Petraeus, Bernard de Clairvaux and Joe Frazier

One wonders about leadership and the problems it brings. Does every advertisement for ship captain have to be answered by an Ahab?

This Petraeus thing is a real problem. Petraeus is a very talented a man to lose from leadership, especially when one examines what is on the public stage at present. Certainly a CIA chief should be in enough control of himself enough to avoid the obvious problem of sexual compromise. but we have seen a lot worse and have managed these problems in the past. Kennedy (Hirsch etc.) was fairly close to a nutcase who was facilitated in his sexual weirdness by the best and brightest pimps in the history of degenerate man. The press certainly knew this. But they held their collective nose--and their tongue. Clinton was totally incontinent but was protected by his wonderful personality which did not allow anyone to take anything he did, even government, quite seriously.

In the military, of course, things are magnified; infidelity in the U.S. Army is a military crime. Cultures have struggled with this for eons. The Christian world in The Middle Ages was populated by many parareligious groups, groups with all sorts of complex assignments--the Templers were warriors and bankers, the Hospitallers were warriors and nurses--and all took monastic vows. The Janissaries were a similar military unit in the Ottoman empire--almost a caste or class--who eventually moved into many aspects of administration and who, originally, were a celibate entity. (There may be some warrior  magic here, as well; before his fights Joe Frazier took celibacy vows, sometimes for up to nine months. And there is a distaff side: A wife's fidelity in many cultures was seen as protective to the warrior-husband and an injury to him--or his death--was seen as prima facie evidence of her infidelity and she would suffer for it when the warriors returned.)

Perhaps because of Clinton we have relaxed a little. Bush was elected despite his alcohol history and, while recreational marijuana use in college destroyed a Supreme Court nominee in the 1980s, Obama ran defiantly with his cocaine history. On the other hand, no one could look past Gingrich's personal life. "Candidate," after all, come from the word meaning "white." Clean.

But beneath this is an old idea, championed by the Greeks, of symmetry. A man was likely to be reflected in his life, his behavior, in all facets--even in his appearance. No "compartmentalizing" for them. If you were dishonest in your business, your friends could not trust you. If you were indecisive in daily decisions, you could not be counted on in a crisis. If you subcontracted the defense of your city to a bunch of brave mercenaries, you got a man who could be bought.

An unfaithful, irresponsible accomplished man in power is an unfaithful and irresponsible man.