What was so bad about Bill Clinton again?

[Edmond]

I believe he's referring to incidents that occured during his tenure as governor. Never really verified incidents, mind you, but suspicions.

Precisely so. I remember one story in particular about using state troopers to procure young women. Don't make me dredge up links -- google it yourself, if you never heard about this.

Yea. I also heard a rumor that Britney Spears is going to marry another guy too. There's away suspicions, you know. Go google it and see for yourself.

[YellowKing]

The people who say, "So what if he cheated on his wife?" obviously haven't been through the utter hell I went through as a kid (and adult) because of the same kind of behavior you say is so unimportant under Clinton.

Perhaps I'm being unfair to Clinton (snicker), but I know the "character" of the men in my life that cheated on their spouse. And it's not a character I'd want changing the oil in my car, much less running my country.

EVEN if I could forgive him for that (and admittedly, my attitude is probably more extreme than many people), he basically showed zero respect for the American people by trying to cover it up. Clinton insulted my intelligence on a daily basis after that scandal broke, and that's what pissed me off more than the BJ. It was his smug "I can get away with it" demeanor, and guess what? He was right. He could get away with it.

The difference between Bush and Clinton is that I've never felt Bush was intentionally trying to scam me. Yes, I think he has followed what turned out to be flawed intelligence. Yes, I think he depends too much on contradictory advisors, and that gets him into trouble. Yes, I KNOW the Bush campaign distorts facts and makes promises that won't be fulfilled, just like any politician.

Clinton is the salesperson at Best Buy trying to sell me a crap computer, knowing full well it's a piece of junk but preying on my technical ignorance.

Bush is the salesperson at Best Buy trying to sell me a crap computer because he has one at home and really thinks it's a good machine.

Maybe they're both pushing crap, but I think Bush genuinely means well for the American people. Yes, he's flawed. You may not agree with where he gets his inspiration. But he's going to push what he believes. Clinton never meant well for the American people, he was all about covering his own ass. It's reflected in every limp-wristed policy he ever dished out, every poll straddling position he took, and particularly in the utter contempt he showed for the public during his sex scandal.

[Eel Snave]

You know what? I'm not even touching that post, Edmond.

I'm shocked at what short memories we have sometimes.

[geezer]

The difference between Bush and Clinton is that I've never felt Bush was intentionally trying to scam me.

Well now hold on just a second. You're telling me that when his folks intentionally supressed the known, true cost of the little perscription drug thing that he an his guys weren't intentionally trying to mislead us?

Maybe they're both pushing crap, but I think Bush genuinely means well for the American people. Yes, he's flawed. You may not agree with where he gets his inspiration. But he's going to push what he believes. Clinton never meant well for the American people, he was all about covering his own ass. It's reflected in every limp-wristed policy he ever dished out, every poll straddling position he took...

Well now hold on just a second. You're telling me that when his folks intentionally supressed the known, true cost of the little perscription drug thing that hew wasn't playing politics to get the senior vote, because it sure as hell isn't in line with his conservative fiscal leanings

And you're telling me that George Bush, pro-choice George Bush (it's true -- look it up), doesn't govern according to what his base wants even if he thinks it's wrong?

I can buy that you have serious issues with Bill Clinton, but to say that George Bush is a better man is a highly debatable position.

[YellowKing]

As far as I know, he's not getting BJs in the Oval Office and has a stable relationship with his wife. That's good enough for me to show who's the better man.

[geezer]

As far as I know, he's not getting BJs in the Oval Office and has a stable relationship with his wife. That's good enough for me to show who's the better man.

And the other things...?

[Papageno]

Here's the real reason Clinton was so demonized, well before Monicagate: the Republicans (or, more specifically, the right wing of the Republican party) couldn't forgive him for having the audacity to get elected as a Democrat after twelve years of Republican control of the White House, and for being popular to boot. Keep in mind that to them, even before Reagan, the Carter Presidency had been an aberration due to the Watergate scandal-- the White House was "rightfully" Republican from Nixon onward.

The reason they were so hard on him almost from the day he took office (remember the BS they tried to spread about Vince Foster being killed because he "knew too much"?) was that he governed from the center and thus blew out of the water their narrative that held that all Democrats were automatically McGovern/Kucinich types.

