Do You Care If Your Elected Officials Cheat on Their Wives?

[Recidiva]

I'm not the person who made this one "not about politics." The sobbing indignation didn't come on the scene with me. "I don't give a rat's ass" didn't need any further detail added until we began to weigh infidelity as social ill and that wasn't my idea.

I believe that I don't have requisite information to make judgements on people who are having extramarital sex based on that fact alone and no others.

I believe that MY choices are mine and made because of the position I'm in when I make them and the person I am when I make them and the people I'm with when I make them and the day I make them on.

They're not a shining guidepost of "if I can make a choice I feel morally strong in then everyone can and should make the same choice."

That' s bullshit. That's a vile load of fuck off worthy bullshit in the annals of human interaction. And I will *always* call that out.

That's apparently loads of personal pain and angst to defend the fact that no one knows who or where people are from the comfortable judging platform of the outside.

What I go though *as me* doesn't have jack shit to do with another human being on earth.

I don't know. And you don't either.

It's like "life begins at conception" - people certain as certain can be on something so mysterious and multileveled. I don't know that it doesn't. I don't know that it does.

I

don't

know.

Yeah, I do know. And I get to vote that way. I'm not telling you how to vote, but don't tell me I don't know a road I've walked just because you picked the other way.

I just think your personal attacks are uncalled for and out of character and that's interesting in its own right and makes it difficult to have a further conversation other than "Huh." I don't give a damn how you vote. I'm telling you why and how I would. It's a conviction, and really not an unreasonable one.

I know about abortion for myself too. And I don't need to be told that I am saying things I'm not saying.

If you haven't made a choice, it's interesting that you're condemning mine so vehemently. I think you've chosen and you're just personally offended at being disagreed with.

So...huh. Whatever. I do not express shock that Nezatch feels strongly about something and defends it with all she's got. I'm fine with it. I'm just clarifying and spitting out the words shoved into my mouth.

 

[intothewoods]

The nuance I'm discussing is that it's different for me to say I wouldn't elect someone on that basis compared to Nezatch telling me to fuck off on behalf of her clients, none of whom I'm aware are running for office. And somehow I've cast an indictment on all Buddhist principles.

I do hold that's missing my point and making her own in its place.

Either way, I appreciate her viewpoint as ersatz therapist. I'm advocating for the viewpoint of the people her clients hurt. Sympathetic as I am to Nezatch's position, I don't think that being an advocate for one person's side, indicates she's fully explored the full situation and asked the cheatee how it affected their life - oh right! Nobody asked them! Huh. Weird.

Everyone deserves sympathy and care. Not everybody deserves public responsibility when they demonstrate they can't negotiate private responsibility.

I really don't see how it got as far as it got or why it's about being fat or cake or all the other analogies I've seen.

I do know I'm in the position of being "it's all relative" - ed out of existence. Sure, if you pull the camera back far enough, everything looks small. However, take a microscope to some of it and look at all aspects. Look at all sides.

I have no problem being the advocate of the "cheatee" amidst the forgiving relativistic "But it's understandable" stuff that seems more about excuses than responsibility.

Just don't expect me to vote for it.

Guess what? I have no problem being the advocate of the cheatee. I have been cheated on. I know people who have been cheated on. I know how they feel. I know how I felt. I have asked them how they feel. I felt worse when I was emotionally abandoned, but that's just me. It will probably be a cold day in hell before everyone takes responsibility for the emotional warfare they wage against the people they promised in public to love forever and ever.

It's not a question of judgment is bad or nothing. Those aren't the only two options.

I do look at all sides. In fact, that's always what I do. Online, offline, whatever. I don't understand the refusal to look at the other point of view, and it's why I typically don't enjoy debate.

 

[Recidiva]

Guess what? I have no problem being the advocate of the cheatee. I have been cheated on. I know people who have been cheated on. I know how they feel. I know how I felt. I have asked them how they feel. I felt worse when I was emotionally abandoned, but that's just me. It will probably be a cold day in hell before everyone takes responsibility for the emotional warfare they wage against the people they promised in public to love forever and ever.

It's not a question of judgment is bad or nothing. Those aren't the only two options.

