PHILL IN THE BLANK: Moral practices should not be focus in upcoming election

Show of hands here. Who wasn't glued to the television during the O.J. Simpson case or the Winona Ryder-shoplifting-"I was just doing this for a part," fiasco?

I got excited when rumors re-surfaced that Thomas Jefferson fathered children with slave Sally Hemmings.

But scandals are only worth it when they are true.

Recent rumors about Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry having an affair with an intern have been denied - by the intern.

She said she never even worked for him.

Another rumor about Kerry is that he spoke at an anti-war rally with Jane Fonda. This rumor came equipped with a photo of the two at a podium, which happened to be doctored.

Either way, is Jane Fonda that big of a threat to the American government? If everyone who wore spandex in the '80s is a threat, then my phones might be tapped.

America is a scandalous country full of judgmental spectators. The nation is designed in a way so that many people watch a few people make all the decisions but heckle them throughout the process. It's a lot like sports.

Most think it is more fun to watch than participate. It is impossible to screw up if you don't try. People also like to watch others fail or act foolish.

Take hockey. Most true hockey fans go to a game because they love the competition. People who have little to no interest in hockey might join fans at the game in hopes to see a good fight.

No blood, no fun, right? But sometimes it hurts peoples' abilities to separate what really matters in an election from what is fun to hear about.

Bill Clinton had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky. John F. Kennedy was rumored to have slept with Marilyn Monroe. One of the lesser-known scandals is that of Democrat president Grover Cleveland, who one woman said had fathered her child. Republicans decided to cash in on the story by coming up with a little jingle: "Ma, ma, where's my pa? Gone to the White House, ha ha ha."

Hilarious.

But it has to stop somewhere.

As candidates are questioned about potential opponents, alleged sex scandals should be left off the roster. Americans understand the need to evaluate presidential candidates' moral practices. However, drudging up what someone did 20 or 30 years before he or she even thought about running for president just isn't right.

In the Clinton situation, that affair in particular occurred while he was in the White House. In that case, it should be settled with his family as opposed to aired in front of people. Unless he lied about it under oath or something.

Wait, he did that.

Regardless, debates should center on issues. They should be dictated by candidate's practices regarding the office and his or her abilities to serve.

Or we run the risk of watching a debate like this:

"You slept with that intern."

"Well you smoked pot 25 years ago."

"Your mom."

And someone gets elected and everyone complains that the president can't do his job because we were all looking the other way.

I would rather have a president who sleeps around but makes good decisions for the country than have a saint who can't better America.

Write to Lauren at lmphillips@bsu.edu


Comments