Assuming that it is true that a United States President may conduct his personal affairs in a way which does not jeopardize his capacity or duties as a political leader, should a United States President be accountable for his personal affairs by the American people whom he represents? This is the question to be discussed. Keep in mind, however, that this question does not deal with whether or not it is acceptable for a president to lie about his personal affairs or whether he should be legally accountable for his personal affairs. Rather, this question deals with whether or not we should require our president to be a moral leader as well as a political one and what standards are appropriate to demand of the man we empower within our nation's highest executive office. This is an important issue because as more and more personal scandals unfold regarding presidents, it is important for the people themselves to decide if it affects their leader and his leadership. It is also important for people to know what they want in a leader so when they read their ballot they know who to vote for. The position I will take is that the United States President should be held accountable for his personal affairs by the American people whom he represents. I take the position that we should require our president to be a moral leader as well as a political one and that private behavior is relevant to public performance. My first argument is that people elect the president based on his beliefs, his morals, and his politics. People support the president because he abides by his beliefs, morals, and politics whether they involve his political or personal affairs. The president is accountable for his affairs, political or personal, that ref... ... middle of paper ... ...say that if the president lies about his personal affairs he won't be prone to lie about his political affairs? This is where the politic becomes very personal. If our leader lies about his personal business then how can we trust him not to lie about his political business. The answer is we cannot trust him. In conclusion, I believe that the best reasons can be provided for belief in the position that I have taken. Although not everyone will agree and many believe that politics is politics and personal affairs are nobody else's business, I have explored the reasons in this paper about why the political is personal. By no means do I feel that in some cases the personal is irrelevant. But, on the whole, the way someone deals with his personal affairs reflects the person himself and sets a precedent for his future actions, whether they be political or personal.
The “Whitewater” scandal was a real estate scheme by the White Water Development Corp. Both President Bill Clinton and his wife Hillary Clinton were involved in the scandal to make a land deal. Many people were involved in the scheme, which was held in the 1980s in Arkansas. Bill Clinton and his wife maintained their funds by the support of the Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan, which represented the Clintons in the overthrow of their Whitewater shares. The Clintons were being investigated when there were improper campaign contributions, political and financial favors, and tax benefits.
Stephen Skowronek writes about political time and how one can determine the legacy a president will leave behind at the time their presidency is done. The president has immense powers when he comes to office, but the challenges they each face vary depending on the time they take office. Skowronek analyzes and demonstrates that the most essential factor for a president to attempt to legitimize his actions and orders will be the actions of the president before him. Following the actions of George W. Bush is how we can determine where Barack Obama falls under and follow the chain to the next president. If Hillary Clinton were to win the 2016 election, she would fall under the politics of articulation and Barack Obama would fall under the politics of pre-emption.
The supporting argument is that Nixon made awful choices, but that should not change the people’s opinion of government. Nixon supporters were disgraced, and his opponents just shook their heads. His supporters trusted him to do the right things, but in the end he just hurt them. While this was a major issue in history, the American people should not look at this one bad apple. If the whole United States thought that everyone in the government was corrupt, then we would have a huge problem.
It is clear that while political scandal, primarily the 1974 Watergate scandal, played a large role in the rapidly declining confidence in government between 1968 and 1980, it is not the sole or even the dominant factor. The Watergate scandal only impacted on the Nixon era, and subsequently lead to measures that should have prevented further distrust in the government. Instead, the role played by the four presidents who held office in those years was the main reason behind the decline in confidence. The role of the presidents and their White House administrations encompassed political scandals, and also clearly influenced other factors such as the role
Presidential power has increased all the time. Compared to the first U.S. president George Washington, the modern presidency has more power and departments (Patterson, 2014). The expansion of presidential power increases the ability of the Executive branch to regulate and protect our society. On the other hand, the president may abuse his presidential power. Like in this case, the President Nixon monitored his staff’s conversation at the Oval Office, and he let some people to set up the recording device in the Watergate complex (“teachingamericanhistory.org”, n.d.). In my opinion, the president Nixon abused his presidential power to set up these recording devices. Even though he had the excuse that the conversations he recorded may contain the national security issue, the method that he get information was not appropriate. He cannot just record everything without other people’s permission to achieve his goal. These recording conversations might have other people’s privacy. Even though the U.S. constitution does not state the word privacy, it can be derived from the Bill of Rights (Patterson, 2014). The people’s privacy is protected now, and any other person cannot invade their privacy without permission. Therefore, the president Nixon violates other people’s privacy, which was against the Constitution. Because the Constitution is the Supreme law of the U.S., the President Nixon had to follow it (Patterson, 2014). Thus, when the presidential power conflicts with the Constitution, anyone in Executive branch should obey the
Impeachment is the ultiomate punishment for a president. It is a long and complicated rout to removing a public official from office. The Constitutional process Article II, section 4 specifies the procedures to be used to remove a public official from office(CNN/All Politics). The constitution states that and president found guilty for bribery, treason, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. There has been a long debate on what should be considered a high crime. Different people in the House share different views. Ultimately it is up to the Hose to decide to drop the charges or further the investigation. If the public official is found guilty a two thirds majority vote from the Senate is necessary. The most recent president to face an impeachment hearing was Bill Clinton. A previous case involving Richard Nixon, Watergate, was held in 1974. Rather than facing an embarrassment with impeachment Nixon chose to resign in disgrace.