I do look at all sides. In fact, that's always what I do. Online, offline, whatever. I don't understand the refusal to look at the other point of view, and it's why I typically don't enjoy debate.

There's a difference between looking at a point of view and agreeing with it.

But I'm being told that I'm condeming people to hell when basically I'm suggesting therapy and choosing not to vote for them.

Public office and leadership roles are being treated like some level of entitlement that doesn't need to be earned with integrity and an ability to make personal sacrifices for the benefit of other people.

I wasn't given a specific, I was given a general to comment upon. If you want to bring up a specific case, then I can respond to that also. I DO care. I'm not advocating burning them at the stake, I'm saying I'd pick the person who wasn't overtly demonstrating their indiscretion, lack of judgment and lack of integrity.

But all the justifications and entitlements that are put up in the way of allowing the person who was cheated upon to have a vote sort of precludes getting both sides of the story, doesn't it?

 

[JMohegan]

Sometimes people grow apart in relationships, someone or both parties cheat, and then the couple really does the hard work in a relationship to repair it and move forward. Some people stray in other ways and then both spouses realize the relationship isn't salvagable and they get a divorce. The idea that a person who has made a couple of isolated bad choices in their life should not be elected is ridiculous. Politicians are human too, and I have yet to see one who hasn't made a bad choice. Are all bad choices equal? Of course not. That's why I wouldn't decide not to vote for someone without knowing the context.

If we're talking about politicians, to me the context is irrelevant.

If you want my time, my money, and my voice in support of your candidacy, then you damn well better follow the rules of political reality - as they exist today. Don't try to bring up FDR or JFK in defense of your dickin' around while in office, because the political environment is different today, *and you know it.*

With regard to politicians, I put infidelity in the same category with cheating on your taxes, or hiring an undocumented worker as your kid's nanny. This shit gets politicians disqualified, and you know this gets politicians disqualified, so don't fucking do it.

As I said before, hell pissed is what I would have been, had I volunteered for the Edwards campaign. And I wouldn't care if he hadn't been laid in two decades, I'd be pissed just the same. The rules are the rules, and you know them. If you can't follow the rules, don't run.

 

[Netzach]

Everyone wants to know about the "cheatee's" side of events.

Courts, public, people who like women martyred and doing laundry and never part of the problem only suffering at the hands of big bad dick, which seems to be most people. It's like a We Are The World for white upper class women and kids.

With that, I really will continue my whoring, stamp collecting, and other activities that bring no valid perspective but my own bilous rantings.

 

[JMohegan]

Everyone wants to know about the "cheatee's" side of events.

Courts, public, people who like women martyred and doing laundry and never part of the problem only suffering at the hands of big bad dick, which seems to be most people. It's like a We Are The World for white upper class women and kids.

If we're talking about non-politicians, I consider both points of view to be relevant. Marriage is a joint responsibility.

I call bullshit when one person claims to be the victim in a decades-long source of bitterness. Husband, or wife, I call bullshit.

 

[intothewoods]

There's a difference between looking at a point of view and agreeing with it.

But I'm being told that I'm condeming people to hell when basically I'm suggesting therapy and choosing not to vote for them.

Public office and leadership roles are being treated like some level of entitlement that doesn't need to be earned with integrity and an ability to make personal sacrifices for the benefit of other people.

I wasn't given a specific, I was given a general to comment upon. If you want to bring up a specific case, then I can respond to that also. I DO care. I'm not advocating burning them at the stake, I'm saying I'd pick the person who wasn't overtly demonstrating their indiscretion, lack of judgment and lack of integrity.

But all the justifications and entitlements that are put up in the way of allowing the person who was cheated upon to have a vote sort of precludes getting both sides of the story, doesn't it?

No, because to me it's not a question of justification or entitlement. I simply don't decide not to vote for someone based on that fact alone. It's not that I excuse anything. I just don't reach a conclusion about someone's judgment and integrity based on that fact alone.

 

[Recidiva]

Everyone wants to know about the "cheatee's" side of events.

Courts, public, people who like women martyred and doing laundry and never part of the problem only suffering at the hands of big bad dick, which seems to be most people. It's like a We Are The World for white upper class women and kids.

