The concept of privacy these days is feeling a little old-fashioned. There was a time when it was considered poor form to question someone about their personal life. This was true for politicians as well as regular citizens. There was a tacit agreement at the time that journalists would generally let politicians’ private lives stay in the background. The annals of history are filled with stories of leaders of all types having affairs or afflictions or family issues that were kept out of public view out of something called basic “respect.”
The leader that changed that was also probably the leader who benefited from it the most. John F. Kennedy was the last president who could depend on full cover from the White House press corp. While stories of his philandering were well known among journalists, it was something that they intentionally kept from the public. And why? Because the prevailing idea at the time was that it just wasn’t anyone’s business but that of his and his wife. That if he was doing a good job and had the faith of the population, no one should care what he did when he was “off the clock.’
But Kennedy was also the first television president, and as such changed the game for everyone who came after him. Television provided an immediate, intimate view of our politicians we never had before. We could see what the inside of the White House looked like, and what the First Lady sounded like. From there, there was no going back.
It isn’t difficult to see the connective thread from those nascent days of televised public lives to where we are now. Today, it is not just acceptable to dig through the lives of candidates and politicians. It’s expected. Some even consider it something productive for the state of our democracy. I don’t agree.
By all accounts, and from both sides of the aisle, it is generally believed that David Petraeus was an excellent military commander. He had bi-partisan support and the confidence of seemingly the entire military industry complex for the job he was doing as CIA director. In short, this guy is a superstar. And now, at a time when we need superstars, he no longer works for us. He has been driven from his office not because he did anything less than an exemplary job, but because of – pardon the vulgarity – into whom he stuck his penis.
This is a situation that was made for the phrase “throwing out the baby with the bathwater.’ Here is a lifelong contributor, someone who was a man of quality and distinction who wants to serve, and now he has taken himself out of the game.
Gay people should be particularly sympathetic to Petraeus’ plight. Isn’t a desire to be judged on our merits not who we sleep with central to all of the work that is being done? Imagine all the time and effort that could have been redirected if we hadn’t been preoccupied with our leaders’ personality short-comings, or trying to throw gay and lesbian Americans out of the military, or trying to legislate marriage inequality.
It’s impossible to think of the eight years of Clinton/Gore without thinking of the incumbent controversies and scandals that plagued the president. Despite the fact that most now agree that Clinton was one of our brightest, most accomplished leaders of all time, during his presidency so much time and money was wasted on trying to bring him down due to personal dalliances. One can’t help but fantasize about what additional could have been accomplished if he had just been left alone to do what clearly he was best at: running the country.
This particular cow is probably out of the barn at this point. So much of our culture and media is about that “gotcha” moment, where we are able to transparently see exactly how human are leaders really are. This shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone, but there is still this prurient interest in private, usually sexual, behavior. And make no mistake: such a searing spotlight drives people from public service. Who among us could withstand such scrutiny?
While no one can endorse what Petraeus did, I also think no one can say that our government, and therefore the health and welfare of our country, is just a little less talented without him working for us.