If Kerry manages to pull it out this week (or after a couple of weeks), look for a campaign to start within a month or two to destroy him, coming from the usual suspects (Mellon-Scaife, I'm lookin' at you).

[Mr. Fed]

Ah, the great Clinton debate. What about this Clin-ton?

You know, if he and his wife had an open relationship and acquiesed to each other's affairs, more power to them (with an asterisk about workplace sex, below). But, unless they were lying about it, that doesn't seem to be the case. I think the marital vow -- which includes, but is not limited to, the vow of marital fidelity -- is one of the most imporant that a person can take. If a person feels free to break that vow for transitory pleasure, I don't trust them. Period. And frankly I don't give a shit about the stock accusaions of puritanicalism and prudishness that inevitably follow that view.

Also, there's what I'll refer to as the Gary Hart doctrine -- some conduct shows you to be so stupid that you shouldn't have a sharpened pencil, let alone launch codes. With Gary, it was screwing around and then having the blazingly stupid hubris to dare the media to catch him at it. With Clinton, it's screwing a 21 year old in the most indiscrete manner possible short of doing it on the White House lawn. Anyone who thinks that a 21-year-old intern could be counted on to -- if you'll forgive me -- keep her mouth shut about an affair is deluded to the point tha their judgment should be questioned. Anyone who thinks that dallying with said intern in the West Wing wasn't suicidally risky has similar issues.

Moreover, questions of marital fidelity aside, screwing the help raises issues beyond the mere notion of mutual consent. Most companies would fire a CEO who was found to be humping a 21 year old intern in the executive suite. Also, workplace sex raises issues that sex elsewhere does not. The workplace is for work. Sex there shows a level of self-indulgence that raises legitimate questions about self-control and character.

And don't get me started on perjury. The common defense that it was OK becaue it was just about sex and everyone lies about sex irritates me to no end. it boils down to an argument that it is OK to lie under oath when you feel the questions are irrelevant or improperly intrusive. But we have judges and elaborate rules permitting a party to raise the challenge that questions are irrelevant or improperly violative of privacy rights. Ignoring those is a big "fuck you" to the rule of law. Believe me, if I were handling a sexual harassment suit against a CEO of a big corporation, I'd want to know if the CEO had been dallying with other underlings. And in most cases the judge would let me. The sexual harassment laws opening this field of inquiry were not, one might note, passed into law by Republicans as a vehicle to subvert Democratic presidents.

By no means is Clinton's record circumscribed by his Monica-related conduct. The rest is another post that I don't mean to get into here.

[is_dead]

Papageno, nice post, really sums it up well. Governed from the center, made the nutjobs on both ends mad, remarkably accomplished a lot.

In the early 90's Republicans spent 50 million digging for dirt on Clinton (compare that Bush allocated 3 million towards the 9/11 investigation that produced the commission report, and you can guess the amount of detail that went into investigating Clinton). Amazing thing was that he didn't come out dirtier than he did. What happened to white gate or whatever it was called?

Here's a speech of Clinton's after Oklahoma city bombing. It was directed to the bombers who hadn't been caught yet:

"I say this to the militias and all others who believe that the greatest threat to freedom comes from the government instead of from those who would take away our freedom: If you say violence is an acceptable way to make change, you are wrong. If you say government is a conspiracy to take your freedom away you are just plain wrong...

How dare you suggest that we in the freest nation on earth live in a tyranny? How dare you call yourselves patriots and heroes?

I say to you, all of you... there is nothing patriotic about hating your country, or pretending that you can love your country but despise your government."


Later Clinton said that Republicans were as much the target of the speech as the right wing militias: the Gingrich movement was based on government bashing in the name of patriotism.[/i]

[RunningMn9]

Papageno, nice post, really sums it up well. Governed from the center, made the nutjobs on both ends mad, remarkably accomplished a lot.

And of course the evidence is that he didn't accomplish much at all. Family Medical Leave acts is not the stuff that historical legacies are made of. Or failed peace accords.

Impeachment for breaking the law? That tends to stick.

What happened to white gate or whatever it was called?

Whitewater. And a HELLUVA lot of people went to jail over it, including most/all of Clinton's associates in the matter.

