What do you think about this?

[mstang67chic]

The facts are that this man was fired as a town manager because it was discovered that his wife is an actress in porn movies. It was a legal firing because his contract allowed for no cause firing as long as it was a majority vote by the town council. The vote was actually unanimous.

 

[Fran]

I'm not sure why it's ok to penalize a spouse for the activities of the other.
Do they penalize women for the work of their husband/mobsters or drug dealers?
Our notion that people in public roles have to have a spotless life is ridiculous. They should not break the law but it's not really any of our business what their spouses do for a living or if they had an affair or if the did marijuana when 18." It should be about the work they do, the quality and how they do it. If we stuck to the law and stopped being judgmental on their private lives we wouldn't have nearly as much sneaking and lying.

Do I want to be judged on the behavior of my adult child? Am I responsible for his behavior? No. Is it any of my business if my mayor had an affair if he did a good job for the city? No. It's his wife's business and vice versa. Do I want to be prosecuted for a law my spouse broke? Should he lose his job over my profession (if it's legal)? No.

We have to grow up and stop with the mentality that politicians have to be saints. They have to be law abiding and they have to do a good job. Everything else is not our business.

 

[DammitJanet]

I know what you mean Fran but some jobs have morals clauses. Even my lowly job with the county had one which really surprised me. Not only did I have to run any part-time job by them if I wanted to get one after hours, they could fire me if my spouse was involved in illegal activities. I guess that didnt include my child because it never came up. However, I lived in fear that it would.

Jamie had to explain Cory when he got his security clearance in the military too. They asked him about all of us.

 

[trinityroyal]

Fran, I definitely agree with you in principle. I don't think that we should expect our politicians to be saints.

However, if the job has a stipulation or morals clause such as the one Janet describes, and the person is aware of it from the outset, then they should conduct themselves accordingly or not take the job. I don't know if that's the case with the City Manager...if it was clear from the outset that his spouse's job could affect his position, then so be it.

However, if there was no such clause in the employment requirements, and the city has just fired him because they don't like his wife's job, then that's another story altogether.

 

[DaisyFace]

Well, unfortunately...when a person runs for public office, their whole family is "up for election". Part of what made Barack Obama so appealing was his wife and daughters. I think folks do assume that husbands are influenced by their wife's opinion and vice-versa. Now it may not make much difference in the world of accounting, or fire-fighting, or computer programming or any number of other careers. But public office...? If the spouse seems questionable, the public often questions the judgment of the public official.

Based upon the details of the story, I believe that this man would never have gotten this public job in the first place with this woman by his side.

So a controversial decision....but I think I get where the town is coming from.

--DaisyF

 

[Star*]

Well if there was ANY truth to husbands/wives having job enhancement by having extra marital affairs or sex then our Governor would be one happy cat. However he's completely lost during interviews, rambles about his affairs, even the priest of the largest Episcopal church begged him on national tv to please shut up. He obviously has severe mental problems AND the only reason he is STILL Governor of the state of South Carolina is because his staff is trying to keep him in office just long enough to get tenure and maintain their state benefits. (We may be 50th in the nation in education scores, but not all of us are idiots.)

In the last month he's had nearly 4 complete weeks of vacations and just took off again for two full weeks in Europe stating that his children paid for the tickets by earning the money himself and he wanted to heal the marriage and try to fall back in love with his wife after he told an entire nation the woman in Argentina was his soul mate. (blech)

So - as far as this man goes? I think the fact that his wife is a porn star had nothing to do with his ability to perform his duties. Maybe in their case it enhanced his ability to get on with the daily grind.

That said - When you take a public position you should read the fine print very carefully and know ahead of time what is morally acceptable in your little corner of the world. It would be interesting to find out if in a small part of SanFrancisco if a mayor was found out to be gay - would THAT put him out of office? Know what I mean?? I guess it depends on where you live. I lived in Ft. Myers and it's pretty um.....conservative.

 

[DaisyFace]

Well said, Star--

In fact, I would like to see Gov Sanford held to the old SC statute that requires jail time for convicted adulterers.

But that's just me...

--DaisyF

 

[Fran]

The employee didn't violate a morals clause. His wife's job isn't illegal. They weren't elected.
Most contracted jobs seem to have a morals clause.

I know teachers have a moral clause but does that mean their spouses can't have legal jobs we find distasteful?
Do we get fired if our spouses are convicted drunk drivers or convicted drug dealers? Do we get fired if our spouses have felonies on their record?
What are we saying? Political candidates have to have a perfect family? How does that reflect the majority of the voters? Wouldn't you have a bit of appreciation for a candidate who lived with a difficult child? or whose spouse once was a difficult child?

Anyhow, I know that what you say is the reality but it isn't logical. in my humble opinion.