With that, I really will continue my whoring, stamp collecting, and other activities that bring no valid perspective but my own bilous rantings.

I don't want to know them for some illicit kick of knowing dirt. My view of women as victims isn't part of it, and women are just as capable of being office holders and irresponsible adulterers. I'm acknowledging that the action of cheating has a human cost. Made especially more vile because the person paying it doesn't even KNOW they're paying until everyone knows, and in politics it's worse by the nth degree. If you want to write that off the books somehow because the people doing it are human, that's fine, the people getting cheated on are human and so are prospective constituents. Come to think of it, I'm human.

You keep doing the equivalent of stomping up the stairs after taking far too much insult from my comments and slamming your door. You've concluded I hate homosexuals, Buddhists and you personally and cursed me on behalf of your clients. I find that to be indicative of this being a subject near and dear to your heart and you feel justified in your approach. I'm not going to adopt your adolescent tactics or take personal offense, and I have sympathy for what you're thinking, feeling and saying, I just don't think it's the best way to go. I don't think I deserve the histrionic Mazurka, but that doesn't mean I don't get it or understand it.

However, this is near and dear to my heart as well and it makes all too much sense, what you're doing, I just think there's a better way. If you want to splatter me with bullshit to obscure my points, I'll just keep hosing it off.

I can appreciate your point of view and still think there's a better way to function as a grownup in debate as well as in politics.

 

[Recidiva]

No, because to me it's not a question of justification or entitlement. I simply don't decide not to vote for someone based on that fact alone. It's not that I excuse anything. I just don't reach a conclusion about someone's judgment and integrity based on that fact alone.

So I'm assuming "all things being equal between two candidates of comparable abilities and one is discovered to be an adulterer, would you care?"

Yes.

Okay. What is a indicator of bad judgment and poor integrity if this isn't, and why?

 

[intothewoods]

If we're talking about politicians, to me the context is irrelevant.

If you want my time, my money, and my voice in support of your candidacy, then you damn well better follow the rules of political reality - as they exist today. Don't try to bring up FDR or JFK in defense of your dickin' around while in office, because the political environment is different today, *and you know it.*

With regard to politicians, I put infidelity in the same category with cheating on your taxes, or hiring an undocumented worker as your kid's nanny. This shit gets politicians disqualified, and you know this gets politicians disqualified, so don't fucking do it.

As I said before, hell pissed is what I would have been, had I volunteered for the Edwards campaign. And I wouldn't care if he hadn't been laid in two decades, I'd be pissed just the same. The rules are the rules, and you know them. If you can't follow the rules, don't run.

I got it. The shit that gets politicians disqualified keeps growing and growing, and that concerns me, but concern does not equal outrage or tears shed for said politicians.

If we're talking about non-politicians, I consider both points of view to be relevant. Marriage is a joint responsibility.

I call bullshit when one person claims to be the victim in a decades-long source of bitterness. Husband, or wife, I call bullshit.

That's always been my point of view.

Everyone wants to know about the "cheatee's" side of events.

Courts, public, people who like women martyred and doing laundry and never part of the problem only suffering at the hands of big bad dick, which seems to be most people. It's like a We Are The World for white upper class women and kids.

With that, I really will continue my whoring, stamp collecting, and other activities that bring no valid perspective but my own bilous rantings.

I keep saying that myself, since I'm exhausted. I must be a mashochist.

 

[intothewoods]

So I'm assuming "all things being equal between two candidates of comparable abilities and one is discovered to be an adulterer, would you care?"

Yes.

Okay. What is a indicator of bad judgment and poor integrity if this isn't, and why?

It's not that it necessarily isn't, it's just that I want to look at everything, all of their choices, before I make that judgment. If it's a person in the public eye and my information all comes from the media, I take it all with a grain of salt. I look for patterns of bad judgment and a lack of self-awareness.

 

[Recidiva]

It's not that it necessarily isn't, it's just that I want to look at everything, all of their choices, before I make that judgment. If it's a person in the public eye and my information all comes from the media, I take it all with a grain of salt. I look for patterns of bad judgment and a lack of self-awareness.

