An interesting thing happened this evening, watching the CBS news with Katie Couric asking the candidates what they thought of infidelity.

Can you believe that?

My son, wife and I were watching it 2gether. My son doesn't know of my W's affair 2 this day. He's a sweet young 20 yr old man now (bigger than I am, 2! Good thing he's not inclined 2 kick my @$$), and a joy 2 be around.

He thought the subject was a personal one and should be separate from politics, like church and state perhaps. My W seemed 2 agree that it was a private matter between the married couple, as 2 how they dealt with it. But she also seemed 2 agree with me that there's a big difference between Rudy and his unrepentant affair marriage, and Bill Clinton, who cheated but seems 2 have learned something from the experience (Hilary sure grew from her side of the experience!). I admit that I don't remember that much about their post d-day recovery, though.

Some of the candidates remarked about how many good presidents in our history were unfaithful (FDR was cited by more than one of them). But Huckabee, McCain and Romney and Edwards seemed 2 be more hardline about integrity and trust issues with a candidate who could promise faithfulness and then partition their lives and keep such a secret from their spouses (and what about the American public?). It was an interesting set of interviews, and an interesting, however brief discussion with my W and son.

At one point, my W complained that it's not just one person "at fault" in an affair. I only later realized that she may have meant me rather than Rat Meat being the other person besides her (and when I think about it now, it's quite possible I only jumped 2 that conclusion because I'm the BS).

But though I don't agree with that, if that's what she indeed meant, I also noted that it wasn't weighing on her mind afterward. We had a good evening after that until she fell asleep a while ago.

But it has me thinking about what I believe about the subject, when I consider what my W and son were saying - their different perspectives (non BS). Mostly, I like that we talked about it.

Neat stuff,
-ol' 2long

2Long,

I think that no matter how much time goes by, my FWH will never really share my perspective and level of pain for his affair.

He will never get IT any more than I will ever understand or even be sure that he actually feels pain because of his actions.

I do know that he feels bad that he hurt me so deeply and I've decided that is enough for me.

Who

Until the wayward spouse gets cheated on themselves.........they will never understand the pain, or really what the BS has gone thru. The wayward should pray that what goes around DOESNT come around.

I don't even think at that point that they get it. They might feel hurt...but in the back of their mind, they would think this was "payback" and not because their spouse actually favored someone else over them.

Of course I'm biased, but if I know a candidate has cheated, they automatically lose out on my vote regardless of their party affiliation.

If a candidate can't treat the people they supposedly love most with respect, if they can't remain loyal to their own family, what makes anyone think they'd remain loyal to a population of strangers?

A guy like Giuliani doesn't know the meaning of the word loyalty and dedication. He'd sell his soul to the wealthiest lobbyist every time. If his own kids wouldn't vote for him, I won't either.

In a nation of 300 million people, we can find a qualified candidate who isn't a cheating scumbag.

I sure hope (just to be even-handed and fair), somewhere along the line, Senator Clinton is questioned by CBS about BS's who enable adulteries. Since many of the former Clinton insiders have identified Senator Clinton as the leader of the "Bimbo Eruption Squad" for much of her WH's career, and knew full well of her husband's serial adultery, I think it's a valid question and one that might even illuminate some issues on this board.

On the other hand, I truly hope threads that are political in nature begin to dwindle and fade away. Discussion about how one intends to vote in the upcoming elections should not be a part of this forum. What one believes about political parties, their candidates, etc., has no value in dealing with the very personal obscenity of adultery and helping others recover from it.

LH

I want someone who can see the big picture. And I mean the BIG picture. A cheating spouse is either unable or unwilling to see anything past his own nose.

And a politician who cheats, a politician who has an eye on the white house, who KNOWS dang well his life is under microscope...is not only not concerned about the big picture of his own family/legacy...he is just plain STUPID.

And I'd like to have someone smart enough to govern his/her own life governing our country.

Oh yes, I want to be president someday. I know that a president is going to get hit hard in the polls if he is a known infidel...but, chit I just can't say no to this piece of [censored].

It just smacks of weakness. A president should be of strength.

They are NOT like every body else. They are running a country, and they should be of an extraordinary inner strength and insight.

A couple of the candidates in that interview sounded like blooming idiots. I'm sorry, but they did. That helped me narrow it down.

Putting a known infidel into office just seems irresponsible to me. Yes, we did have many great leaders who were infidels, but was it known about it before we elected them into office?

Too much like a crap shoot to knowingly vote an infidel into office and hope he is so great that it doesn't matter that he can't run his own life.

I would not want my FWW's whole life defined by her affair.

At what point does a FWS regain the trust that they can operate in society.

Where do we draw the line as far as a FWS being qualified for a position.

Should we remove all Judges that have had an A? All Pastors, Cops, Senators, Congressmen/women, astronaughts, coaches, CEO's, doctors.

