I was disappointed. I must admit it was a familiar feeling. Another American politician caught with their pants down in the wrong room with the wrong woman...or worse in a bathroom with the wrong man. The argument I have heard often is, politicians have a right to a private life and their private life has no bearing on their ability to lead. How can one's behavior in one setting have no affect on how this person would lead our country or handle their office in another scenario? When I hear this argument I flash back to the large vat of Kool-aid in Jonestown and think somehow it reached our water supply. How can a person's personal behavior not give you a window into their true character?
My Mother use to always say "You can tell the man, by how he treats his mother"... Or his wife and family. And more so, when caught in a tough situation, how does that person behave? Do they deny till the truth is irrefutable? How does ones courage under fire measure up in that scenario? How do we NOT hold our leaders accountable for truth and honesty? Aren't those two key components of integrity?
It does remind me a bit of how we deal with domestic violence in the United States. When a situation happens in a home, even today police officers are often discouraged from getting involved. It is still called considered a domestic matter. Why the Cybil split? If a man beats his wife, it is a domestic issue. If he did the same thing to a stranger, it's assault. Does anyone else see this outdated double standard? Perhaps this double standard is part of the global problem of violence against women and girls.
When any individual hold's themselves up as a beacon of hope and leadership they should expect serious scrutiny. I heard often from John Edwards speeches how important his religion is to his life and his family. IS there any hypocrisy in a personal stance and affirmation on religion but then ignoring the basic tenants of that religion when it's inconvenient?
I heard on NPR yesterday, a number of letters and emails protesting their coverage of Edwards's affair. Its true how you cover a story is critical in your own credibility as a newscaster or reporter of publication. But...How do you evaluate one's integrity without looking at the whole?
How do we discriminate when we pick friends, spouses or people we choose as leaders? What are the criteria for each of us? My father taught me that you can see the real "mettle" of a person during a crisis. When John F. Kennedy died, wasn't Jackie's' response and her dignity throughout the ordeal that cleaved her to our American hearts forever? John Edwards "mettle" when confronted continually was to deny and rant about the "terrible tabloid trash". After his lies have been revealed, what makes him stand apart from the tabloid trash he referred to?
Another one of my father's favorite sayings was "You have to be an Indian before you're a chief" I use to roll my eyes at that one. Not again, I would think to myself. Yet, he was right. He would further talk about the responsibilities one has as a chief, to lead with experience and gained wisdom.
Even after admitting the affair to his wife and family, he still lied again. How can one not go beyond shame and say "wait a minute" who is this man? On a personal level when finally caught in a series of lies, how does one regain trust? By not doing it again. Yes, Edwards is lying continued with his clandestine meeting at the Beverly Hilton. When does one's credibility dissolve.?
I know women have affairs, in fact in record numbers...but why does it seem that men in power have an inordinate amounts of liaisons. Is it just because there are more men in power? They can't all be that stupid...yet why does the same mistake get repeated over and over again.
For me, the most disappointing part of President Clinton's tenure was his response to the affair with Monica Lewinsky. Word games and half-baked truths hurt his credibility tremendously and stained his legacy. A leader leads, and that means facing the music when it's tough to hear.
In a Washington Monthly article back in 2001 http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0110.green.html
Charles Black, a GOP consultant with North Carolina ties, readily concedes that "Edwards has got a lot of Bill Clinton in him---without the ethical or moral problems."
Guess he was wrong.
Another lesson I learned was from my corporate years," People in glass houses, shouldn't throw stones", but there is no reason why, those houses shouldn't be scrutinized...especially if they belong to our leaders.
To me leadership qualities include: Passion, Empathy, Courage, and Ethics are all top of the list for my leader. Someone who I hope will lead by example. If those qualities are not on our list, we are asking far too little from our leaders.