Okay, then again, answer specifically. What is bad judgment and lack of integrity in your judgment?

What would disqualify someone and why?

And I take it with a whole shaker of salt. And some pepper. Probably a little Old Bay. Best be safe.

 

[intothewoods]

Okay, then again, answer specifically. What is bad judgment and lack of integrity in your judgment?

What would disqualify someone and why?

And I take it with a whole shaker of salt. And some pepper. Probably a little Old Bay. Best be safe.

Oh, so I should be specific but you can paint with broad strokes? Please dictate the terms of this conversation as it's most enjoyable for me. As I said, bad judgment on one occasion does not necessarily mean a lack of integrity. In reality, I look at the choices I'm given and see whose voting record and policy positions closely match up with mine. If I recall correctly, we knew Bill Clinton had cheated both times he ran. I wasn't a huge Bill fan, but I voted for him because his policy positions were closer to mine than Bush I and Bob Dole.

What would disqualify someone? Well, to be totally cliche, Bush II. No critical self-awareness, patterns of bad judgment. I did not vote for HRC because, to me, she repeatedly could not admit when she was wrong. No nuance. So perhaps I shouldn't have said I don't care about someone's infidelity. It's not that I don't care, it's that there is just so much else to look at. I have yet to not be disappointed with a politician, so the bar is set low. I'm more upset with the middle road Obama has taken on many issues then with the state of their marriage.

ETA: I really do have to go back to my whoring for now.

 

[Recidiva]

Oh, so I should be specific but you can paint with broad strokes? Please dictate the terms of this conversation as it's most enjoyable for me. As I said, bad judgment on one occasion does not necessarily mean a lack of integrity. In reality, I look at the choices I'm given and see whose voting record and policy positions closely match up with mine. If I recall correctly, we knew Bill Clinton had cheated both times he ran. I wasn't a huge Bill fan, but I voted for him because his policy positions were closer to mine than Bush I and Bob Dole.

What would disqualify someone? Well, to be totally cliche, Bush II. No critical self-awareness, patterns of bad judgment. I did not vote for HRC because, to me, she repeatedly could not admit when she was wrong. No nuance. So perhaps I shouldn't have said I don't care about someone's infidelity. It's not that I don't care, it's that there is just so much else to look at. I have yet to not be disappointed with a politician, so the bar is set low. I'm more upset with the middle road Obama has taken on many issues then with the state of their marriage.

ETA: I really do have to go back to my whoring for now.

I disqualified Hillary because she decided video games were the greatest evil to be confronted while a war was on. She also insulted the work ethic of her daughter's generation in broad strokes and got called on it. Bad judgment calls in my opinion because it indicated to me a tendency to try to dig into stereotypical poll response issues. Silly and divisive and ignorant ones. If I'd HAD to vote for her, I would have even with those considerations just because the other options are likely worse.

Okay, if you don't care about infidelity that's cool for what it is. I get that other things and the big picture are important to you. They're important to me too. Would I vote for an adulterer over a *insert other personally undefined yet horrible thing here*? Sure. I 'care' but I'm not blind. I don't get why it wouldn't be important with all other things being equal. But I will just have to get used to disappointment.

As to whoring, I'm all for legalization of prostitution.

 

[JMohegan]

I'd like anyone who thinks cheating is no big deal or defensible to tell me why if it's such as small thing and doesn't matter, why people can't just NOT DO IT if it's so trivial and irrelevant.

I have been in unhappy marriages and bad relationships and I've done the honest and fair thing.

I resent being told that I could have just lied and betrayed someone I claimed to love and it wouldn't have mattered.

It matters to me, therefore I can base my opinions on it happening. Honesty and integrity are part and parcel of all political issues. If a person proves themselves incapable of comprehending the importance of such things and the cost of the loss of them to other people who get hurt in the process, I don't think I need to dismiss that and profess faith in their judgment.

Selfishness and cruelty and an inability to stick to promises that are no longer convenient aren't things I prize in a public servant.

Anything that doesn't involve making plans for large groups of people and sticking to them and making hard personal sacrifices.

If you can't make honest, clear choices for the people you're supposed to love the most, fuck off.