 

[Star*]

Daisy -

We're a joke - (State of SC)

One of our top AGRICULTURAL officials - abuses HORSES - TREXLER -

Our State treasurer, and also had a seat on the state budge and control board...is a crack head

Our Governor is a womanizer & globe trotting male *****

Our Governor trying to refuse stimulus money in an bid for the 2012 presidency of the US.

Our Lieutenant Governor is a difficult child who thinks he is above the law.

Our First Lady is setting a horrible example for young women in abusive relationships by welcoming her husband back with open arms after he admits he is not in love with her -ugh. in my humble opinion - (opinions on this may vary)

Our Sheriff "Barney Fife" in arresting and Grandstanding Michael Phelps possible bong hit...blunder.

Yeah......love it here.

Not to mention they are tearing down the farmers market to build a parking lot for the football stadium.....and we are THIRD in the nation in unemployment but our tax dollars were approved for these projects recently -

9.6 million to restore an already restored WWII battleship and (no I am not kidding) $35,000 to build floating toilets on the rivers in the upstate. So that boaters would be able to potty and change diapers while boating.

(possibly decisions made while our Treasurer was on crack)

 

[susiestar]

While Ft Myers is quite conservative (my gparents used to live near there), the fact is that there was no morals clause in his contract. It is ridiculous to think that this is a huge deal. NO ONE would have been bothered by this or even had a clue about this except that the City Council made it a big deal by firing him.

Her job is legal. So what if some people don't like it. I had the impression that she was a porn actress before the man got his job. So they could have dealt with it via a background check on each of them. But they didn't.

Why do we make such a big deal about other people's sex choices? Why are so many people getting their panties in a bunch about this?

I wish the sex police would go somewhere else and stay out of people's lives.

 

[donna723]

"...$35,000 to build floating toilets on the rivers in the upstate. So that boaters would be able to potty and change diapers while boating."



OMG, Star! I'm getting these vivid mental images of dozens of brightly colored port-a-johns merrily bobbing up and down as they float down the river ... and people falling in while trying to step veeeery carefully from the boat into the floating toilet (tricky if you're trying to get in there while holding your baby if they need a diaper change) ... or the family desperately trying to catch up with a floating toilet caught up in the current with grandma in it ...

 

[flutterby]

I agree with Fran.

What one's spouse does is not relevant. The mayor admitted that the man did a good job and they had no problems with his job performance.

I think this was a case of bias. Unfortunately, his contract gives him no recourse.

 

[donna723]

Ummm, does it say in there anywhere how they knew that his wife was in porno movies? Maybe the mayor or one of the city councilmen suddenly realized why she looked so familiar ... ?

 

[DammitJanet]

Donna...that was what I was just thinking...lol. Exactly how does one realize someone is a porn star without viewing said porn?

I wouldnt know someone was a rapper unless I saw them perform!

 

[muttmeister]

I think it is outrageous. I'm not sure you should even be penalized if your spouse does something illegal, as long as you were not in on it, but to penalize somebody because you don't like their spouse's LEGAL job is ridiculous. What rock did these people crawl out from under?

 

[Marguerite]

If he was sacked because of his wife's job, that is outrageous. Even if his wife's job was used as an excuse, it is outrageous. if he was sacked because he is incompetent - then fair enough.

A morals clause shouldn't affect anyonoe other than the person who is doing the job. A partner or spouse - not relevant.

Too often in politics (in some countries more than others), there is a huge medial hoo-ha over a politician skulking around with someone not a spouse. I'm thinking the Christine Keeler case in Britain back in the 70s as well as the Monica Lewinsky stuff. And many other cases.

A politician should be elected on his ability to do the job. Similarly, he goes or stays on the same basis. The French seem to be quite happy to keep Nicolas Sarkozy despite the topless photos of his wife Carla Bruni. Carla Bruni is currently embracing respectability, but her past has been well-photographed.
The current Italian president Berlusconi is "a self-confessed womaniser". His wife is divorcing him for his well-publicised bad behaviour. In a lot of other countries the merest whiff of scandal this juicy would have him out the door by now. Every time he opens his mouth, it seems, he comes out with yet anoter embarrassing clanger which desparages women. Yet he is still Italian president.

News from South Korea - "Former President Roh Moo-hyun of South Korea admitted on Tuesday that his wife had received cash from a businessman arrested in a snowballing scandal that has centered on Mr. Roh's aides and relatives."

Tony Blair had publicity problems due to his wife Cherie's involvement in some shady dealing (allegedly). He survived that to continue in power for some years.

And so on. Some politicians survive this, some prosper. It all comes down to spin, the media, and the cultural attitudes in the area.

Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. But when it all boils down, does he do the job well? That seems to be more important in many places.

Marg