point I was trying to make. Add to that my opinion that maybe the rules of celebrity should be changed altogether. There are some places the public eye has no business being.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Mike O'Brien
Byrne Robotics Member
Official JB Historian
Joined: 18 April 2004
Location: United States
Posts: 10927
|
| Posted: 23 November 2008 at 2:46pm | IP Logged | 11
|
|
|
You didn't vote against anyone.
Keeping with your grand proud tradition, you are wrong again.
The sentence above details why this election was so very important to me. Every election in my life time I just voted against someone - against G HW Bush, against Bob Dole, Against G W Bush - because I didn't like Clinton, Gore or Kerry.
But I really loved Obama. And honestly, I didn't hate McCain - I just didn't want him to be President. But I REALLY wanted Obama to win. It was a new thing for me at the polls...
But then 9 weeks before the election, something magic and special happened. The worst possible person entered the race and it became this magic event. Not only did I REALLY want Obama to win, I also REALLY wanted Palin to lose.
On BOTH sides, I was campaigning for the results with every fiber and iota of my being. Man, did I need a cigarette on November 5th... I can't imagine there will ever be a clash like that again in American politics in my lifetime. Those were both once-in-a-lifetime events - a candidate as good as Obama and one as bad as Palin.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Wayde Murray
Byrne Robotics Member
Joined: 14 October 2005
Location: Canada
Posts: 3115
|
| Posted: 23 November 2008 at 3:33pm | IP Logged | 12
|
|
|
Valerie wrote:
...maybe the rules of celebrity should be changed altogether.
Once again I agree. I used to think that there were four US Presidents who were celebrities in the sense that we use the term today: FDR, who used radio effectively while in office, JFK, who used TV effectively to attain the office, Reagan, who parlayed his moviestar career (and perhaps even his moviestar persona) into a political career, and Clinton, who donned shades and played saxophone on late night television and became known to a demographic that might not have been politically motivated on his behalf without that exposure.
Then Clinton's private life blew up in a very public way, and the office of President was cheapened. The arguments that it would have happened to JFK if the media had been a different beast in the 1960s rang hollow to me. Yes, the times had changed, but sensationalism isn't journalism. But, I told myself, Clinton had brought it upon himself by using the tools of celebrity. Those tools had now turned on him.
Then George W Bush's daughters were followed as they went bar hopping. The office was cheapened further, and there was nothing I could think of that excused the media. There was no good reason I could think of to explain why I was watching those two young women grow up on Entertainment Tonight.
As much as I disliked GWB, there was no good reason for some of the coverage of his family in the media. Any politician who runs NOW knows what's in store for his kids. And the kids don't deserve it.
|
| Back to Top |
profile
| search
|
| |
Topic Closed)