On August 17, 1998, exactly one year after making the statement above, President Bill Clinton prepared to deliver a speech concerning a scandal that had gripped the nation for months. It is needless to say that this was an important moment during the Clinton administration. After accusations of sexual harassment, Clinton addressed the nation and admitted to having a relationship with Monica Lewinsky. In this critical speech Clinton set out to admit to wrong-doings, provide a few reasons for his action, and ultimately persuade the audience into moving on and forgetting the scandal. This essay will break down his speech into sections and examine the most and least effective strategies that Clinton employed and how well he executed those strategies. This is an interesting speech given under rare circumstances. Not since Watergate had an American president been under such harsh moral criticism from the public. By looking critically at this speech we are able to gain valuable insight into Clinton's motives.
The purpose of Clinton’s public rhetoric is to win the support of the American people, relative to the Republicans and the Independent Counsel. The support of the people will ensure the eventual cooperation of the House and Senate–who are directly responsible to the public for their jobs. Because Clinton is speaking to a broad and...
Choosing a president can be very challenging. There are many things we as citizens look for in a candidate. For example, goals, visions, etc. We always want what is best for our country and for our families. James D. Barber looks into one thing, which is the candidate’s character. This essay will explain James D. Barber’s theory. It will also criticize the placement of five presidents in the typology he has created.
Unethical leadership in areas of political, industrial, religious, and public safety by just a few in upper management have caused international devastation such as the oil pollution in the Gulf of Mexico, the New Zealand mining disaster, and law enforcement leaders ignoring the unprecedented violence in jail systems. All of these are unethical activities of leadership are contributing to the loss of public trust of leadership. Some of the reasons given by (Perez and Normore 2015) for the loss of confidence were “no leading financier or politician was held legally accountable for his or her unscrupulous role in causing the economic collapse that saw millions of people around the world lose their homes, employment, lifestyle, and dignity” because of this reason I feel in itself is another example of unethical leadership in that the court system for not making these leader accountable for their unethical
Examining Trump’s rhetoric and past actions, it becomes clear that Trump’s ability to be the leader of America, especially in today’s already heated world climate, becomes questionable. When even the members of his own party refuse to endorse him and claim that he is not qualified to run a country, the general public needs to sit back and question his integrity. In Trump’s past, he has proven to be an insensitive, racist, greedy business man. Why would he prove to be any different once elected to office?
Understanding and evaluating presidents’ performance often poses challenges for political experts. The nation votes one president at the time and each presidency faces different tests. The environments surrounding a presidency have a tremendous impact on the success and failure of that presidency. In addition, the president exercises his power through a check and balance system embody in the Constitution. As stated in (Collier 1959), the Constitution created a government of “separated institutions sharing power.” As a result, a president works with others institutions of the government to shape the nation’s agenda. Thus, determining a presidential performance becomes difficult, especially when it comes to comparing the performance among presidencies.
Richard E. Neustadt, the author of Presidential Power, addresses the politics of leadership and how the citizens of the United States rate the performance of the president's term. We measure his leadership by saying that he is either "weak or "strong" and Neustadt argues that we have the right to do so, because his office has become the focal point of politics and policy in our political system. Neustadt brings to light three main points: how we measure the president, his strategy of presidential influence, and how to study them both. Today we deal with the President himself and his influence on government action. The president now includes about 2000 men and women, the president is only one of them, but his performance can not be measured without focusing on himself.
Lately, the top story in the news day after day, months after months have been about William Jefferson Clinton, also known as Bill. Who could blame them, there is nothing better than a story out of the ordinary, especially one with presidential status. For the past months he has been the most talked about figure, being the essential topic for news, talk shows, late night comedy and even going as far as the big screen. Talk about 'Primary Colors' and 'Wag the Dog.' What has gotten to me the most however, were the constant flow of Republicans, along with a few Democrats, who just want to say how shocked and embarrassed they are along with the people of the United States.The president had not just become the most talked about figure, but also one history had ever seen, so far that is, breaking the record and becoming a topic of conversation and debate 'twenty-four seven.' The people, who I think were most affected by this crisis and feel very sad for, are the Republicans, since they had lost severe amount of sleep over the president's bedroom crisis. They had to perform their republican duties by shocking our brains with the president's affair with Monica Lewinsky. We had to ignore the rest of the world news and its issues while they plough through the valley of lies, abuse of power and something they called high crimes and misdemeanors.
Political Philosophy is typically a study of a wide range of topics such as, justice, liberty, equality, rights, law, politics and the application of a codified law. Depending on what the philosophy is, it usually tends to be a very sensitive and a personal ideology that an individual holds within the reality of their existence. Several of the fundamental topics of political philosophy shape up the society that we live in as these specific topics and their implementation by the state ensures a legitimate government. In Political Philosophy, the aforesaid concepts or topics are evaluated and analyzed with tremendous depth in context to their history and intent. Furthermore, in a rather colloquial sense, political philosophy is generally a point of view which after some deep thinking asks questions such as, what are the government’s duties? Is it legitimate? What makes it legitimate? What are the duties of its citizens? What are their rights? Are they protected? So on and so forth. In the following paper, I will canvass my political philosophy and elaborate on my reasoning behind it.