If you are unable to control your urges and use your better judgment, if you are unable to live up to your word and your vows in marriage, if you are so selfish as to take actions that are going to destroy multiple lives, you are clearly not in a position to lead anything.
Stop the moral relativism bull.
A moral absolutist is in no position to lead a complex society. You can always slice things down to where "black" and "white" don't work anymore, and there the moral absolutist relies on capriciousness to get his absolutist fix.
I would rather have someone who actually understands what's going on and can weigh the gray in terms of its separate values.
You talk about judgment, but the moral absolutist isn't doing it in its fullness. He jumps to preconceived conclusions rather than weighing things as they lie in situ in relation to the system in which they lie.
A moral absolutist might to decide to invade England because he thinks driving on the left is an abomination. A relativist would have more things to consider.
And relativism is not anathema to direction. One can be quite confident in one's relativistic assessments. Decisions are always absolutes.
As for Arnold, you're talking about narrowing a general rule down for a specific case. I see no need to make him part of the general population in this.
He's high profile enough that there's no mistaking him for anyone else.