Go collect stamps or rebuild engines or deal with things other than people.

Being a lawyer is absolutely perfect. Very good at building defenses and looking out for a single person's best interest. Great job. Compartmentalized and perfectly suited. Keeper.

Anybody could have stayed single or gotten a divorce. Choosing not to own up and do so is telling. Tells me a lot.

It means they're afraid of public opinion and confrontation and keeping up appearances. None of these are things I value and in fact I do everything I can to avoid. Fear isn't a big selling point for me. Demonstration of fear and caving before circumstances, no matter how prettily presented or "complicated" means nothing to me. It's all justification.

I think you're taking it far too personally

The nuance I'm discussing is that it's different for me to say I wouldn't elect someone on that basis compared to Nezatch telling me to fuck off on behalf of her clients, none of whom I'm aware are running for office.

Yeah, I do know. And I get to vote that way. I'm not telling you how to vote, but don't tell me I don't know a road I've walked just because you picked the other way.

I just think your personal attacks are uncalled for and out of character and that's interesting in its own right and makes it difficult to have a further conversation other than "Huh." I don't give a damn how you vote. I'm telling you why and how I would. It's a conviction, and really not an unreasonable one.

Recidiva, looking at the statements I've bolded, is it really so hard to understand why people who have cheated on their spouses would take your comments personally?

You are making unequivocal assertions about their alleged character flaws. The fact that they're not running for office is irrelevant; your assertions about what cheating allegedly reveals about a person's character are still insulting.

Of course Netzach is telling you to fuck off on behalf of people whom she knows and respects.

Reading between the lines isn't exactly my forte, but I don't think you have to be a fucking genius to figure out that there are people posting on this thread who either have cheated on spouses in the past, or are in the process of doing so right now. Your assertions are directly insulting to them, as individuals. And while it would be great if they had worked through all of their issues to the point where they could brush off your insults, that doesn't appear to be the case. I understand why they are reacting defensively, but you? Give me a break.

If you're gonna go around telling people you consider them to be incapable of comprehending the importance of honesty and integrity, selfish, cruel, and every other damn thing, you'd best be prepared for the consequences.

 

[satindesire]

You're making connections I'm not. But dressing up and going out usually results in the kind of night where we fall asleep in about five minutes.

I definitely think Barry has a shitload of oversexed black male stereotype to avoid, and this kind of male Jackie O perpetual class thing is the best road to go. I can't really picture these people doing anything non procreative.

Meeee-owww. Cranky much? Geesh.

 

[00Syd]

Well this has been an entertaining read. Please, do go on.

 

[Recidiva]

Recidiva, looking at the statements I've bolded, is it really so hard to understand why people who have cheated on their spouses would take your comments personally?

You are making unequivocal assertions about their alleged character flaws. The fact that they're not running for office is irrelevant; your assertions about what cheating allegedly reveals about a person's character are still insulting.

Of course Netzach is telling you to fuck off on behalf of people whom she knows and respects.

Reading between the lines isn't exactly my forte, but I don't think you have to be a fucking genius to figure out that there are people posting on this thread who either have cheated on spouses in the past, or are in the process of doing so right now. Your assertions are directly insulting to them, as individuals. And while it would be great if they had worked through all of their issues to the point where they could brush off your insults, that doesn't appear to be the case. I understand why they are reacting defensively, but you? Give me a break.

If you're gonna go around telling people you consider them to be incapable of comprehending the importance of honesty and integrity, selfish, cruel, and every other damn thing, you'd best be prepared for the consequences.

And the consequences are that people are offended and disagree with me and maybe aren't my BFF? How does that not happen to me seventeen times a day and/or whenever I open my mouth? What consequences am I not accepting here?

 

[JMohegan]

And the consequences are that people are offended and disagree with me and maybe aren't my BFF? How does that not happen to me seventeen times a day and/or whenever I open my mouth? What consequences am I not accepting here?

Quit bitchin' about being personally attacked, when you're the one doing the attacking.

If you throw a punch at somebody, you've got no right to complain when they punch you right back.

 

[Recidiva]

Quit bitchin' about being personally attacked, when you're the one doing the attacking.

