The circumstances of Reagan's divorce were not the same. Moreover, the divorce was more than thirty years behind him. He had consitently demonstrated exceptional emotional and moral stability and integrity by the time he ran for president.
Giuliani has not demonstrated requisite emotional and moral stability and integrity. A man who cannot exercise the necessary self-discipline to be faithful to his wife and children cannot be trusted to be faithful in other things.
But there was a time when a divorced person such as Reagan could not have been elected, just as Catholics were out of the running prior to Kennedy. After Clinton, what can anyone say about infidelity, the media is showing a lot of hypocricy here. When we find the perfect candidate with all the morality and views some here wish for, he or she probably won't have the other qualities needed to reach the electorate or to lead if by some miracle there is a victory by the GOP in '08 with a currently unknown perfectly devoted husband/father/conservative.
I freely admit that infidelity in a marriage is one of the few, absolute litmus tests I apply to discard political candidates running for high office. As you have expressed, I also believe it is a reliable indicator of overall strength of character.
I stopped listening to Bill Clinton on the campaign trail in 1992 after he appeared in the CBS 60 Minutes interview with Hillary and basically admitted to extramarital affairs without coming out and saying the words.
You have GOT to be kidding. There is no man else that I would have wanted at the helm of 9/11!!!
I am glad that my vote renders yours impotent!!!