Quote:
Originally Posted by steeljack
Sorry, disagree with you on this , any person who who puts themself up for elected office puts themself and their reputation under the public microscope .
Since the Churchs have abdicated their traditional postion as 'guardians' of public morals and standards/ethics over to the new self appointed guardians, the Politicians and Civil Servants, (the folks who change their minds about everything as often as I change my underwear,) who then cry foul when their hypocrisy and indiscretions are pointed out , I think they should be held to a higher standard. ( the recent UK case involving the immigration judges comes to mind)
As an example, on a local level I would want to know if a member of the local public health services commitee had ever had an aged parent admitted to hospital for unexplained falls and bruising ........if they can't look after their own parents why should they have the responsibility for yours .
Same will someone elected into higher office , using an ex President and his wife as an example , how can trust someone who has access to the 'Doomsday' button when he says to the world "I never had sex with that woman" and the little blue dress along with the stains are there for the whole world to see .......should that have been kept quiet from the public ? ......my view , if Monica Lewinsky had been in her late 30s or her 40s no problem , just an indiscret sexual liasion ,to be sorted out between husband and wife in private , but this was a young woman , late teens/early 20s......and he was in his 50s, this womans life has been ruined , not because of the Press that broke the story , but because Bill Clinton exploited his position of power and authority to 'get his rocks off', what guy in his right mind is going to take Miss Lewinsky home to meet the parents and say this is going to be the mother of your Grandchildren.... and any kids she may have in the future are going to be stigmatized throughout their lives through no fault of their own as the kids of the woman who b**w the President .
I say publish and be dammed, if the mud sticks so be it , if your living a decent honest life there is usually no mud to be thrown 
[(note to US users of the group , Mitt Romney is looking good for the nomination , though I am still waiting for the press to decide if Mormons really do worship the Devil or not   ) absolutley no offense meant or intended to local users of this group , its an American media thing .] |
In this case I still totally disagree.
We are talking local politics here. I don't think any of them hold themselves up as beacons of moral light, and I don't think any of us look to them for moral guidance.
If there was an undeclared interest, for instance a councillor had a relationship with the owner of a company that had just been awarded a large contract from the council, that is newsworthy, and should be made public. However, since lots of people have had more than one relationship in their life, I don't think that's anyones concern but their's.
Hypocrisy was the downfall of the Major government. They were preaching of a return to 'Victorian values', yet we had a situation were many of them were having clandestine affairs. Also at this time you had secretly gay M.P.'s voting against gay rights bills. Again that sort of hypocrisy should be made public.
Local politicans can dress up as Shirley Bassey every weekend for all I care, and go to wife swapping parties. As long as they aren't breaking the law, or frightening the horses, all I expect is that they do the job to which they were elected, to the best of their ability.