The oh so tolerant American voter.

In today's New York Times, Gail Collins writes "Another election has come and gone, and with it yet another demonstration of American voters' fascinating indifference to the sexual behavior of their public officials."

. . . .

"The terrible truth is that great public leadership and domestic fidelity do not really go hand in hand. Some of our favorite national leaders were unreliable on the domestic front. Franklin Roosevelt comes to mind, as does John F. Kennedy. And the current mood of the electorate seems to clearly favor the argument that things were better when the worst thing the president did wrong was have sex with an intern in the Oval Office."


But all the examples that history provides (and there are many come to mind) are male politicos.  Is this really and example of public indifference to sexual misconduct by public officials, or is one more sign that "the old double standard" of ancient patriarchy is still a part of the expectations of moral Americans?  Is it really "what one does in ones own bedroom is one's private business" or is it "boys will be boys."    Gail Collins begins to explore this in her editorial column asking whether the voters would extend a similar latitude to a female politico.  Her conclusion, probably not.