I say this to the militias and all others who believe that the greatest threat to freedom comes from the government instead of from those who would take away our freedom: If you say violence is an acceptable way to make change, you are wrong.

Maybe he should have paid more attention in US History 1, when the covered the American Revolution.

[Kraken]

I believe he's referring to incidents that occured during his tenure as governor. Never really verified incidents, mind you, but suspicions.

Precisely so. I remember one story in particular about using state troopers to procure young women. Don't make me dredge up links -- google it yourself, if you never heard about this.

Yea. I also heard a rumor that Britney Spears is going to marry another guy too. There's away suspicions, you know. Go google it and see for yourself.

OK. I'm not going to spend hours trying to prove what courts could not, but here's a quick outline for those with short memories:

Clinton was accused of rape by one Jane Doe #5, a.k.a. Juanita Broaddrick: Bill Clinton, while state attorney general, brutally raped her in a Little Rock hotel room after she had enlisted to work in his first gubernatorial campaign in 1978. There is plenty of published verbiage about that, but the charges were never proved.

Here's a story containing a dozen or so other public accusations of rape and sexual harrassment.

He was also accused of using Arkansas State Troopers to procure mistresses.

I won't bother with links regarding Paula Jones and Gennifer Flowers; I hope you can at least remember those names. The more you plug these names into google, the more new names and accusations you find.

The guy is a proven philanderer and perjurer. Whatever the specifics of each individual accusation, he almost certainly used his power to take advantage of young women, quite possibly against their will in some cases.

OK, so he's a slimeball -- no news there. My point is that women's organizations supported this guy despite all of this! He treated individual women -- including his wife -- with utter disrespect, and yet somehow kept their overwhelming political support? Whether you chalk it up to his charisma or whatever, THAT is why his sexual escapades make my list of reasons to hate Clinton.

[Dirt]

Bush is the salesperson at Best Buy trying to sell me a crap computer because he has one at home and really thinks it's a good machine.

Bush is the salesperson at Best Buy trying to sell you a crap computer because he has one at home that his friend Karl Rove told him to buy, not doing his own research and not knowing any better, Bush thinks it's a good machine.

[Schroeder]

Bush is the salesperson at Best Buy trying to sell me a crap computer because he has one at home and really thinks it's a good machine.

Bush is the salesperson at Best Buy trying to sell you a crap computer because he has one at home that his friend Karl Rove told him to buy, not doing his own research and not knowing any better, Bush thinks it's a good machine.

And now we have reached the point where Dirt has become a cliche of a parady of himself doing a bad imitation of himself hating on the incumbant...

[Schroeder]

Bush is the salesperson at Best Buy trying to sell me a crap computer because he has one at home and really thinks it's a good machine.

Bush is the salesperson at Best Buy trying to sell you a crap computer because he has one at home that his friend Karl Rove told him to buy, not doing his own research and not knowing any better, Bush thinks it's a good machine.

And now we have reached the point where Dirt has become a cliche of a parady of himself doing a bad imitation of himself hating on the incumbant...

Say that 3 times fast!

[Tareeq]

Bush is the salesperson at Best Buy trying to sell you a crap computer because he has one at home that his friend Karl Rove told him to buy, not doing his own research and not knowing any better, Bush thinks it's a good machine.

Does this mean Kahless is endorsing Kerry? Or was that Rob Morton at Circuit City?

[Dirt]

Bush is the salesperson at Best Buy trying to sell me a crap computer because he has one at home and really thinks it's a good machine.

Bush is the salesperson at Best Buy trying to sell you a crap computer because he has one at home that his friend Karl Rove told him to buy, not doing his own research and not knowing any better, Bush thinks it's a good machine.

And now we have reached the point where Dirt has become a cliche of a parady of himself doing a bad imitation of himself hating on the incumbant...

Say that 3 times fast!

I'd want to understand it first.

[Al]

Clinton had a chance to take him out early on.

How? There were something like five separate orders authorizing the CIA to kill OBL and the CIA could never pull it off. Does that make it Clinton's fault or Tenant's?

Military options were never viable either since their options tended to start at the brigade level instead of at the fireteam. Some implied that the Pentagon did that because they didn't like Clinton but Rumsfeld made a similar complaint when he came in so I'm betting it's an institutional thing.

