So, the NYT ran this story about McCain maybe having an affair. First off, it seems the story is pretty flimsy. Consider these two paragraphs:
A female lobbyist had been turning up with him at fund-raisers, visiting his offices and accompanying him on a client’s corporate jet. Convinced the relationship had become romantic, some of his top advisers intervened to protect the candidate from himself — instructing staff members to block the woman’s access, privately warning her away and repeatedly confronting him, several people involved in the campaign said on the condition of anonymity.
. . . .
Mr. McCain, 71, and the lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, 40, both say they never had a romantic relationship. But to his advisers, even the appearance of a close bond with a lobbyist whose clients often had business before the Senate committee Mr. McCain led threatened the story of redemption and rectitude that defined his political identity.
So, it sounds like some people thought that there might be the appearance of a problem, which is particularly bad for someone who claims to be as moral as McCain.
I don’t like this garbage of making an allegation and then claiming it doesn’t matter if its true because the mere allegation is a problem. It does matter. If the man didn’t have an affair, then your done.
If the story is true, what should we do with it? What role should the personal morality of the candidates in our consideration of these candidates?
For example, I consider the following moral imperatives: (1) caring for the poor, (2) marital fidelity, (3) pursuing peaceful resolution to conflicts and(4) avoiding substance abuse. Can I elect officials with more regard to (1) & (3) because that is the “purpose” of casting my vote, or is it immoral to elect folks that fall short with regard to (2) & (4)?