Private Political Parts

The world is rife with Weiner jokes, but this week’s column isn’t going to go there—no matter how easily the puns may come.

Former New York Rep. Anthony Weiner may not have considered his name when he started posting lewd pictures of himself online, but the fact is he did. After serious pressure from Americans and the president himself, Weiner has resigned.

I’m no proponent of posting pictures of yourself online if those pictures don’t include some amount of clothing. I would especially advise against it if your particular career doesn’t include getting naked for money.

I know that seems a little contradictory. “Elected officials” and “naked” seem to go hand-in-hand. But I don’t think it’s an official job description for the position.

Despite Weiner’s life decisions, we will never see if he could have become a great leader. The people of New York have spoken and now a man’s career, and possibly his constituents' lives, are changed forever.

Who knows what’s to become of Weiner now. Perhaps a book deal is in the works, or perhaps an even more lucrative video deal is being mulled over. Whichever it is, there’s no guarantee he won’t have the same amount of power or influence as he did as a legislator.

And really, when you look at Weiner’s voting record, he seems like the perfect representative for New York Democrats!

According to the official vote counting website, govtrack.us, Weiner voted to keep our troops out of the unstable Libya conflict, to limit the amount of power Homeland Security wields, and to help our Veterans through legislation. If that doesn’t bleed donkey blue, I don’t know what does.

But New York voters decided none of that mattered. Despite his liberal voting record, the people chose to judge him on his private parts.

Although I’m arguing against Weiner stepping down because of a sexting scandal, I’m not going to allow him to get through this column unscathed. I’m not a Republican, and I’m certainly not a Democrat, so I’m always finding things I don’t agree with. I see many of Weiner’s votes that I think are just ridiculous.

For voting “Yea” on H.R. 1954, an implementation on a national higher debt ceiling, I must rate Weiner with four out of five years having a new first name: Richard. You finish that joke in your head because like I stated before: I’m not going there.

If the people are going to demand an official step down from office, it should be for reasons of voting and political action, not for reasons of private affairs.

I’ve had this mode of thinking for as long as I can remember.

I was 16 years old when the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal was going down, and I remember thinking: “Isn’t this guy a good president? Why is everyone so hung up on his personal life? Shouldn’t we be more concerned with how he’s running the country?”

We can debate Clinton until we’re blue. The truth is he was a good president, but citizens and congress thought this act of marriage defiance was reason enough to impeach him.

I know, I know. He lied under oath. But if he hadn’t done that, the Republicans would have found another way to use the scandal against him.

It hasn’t been until the last few decades that politicians were scrutinized for their private lives. I would like to think Americans would rather see an elected official impeached for something horrible and totally relevant to that person’s job.

For example: Richard Nixon’s little fiasco. Now there was a reason to get a guy out of office!

For that whole mess, Nixon gets the review of being reprinted in the history books as Richard Weiner.

It should be for those reasons, and those reasons alone, that men and women get kicked out of office. A president breaking into an opponent’s headquarters: bad. A man trying to get lucky on the Internet: not relevant.

Just imagine if we as a country were this judgmental historically. I don’t even need to explain what would have become of John F. Kennedy. Today he is regarded as one of the nation’s most influential leaders. But what if Americans judged him on his private actions? Go ahead and mull over that rhetorical question for a minute.

There’s dozens of names that could be dragged through the political mud pit, including Franklin D. Roosevelt’s wife, Eleanor, for signs of lesbianism; Andrew Jackson, America’s seventh president, for partying too hard; and even the drafter of our Constitution, Thomas Jefferson, for having affairs with his slaves.

But F.D.R. helped America through the Great Depression and WWII, Andrew Jackson was the only president to pay off the national debt and leave the country in the black, and Thomas Jefferson, well, was a founding father!

Who knows how America might have been affected had any of these leaders been ousted because of their private lives.

We definitely wouldn’t have those two familiar faces on the $20 bill, the nickel and the ever-popular $2 bill.  And the musical “Annie” would be drastically altered.

Should we examine each political official’s public actions with a microscope? Yes. But should we spend our time peering through that microscope at each official’s private lives? No. We’re wasting our time if we do. We need to be scrutinizing politicians for how their actions affect our lives—not how their actions affect their lives.