Again, should Clinton be blamed or should Pentagon leaders?

[Dirt]

Clinton had a chance to take him out early on.

How? There were something like five separate orders authorizing the CIA to kill OBL and the CIA could never pull it off. Does that make it Clinton's fault or Tenant's?

Military options were never viable either since their options tended to start at the brigade level instead of at the fireteam. Some implied that the Pentagon did that because they didn't like Clinton but Rumsfeld made a similar complaint when he came in so I'm betting it's an institutional thing.

Again, should Clinton be blamed or should Pentagon leaders?

Clinton of course. The buck always stops at the President's desk.

Doesn't it?

[Poleaxe]

Clinton had a chance to take him out early on.

How? There were something like five separate orders authorizing the CIA to kill OBL and the CIA could never pull it off. Does that make it Clinton's fault or Tenant's?

Military options were never viable either since their options tended to start at the brigade level instead of at the fireteam. Some implied that the Pentagon did that because they didn't like Clinton but Rumsfeld made a similar complaint when he came in so I'm betting it's an institutional thing.

Again, should Clinton be blamed or should Pentagon leaders?

We could have invaded Afganistan. Hell, we should have invaded Afganistan.

[Al]

We could have invaded Afganistan. Hell, we should have invaded Afganistan.

Was President Bush planning to do that prior to 9/11?

[is_dead]

The whole sex thing is stupid. And I'd be careful about calling women dumb for supporting Clinton, when the reality is that maybe they know something you don't. Something like: life is complicated, and a husband who cheated on his wife and a loving relationship between them are not guaranteed mutually exclusive. Somthing like Hillary went through a tough time and made a decision, and Bill went through a tough time facing up to his mistake. If they can move on maybe that deserves a bit of respect instead of spitting red-faced that Bill is a killing rapist.

There's another reason to ignore the sex aspect that people really don't think about: it wasn't mine or your business, just as your sex life isn't mine or president Bush's business. It was the cry-babies that made it our business, hounding the media and hammering it into every possible nook and cranny and dumping millions of dollars into it. Bill thought that he could lie and get away with it. Big deal. He had a right to lie. Don't you have an amendment that says people don't testify against themselves? That is the situation the Right put him in. Repeatedly. No president in history has been treated with such blatant villainous hate. Having something so personal under the glare of a thousand Republican sycophants, no that's not a reason for women to appreciat Hillary and Bill! Unable to resist women, what a world changing character flaw of Clinton's. Not.

How about talking about the real issues or scandals of the Clinton presidency? The business dinner scandal or the Lincoln room rentals? Are people aware of them? No. Because the Republicans found that true issues didn't inspire enough hatred. So they had to dig into his personal life and come up with sex.

Clinton had ideals and ideas when the Newts found it easy to oppose anything and propose nothing. The sex "scandal" was pathetic. Impeached over a blowjob? How about using fear tactics to sell the American people the invasion of an independent nation? Orange alert, red alert, missiles on the whitehouse lawn, weapons of mass destruction. A phony war. What would 50 million reveal about the so called intelligence that led to those justifications for invading?

Moral character. Blowjob. Tax break for people who make more than 200 000 and a phony war, or health care for poor people and social security and a balanced budget. Guess what, morality is a balance of a lot of things.

[RunningMn9]

There's another reason to ignore the sex aspect that people really don't think about: it wasn't mine or your business, just as your sex life isn't mine or president Bush's business.

Dude. I can absolutely guarantee you that if I get caught getting hummers from interns here in my office, my sex life will very quickly become Craig Barrett's business. And I will very quickly find myself out of a job.

But that's neither here nor there. The President perjuring himself and trying to tamper with witnesses in a civil suit most definately is my business. I don't care if he was lying about the fact that he likes purple popsickle sticks on Tuesdays but not Wednesdays.

If you are a sitting President, and you lie under oath in court - that should be grounds for dismissal - regardless of how well the economy is doing.

[is_dead]

Office or home? Since people live there and its called a house, I'd assume that those people are entitled to some privacy.

[YellowKing]

Well said, RM9.

Quite simply, Clinton made his sex life our business when he decided to bring it to work with him.

