Is the private (i.e. personal, non-official) conduct of an elected official important in your estimation of how well they serve in their official capacity?

It is important to me to the extent that it affects their ability to do their job. If, hypothetically speaking, an elected official was found to be dishonest in their private dealings I would not believe that they would be honest in their public dealings. This lack of credibility would directly impact their ability to perform their job.

If their personal life does not revolve around illegal activities I really do not care. I do not think that investigations should stretch into the personal life unless FACTS of these illegal activities present themselves.

This is a tough issue for me. In theory, I don't think it SHOULD much matter, but in practice how we feel emotionally about our elected officials is often as important as how well they do their jobs. I'm not sure we really have the right to dig too far into their lives, either, except where criminal activity is involved, but in our media-driven and litiginous (did I spell that right?) society, that line seems to be getting pretty fuzzy...

***daver: I can totally see the viewpoint that personal integrity can reflect on professional integrity. So maybe lying about an affair is a different matter than, say, a compulsive gambling problem.

I'd like to think of public officials in a purely functional manner, the same way I think of my co-workers. If they do their job well, I don't care what they do in their spare time. Still, I can't say "Definitely not" as I know that knowing what someone is like at home does affect my estimation of someone.
Yipe, lisashea's bill reference is pointing at me! ...it's not me, I didn't do it! I didn't cheat, I'm an ever-faithful husband!

This one is very difficult. I guess the greatest leader in the world would not be agreeable if he abused his wife or kids. It really depends on the situation. Clinton's sexual problems should be between him, his wife & his therapist.

Strictly personal life doesn't much matter to me. The only part that matters is where that personal life starts effecting their official life. If the President is constantly fighting private lawsuits how much of his attention is on his job? ***Lisashea: your example isn't really lying. It is double-talk and abuse of language. I do it a lot myself. I can't fault the man. ***Lisashea: okay, I'll give you the oral sex thing, that's even too cagey for me. As for the rest of it he's no worse than the system he is a part of.

Basically, I don't care what the official does in his off time. The only time I do care is if he is caught by the rumormongers and muckrackers and he lies about it(but I don't want to hear about it all day every day), then I have a problem. If he is doing a decent job in the office, then lay off. re: clinton. people really can't be surprised that he lied about this issue, he lied in the original campaign and he still got elected.

NONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONONO!!!!!!!

I put "not usually", but I find hypocrisy to be a notable failing in many of my elected officials, and this would have some bearing upon it.

Ethics are important, morals are not.

To me I think it depends on whether I think they are victimizing other people and how consistent their behavior is with the public image they attempt to project.

The private life of Officials or anyone else should be just that...private...unless it's something that might have a negative impact on the security of the country (sleeping a spy and telling him/her about our newest secret weapon for pillow talk for example). The situation with Clinton would have been over in a heartbeat if he had been honest in the first place. I think that he let it go on for so long (until he knew he was snagged) said something about him. The fact that he had a relationship with Monica doesn't bother me anywhere near as much as the idea that he twisted questions so that he could supply answers that he thought were covering his butt.
We have in the state right now an elected official whose private life should be just that. Unfortunately his private life includes being a slum lord who has defaulted on many loans (yes, I know this to be a fact and can't say a word....DAMN!!). He has the potential to become a very high ranking official (this is America after all). I had voted for him before I saw how he handles at least the financial part of his life. I won't again.

Absolutely yes, but not because they are representing their country. I disagree that rigid lines exist between a person's public and private life -- if someone behaves a certain way in their private life, that same character trait will come to bear on their public life. Clinton should be impeached, not for having had sex with Monica, but for lying -- many times, over the course of many months, and increasing taxpayer costs thereby.

The nation has no business in the bedrooms of the state.

beyond rape or murder, I've gotta say that I don't really care or want to care just how a politician handles their private life. If it ain't in the job description, I don't think they should be held accountable.

Now, if the tabloids want to print pictures of Clinton with the Space Alien, *that's* okay with me.

I understand the argument that if someone is willing to lie in their private life, they may not be trustworthy in doing their job, but I disagree. I keep my job and my personal life separate, and I expect that others can do the same. As long as he/she is not breaking any laws, I don't need to know about it. I think that everyone is entitled to a personal life, no matter how high-profile they may be.

I certainly don't think that Clinton should be impeached. I haven't followed the case very closely, but from what I can tell, he was very careful not to lie. He certainly didn't tell the truth, but he never said an outright lie. That may be sleazy (although personally I can understand it under the circumstances), but I don't think it's impeachable.

Private life should be private... but at the same time what people do in their "private lives" reflects what they will do or will be tempted to do in public life. Things like lying and lack of respect for other people, among others, are problems in people holding public office. So, in theory, no it doesn't matter, but in practice it all too often does, merely because they will generally tend to do similar things in the area of their office.

The stronger the scrutiny, the more flaws you find. It doesn't matter where you look.

Its hard to seperate what is happening to Clinton now from this question. But I'd have to say that what he did does matter in that he lied about it. Its hard to trust someone once you know they've lied to you once, because you know you may never know when else they are lying to you. Also, ones behavior in private life should be related to your behavior in public life in that you are the same person. You probably won't find a whole lot of people who are entirely honest in one aspect and then a liar/cheat in others. People tend to let their morality into all aspects of their life and can't really compartmentalize it.

nononononono. and no.

hard to answer. Elected officials' ability to do their job depends a lot on people's respect for/feelings about them, so it's hard to draw a line between publically-known-but-private things and official/public things -- they influence one another. I finally decided to define "non-official" as "having no measurable impact on their official performance," which seemed to be what was meant, in which case definitely not... who cares?

Whether or not the President likes it, he represents an entire country. All of his conduct, private and public, is part of this representation.

a senator who promises to improve the communities and then is not recycling would show me they really don't care......but a CEO of a major industrial plant (where they spew toxins into the air everyday) who doesn't recycle isn't a big deal because he obviously doesn't care anyway. So depending upon the official it does matter what they do in their private lives.

Usually yes. I don't care that BillC cheated. I know many politicians (and indeed many humans) cheat on their spouses and that's OK. What's NOT ok as far as I'm concerned is his continual lying. Remember the lies about pot? "I didn't break any laws of Arkansas". Then, "I didn't break any laws of the US". But finally someone had to ask him "Did you break ANY laws of ANY country" and he had to say yes. Same thing here. Lie, lie, lie, oh they have the dress? Admit to what I *have* to. I don't trust a man in our presidential office that has those kinds of ethics.

Bill: heh heh heh. Oh, OK, I'll change it so it doesn't think You are The BillC :)

jjg: he is not disclosing the full truth. In my view of honesty, that's lying. If I ask my SO if he's having an affair and he says no because he considers Oral Sex not to be an affair, I'd still kill him. The fact the was trying to weasle out of it would only add insult to injury and makes it far worse, in my opinion.

Pookster: Right - a person normally isn't "one way" in private and "another" in public. So the private self is indicative of how they "really are" in their work self. It's just harder to see that, sometimes.

The 4th answer is very funny if you think in Clinton, bcos that "recent events" happened on the White House, during job.

Jen: Ah! As always, law is not the same for all people.