If you throw a punch at somebody, you've got no right to complain when they punch you right back.

Oh please.

I think adultery is a bad thing. Nobody can tell me why it's a GOOD thing. But I'm a bad person and tons of people I don't know won't like me and...what the fuck?

It's childish and it has nothing to do with my argument or my reasoning. Fine. I'm a big meanie. This is not news to anybody.

My opinion is not that damned big of a deal and if anybody had their day ruined by someone disapproving of adultery, they've got lot bigger problems than me.

If someone wants to tell me why adultery is admirable, I'm all ears.

 

[00Syd]

Oh please.

I think adultery is a bad thing. Nobody can tell me why it's a GOOD thing.

*snip*

If someone wants to tell me why adultery is admirable, I'm all ears.

Having thoroughly read through the entire thread, I think I can confidently say that nobody has made any argument that adultery is a good or admirable thing. If that's what you think people have been saying to you, I think you've missed the point.

 

[satindesire]

Having thoroughly read through the entire thread, I think I can confidently say that nobody has made any argument that adultery is a good or admirable thing. If that's what you think people have been saying to you, I think you've missed the point.

I don't think she's missing the point at all. Maybe she just doesn't agree with the points that have been put out there and maybe she isn't going to change her mind because of another person's opinion.

I don't see anything wrong with her opinion at all. Maybe it's because I agree with her and maybe it's because I think she's been really fantastic at getting her opinion across, regardless of whether or not I agree with her.

I think she's being attacked because she's stuck to her guns and told everyone shamelessly that she doesn't agree with adultery. Being a porn board full of people that are more sexed than your average joe, I can understand why there's a stigma against people who don't think fucking around on your spouse is okay...Doesn't mean I agree with it, though.

And we shouldn't have to, either.

 

[Recidiva]

Having thoroughly read through the entire thread, I think I can confidently say that nobody has made any argument that adultery is a good or admirable thing. If that's what you think people have been saying to you, I think you've missed the point.

I'm sure nobody's made the argument that it's admirable either.

And I can't say I'm waiting with anticipation for someone to do so.

I'm entirely capable of missing the point. What is the point, then?

Keep in mind I sometimes get points and then ignore them as irrelevant, so what's the point I'm missing and why is it relevant?

Thanks. You are a dear and I should probably be baking you cookies if you answer. But I probably won't.

I do have some extra Old Bay though.

 

[Recidiva]

I don't think she's missing the point at all. Maybe she just doesn't agree with the points that have been put out there and maybe she isn't going to change her mind because of another person's opinion.

I don't see anything wrong with her opinion at all. Maybe it's because I agree with her and maybe it's because I think she's been really fantastic at getting her opinion across, regardless of whether or not I agree with her.

I think she's being attacked because she's stuck to her guns and told everyone shamelessly that she doesn't agree with adultery. Being a porn board full of people that are more sexed than your average joe, I can understand why there's a stigma against people who don't think fucking around on your spouse is okay...Doesn't mean I agree with it, though.

And we shouldn't have to, either.

Thank you.

I do piss everyone off eventually.

But I don't piss off everyone ALL the time and that is something.

 

[JMohegan]

Oh please.

I think adultery is a bad thing. Nobody can tell me why it's a GOOD thing. But I'm a bad person and tons of people I don't know won't like me and...what the fuck?

It's childish and it has nothing to do with my argument or my reasoning. Fine. I'm a big meanie. This is not news to anybody.

My opinion is not that damned big of a deal and if anybody had their day ruined by someone disapproving of adultery, they've got lot bigger problems than me.

If someone wants to tell me why adultery is admirable, I'm all ears.

You didn't just comment on adultery. You made repeated, explicit, pejorative generalizations about the alleged character flaws of people who commit, or have committed, adultery.

And then complained about being personally attacked, when someone responded by telling you to fuck off.

For the record, I don't think your pejorative generalizations make you a "big meanie." I think they indicate that you are prone to self-serving, sanctimonious, absurdly over-simplified assertions.

And your complaining about being personally attacked, in this context, shows you to be passive aggressive, and hypocritical to boot.