Meaning: This quote by Charles Krauthammer addresses the issue of imposing an unrealistic standard of personal perfection on public figures. The quote suggests that if society insists on only allowing individuals with a "pristine" personal history to participate in public life, the result would be a dearth of individuals of virtue and integrity in positions of power. Instead, those who are wealthy and able to outsource their personal affairs, those who are unremarkable and have nothing to show, and those who are cunning and adept at concealing their true nature would be the ones running the show.

Krauthammer's quote reflects a broader societal concern about the impact of personal scrutiny and moral judgment on the public sphere. This issue is particularly relevant in the context of contemporary politics and media, where public figures are often subject to intense scrutiny of their personal lives and past behaviors. The quote suggests that holding public figures to an unattainable standard of moral purity may ultimately lead to a situation where those who are best able to hide their true selves or have the means to outsource their flaws are the ones who rise to power.

One interpretation of Krauthammer's quote is that it highlights the potential pitfalls of moral absolutism in public life. By insisting on a narrow definition of "pristine" personal history, society may inadvertently exclude individuals who possess the necessary skills, experience, and vision to lead effectively. This can lead to a situation where the qualities required for success in public life become divorced from moral integrity, and instead favor those who are adept at navigating the demands of public scrutiny.

Furthermore, the quote also raises questions about the nature of virtue and integrity in public life. Krauthammer's suggestion that paragons of virtue may be scarce in public life challenges the assumption that personal perfection is a prerequisite for effective leadership. Instead, the quote implies that individuals with flaws and complexities may also possess the qualities necessary for leadership, and that a more nuanced understanding of virtue is needed in evaluating public figures.

In a broader societal context, Krauthammer's quote sheds light on the tension between the public's desire for transparency and authenticity in public figures, and the reality that all individuals have aspects of their personal history that they may wish to conceal. The quote suggests that a relentless focus on personal perfection may ultimately drive capable and qualified individuals away from public life, leaving the field open to those who are better equipped to navigate the demands of public scrutiny.

In conclusion, Charles Krauthammer's quote offers a thought-provoking perspective on the intersection of personal history, moral integrity, and public life. By challenging the assumption that public figures must have a "pristine" personal history, the quote raises important questions about the qualities necessary for effective leadership and the impact of moral judgment on the public sphere. It prompts us to consider the complex interplay between personal flaws, public scrutiny, and the qualities needed for effective leadership in contemporary society.