So half of Congress and the Senate can be infidels but not the President.

Any job that requires integrity should never be held by a FWS? HMMMM.

Yep. There are plenty of people out there who AREN'T a FWS.

I agree with JJ and others here. As we all know, a WS in the fog, is the equivelent of entitlement, selfishness, immaturity, lack of integrity and the list goes on. I personally wouldn't want someone as immature as that running the country.

Edited to add: Not to mention a known LIAR.

That's true Frog, but in electing a president we only have so many things to go by. And their integrity is a big one, and one of the things measured by integrity is their commitment to their own spouse and family.

If we have the opportunity to know in advance that they have not lived a life of integrity, then how can we discount that?

I mean if past behavior is a very big indicator of future behavior...

It's not about throwing someone out of office, it's about putting them in there in the first place.

I was conned, scammed...whatever you want to call it by a known infidel...and I overlooked his past behavior. Now I look very closely at past behavior. I might be biased. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

So does that become part of the criteria? Infidelity?

So I would assume since it is in your mind we should then make every person running for office take a lie detector test to make sure they have never been unfaithful.

The statistics say that about 50% of people have been unfaithful. Do you know what our unemployment rate would be.

Besides infidelity there are many immoral things people do in life. Exactly what should we use as that criteria and how do we know if they never did it or just never got caught?

When people interview for Jobs they are judged solely on their ability to do the job.

Infidelity does not necessarily mean they do not have the ability to fulfill their job.

I think that the best way 2 show our support for people of integrity running for public office would be 2 pay them room and board only - no salary or retirement.

That way, people who WANTED 2 serve could VOLUNTEER, and the benefit 2 them would be respect (and getting 2 live in a nice house during their term, I suppose).

-ol' 2long

Maybe if the consequences were that high, a person may not take the risk of becoming a wayward.

There are very little consequences outside of the family relationships in todays world.

If there were higher stakes, would the stat still show 50%?

I feel the same way about my W. I've had 2 ponder for a couple years now, whether it is sufficient for me 2 know that she's suffered as well. I don't think she'll "get it" in the sense that a repentant WS, particularly one who finds methods like MB on their own initiative, does.

Can I accept that and live with it? I think so. But I still wonder at times.

In the mean time, I'm getting older, and someday I'll push daisies.

But I don't feel any urgency 2 make a major life change at this time.
-ol' 2long

My posting this was not about politics at all. Rather, about a wonderful oppor2nity I had 2 discuss infidelity with my W and son 2 get their perspectives on the subject. It just happened 2 be centered around the candidates.

-ol' 2long

Most employers require a background check, drug screening and credit check before hiring. The reason??? Companies understand that the past is a good indicator of future performance. In the case of electing our President we are the employers. I for one will use past performance to help determine my vote.

Merlin

Sorry, but as has been said here by the Harley's, an affair defines the relationship of both BS and FWS from the onset. Your FWW and my FWH are just that, former WAYWARDS. And it the eyes of many folks, they are in some way diminished by it. We don't have to agree with it or like it, but that doesn't change that it is.

I personally think hubris is more accurate than stupid when discussing political candidates and other public figures and their adultry. Many of these folks actually think that the "rules" are meant for someone other than them.

I do know that if I was in a position to hire an employee and all other qualifications were equal but one was a WS or FWS, well, I would go with the other candidate.

Judgement is and remains a factor here. In my personal situation, OW exposed the affair to my FWH publisher. Although he was not disciplined for his affair, any real future with that agency ended right then.

I have to agree with whomever said that they couldn't knowingly vote for someone who had an affair.

Who

I agree with a lot of what is being said here, and posted info about this interview on another thread.

Politics aside, there was one candidate whose answer shows that he really does value marriage and his wife.

I agree that we can't expect all presidents to be saints, but I also want a president I can look up too. I can't look up to someone who condones extramarital affairs. Especially after what I have been through.

This post and the other post should be linked somehow.

This really hit close to home for me. If you don't know my stich, WW started A in Mar 07, Dday 9-07, exposure to OMW 11-13-07, A seems to be over, but WD sucks, but....

Soon after Dday I called a friend of mine, D. She had an A 10 or so years ago, her BH found out, the A ended and they recovered their marriage. I called her because she and WW are good friends and D confided in WW when she was having her A and I wanted D to talk to WW to try to get her to wake up. Anyway, not too long ago I was talking with D and I told her how much I appreciated her help in getting me through this and she said it has been kind of her pentance (sp?) for what she did and since I told her of WW that D and her H have had some really good talks about things that were left unsaid during their recovery. D told me that she never realized the pain her H went through until she began talking to me.

Maybe a good thing for all wayward spouses to do would be to come here and read the pain us BS's go through. I would bet the Waywards that are on here can see what a BS goes through.