Ultimately the President does have a boss, and that boss is the American public. We hired him.

[RunningMn9]

Office or home? Since people live there and its called a house, I'd assume that those people are entitled to some privacy.

Office. This wasn't done in the residency. It was done in the office, on the job (so to speak). He has no privacy entitlement when he fails to exercise the proper judgment that would tell him to not do it at work, and in the office.

[Dirt]

All I ask is for Republicans to scrutinize Bush as assiduously as they did Clinton. I don't see them doing that.

[The Preacher]

Office or home? Since people live there and its called a house, I'd assume that those people are entitled to some privacy.

Why is he entitled to privacy in a matter that is relevant to a lawsuit? A "privacy" that would not be extended to any other person being sued for sexual harassment? I assume you realize the context of his perjury.

Edit to add:

He had a right to lie. Don't you have an amendment that says people don't testify against themselves? That is the situation the Right put him in.

We do have a right against self-incrimination. That only means, however, that he can refuse to answer the question on those grounds. Under no circumstance is he or anyone allowed to deceive the court.

One could argue that Bill's willie got him into that particular situation -- remember, this is not testifying before Congress or such bs, this is a sexual harassment lawsuit.

[RunningMn9]

All I ask is for Republicans to scrutinize Bush as assiduously as they did Clinton. I don't see them doing that.

Well, I'm not a Republican anymore, but what would you like me to scrutinize Bush for? If he gets into a court of law and lies under oath, you can be damn sure that I'll want him impeached and kicked to the curb as well.

[LordMortis]

They mentioned the same sentiment as Paul: "Geez. Never in a million years would I have thought I'd ever be nostalgic for Bill Clinton....but right now I just want to hug the guy and kiss his feet for what he did."

But that's only by comparison. Saying that it takes a GWB to appreciate a WJC is like saying it takes drinking poison to appreciate drinking urine. I am nostaligic for Clinton at this point, but even that is more for the gridlock he inspired and the economy he was fortunate enough to preside over.

If you gentlemen expect to never be lied to by a polititian, past or present, you have long, rough lives ahead of you.

For those of us who count on being lied to as a matter of fact course in life, we make it difficult to for the others of us trying to break the mold.

So sad. Discussion of Bill Clinton invariably falls down to a BJ dissertion. Are we a bunch of good boy scouts here? Have you ever watch porn? Isn't BJ an integral part of every "action" in a porn? Oh my, he got a BJ! Hide away the children. Did he ever think of the children? He is a bad man, wow!

So sad that lying to your wife and your daughter and then the American populace to protect your cowardly ass can be reduced to the equivalent of watching porn.

Or perhaps he has an open relationship. Regardless, it's not our business where anyone puts their various body parts, so long as both (all) parties are consenting.

He was obviously in an open relationship and that image was part of why he was put in office. We wanted him there that 20 YOs would be attracted to his power. He is running the buisness of my country. It is bery much my business how he conducts his self.

Here comes the rare agreement with YK. There's not a lot of trust and empathy for me in any aspect of life for anyone who makes a commitment to another human being (or set of human beings like that) and then shits on it. I'll stay away from the very hot topic I could address right now.

However, I will let Mr Fed nail it on the head for me on it as I move further down the thread:

I think the marital vow -- which includes, but is not limited to, the vow of marital fidelity -- is one of the most imporant that a person can take. If a person feels free to break that vow for transitory pleasure, I don't trust them. Period. And frankly I don't give a shit about the stock accusaions of puritanicalism and prudishness that inevitably follow that view.

He had a right to lie. Don't you have an amendment that says people don't testify against themselves?

I've already put too much thought into this. Clinton should fade into the sunset. I am sick of the but Clinton did or not do this.

Clinton's legacy will be a cum stained dress and that is probably symbolic of his entire tenure. It's going to take some pretty serious changing of people's memories to make his presidency anything but. When pressed they will remember him as he who presided over what was probably the most economically successful time in US history. If pressed no one be able to tie the success of the economy to his action.

They won't remember health care initiatives, or the gridlock, or even his impeachment (other than a footnote), nor Ken Star, nor White Water, nor the McDougals, nor his role vs Iraq or Al Queada, nor China and the sale of military and other information, nor the leasing of the Lincoln Bedroom, nor Socks, nor Chesea, nor the throwing of the lamp, not even Paula Jones, nor Vince Foster, nor McDonalds French Fries, nor the pardons, nor the last minute laws, not his saxaphone, nor Nixon's refusal to work with him internationally, nor his tax and spend policy setting, nor whatever else you come up with about enviornment, health insurance, education or whatever.

They will remember that he likes head from fat chicks. I think it's appropriate. The statement is both the sad state of who we elected and the sad state of who we are by electing him. If we're really lucky we will branded with the memory that we fire people and destroy their livelyhood in court for far less offensive behaior than was that of our then leader of the freeworld, and yet we championed him as a great man doing something that is none of our business. We won't be that lucky, though. We won't remember our part in all of this. We will divorce ourselves from the event and just remember the dress and perhaps the line: "I did not have sexual relations with that woman..."

The difference between Bush and Clinton is that I've never felt Bush was intentionally trying to scam me.

Oh stop it. You're killing me. I get the feeling that man is smirking and lauging at me every time his face gets on camera. Willy was to slick not to look solemn. Georgey's not nearly that good. Every time he looks at that camera I feel like he's looking right at me, both of us knowing he's got me by the short and curlies and there ain't nothing I can do about it. And there is not apologies for the pulling and the tugging.

I think Bush genuinely means well for the American people. Yes, he's flawed. You may not agree with where he gets his inspiration. But he's going to push what he believes.

I think you are mostly right. I think he believes what he is doing is good for most of the American populace and that he is only lying to a small portion. What he is out of touch with is just exactly how large that "small" portion of the country is.

[Dirt]

Ma! Ma! Where's my Pa?!

Gone to the White House! Ha Ha Ha!

[RunningMn9]

nor McDonalds French Fries

"More warlords."

I'll always remember "More warlords."

[Poleaxe]

The whole sex thing is stupid. And I'd be careful about calling women dumb for supporting Clinton, when the reality is that maybe they know something you don't. Something like: life is complicated, and a husband who cheated on his wife and a loving relationship between them are not guaranteed mutually exclusive.

They must not have been mutually exclusive any of the times he cheated on her, I guess. Wonder what his daughter has to say about it.

Somthing like Hillary went through a tough time and made a decision, and Bill went through a tough time facing up to his mistake.

This one, or all of them?

There's another reason to ignore the sex aspect that people really don't think about: it wasn't mine or your business, just as your sex life isn't mine or president Bush's business.

See RM9's post.

Don't you have an amendment that says people don't testify against themselves?

The fifth amendment is not a get out of jail free card. So no it does not allow one to lie under oath.

It wasn't about sex. It was about a man with the most important job in the world not showing enough self-discipline to pass on using his position to nail young, fat chicks while he's on our dime. It's about the president committing perjury.[/quote]

[Dirt]

All I ask is for Republicans to scrutinize Bush as assiduously as they did Clinton. I don't see them doing that.

Well, I'm not a Republican anymore, but what would you like me to scrutinize Bush for? If he gets into a court of law and lies under oath, you can be damn sure that I'll want him impeached and kicked to the curb as well.

Like his coke habit and whether he's lying to the American people when he (or his people) denies it.

[Edmond]

A difference between Bush and Clinton:

Clinton lied under oath.

Bush also lies, but he refuses to testify under oath and demands Dick to answer questions for him.

[Eel Snave]

Here's the thing that always gets me. Name one of Bush's lies. People say, "It's all LIES!" Name one for me. Iraq doesn't count.

And...go!

[Dirt]

Here's the thing that always gets me. Name one of Bush's lies. People say, "It's all LIES!" Name one for me. Iraq doesn't count.

And...go!

Give me $50 million dollars and I'll give you a better answer.

[Tareeq]

Here's the thing that always gets me. Name one of Bush's lies. People say, "It's all LIES!" Name one for me. Iraq doesn't count.

And...go!

[Dirt]

I think the picture posting capabilities of this board is broken.

[Tareeq]

The image depicted a softball, Dirt.

[Eel Snave]

Give me $50 million dollars and I'll give you a better answer.

Huh?