I'm so tired of hearing republicans bashing bill clinton about his affair with monica lewinsky, that was what..7 years ago? It seems like they have nothing else bad to say about him....I mean, look at Bill O Reilly, at least with bill and monica it was consensual, he wasn't sexually harassing her and he didnt settle out of court. I don't know, I just get really annoyed when that's all I hear them make fun of him about, there are so many other good qualities in him to talk about....bad even.

I'm so tired of hearing republicans bashing bill clinton about his affair with monica lewinsky, that was what..7 years ago? It seems like they have nothing else bad to say about him....I mean, look at Bill O Reilly, at least with bill and monica it was consensual, he wasn't sexually harassing her and he didnt settle out of court. I don't know, I just get really annoyed when that's all I hear them make fun of him about, there are so many other good qualities in him to talk about....bad even.


Consider Monica the "straw that broke the camel's back".

The only reason that ever came up is because President Clinton was being accused of sexual harassment by 2 other women.  During depositions, he made statements that he had never had an affair, and he had never made inappropriate jestures, never exposed himself, and never attempted to molest anybody.

The only reason that the entire "Monica Affair" came up is that it showed that during that deposition, it proved that he lied.  And this also brought in the fact that both women testified that he had Peyronie's Disease.  Since this affects less then 1% of men, it would be hard to guess that he had this problem.

When some major parts of his testimony were perjury, it throws all of his testimony into question.  But the entire thing was swept away in screams of "it is all about sex".  To me, it was never about sex, but about a man who lied under oath who is accused of multiple cases of sexual harassment.

Add to that the many statements he made denying any affair with Monica (including those under oath), up until the "Blue Dress" appeared.  If not for the fact that his DNA was now available where it should not have been, he never would have told the truth.

Myself, I could not have cared less who he slept with.  But when you are under investigation for sexual harassment, that is not the time to lie.  If he had told the truth, little would have ever come of this.  But the lies upon lies upon lies put his entire credability into question.  And multiple lies under oath made it look more and more like he had sexually harassed the women that accused him.

But it does not matter.  This is such a partaisan issue that people will defend his right to the death.  The facts do not matter, only the politics.

i'd much rather have someone lie about their sex life than lie and send thousands of people to their deaths needlessly. of course, i think what clinton did with monica was reprehensible -- because she was so much younger than him and so plainly in awe of his political stature it amounted to exploiting her.

as for his supposed "purgery," though, that was basically a technicality -- he was sticking a thumb in the eye of a partisan hackjob investigation that, having found nothing on whitewater that would stick, was basically fishing around for ANYthing to stick on him. i hold him responsible for abusing his office to have a very one-sided sexual relationship with monica, but for lying to republicans who were trying to ruin his life, i say, i'd have done the exact same thing.

as for the notion that any of this has one one-hundredth the gravity of the veneer of lies surrounding this prespammersite and unconscienable war, i think that's ridiculous. what clinton did was nothing near as bad. if he got impeached for it, then to make the punishment fit the proportion of the crime bush should probably be paraded through the streets in irons, publicly humiliated, and flogged. (i don't actually endorse this, i'm just saying that clinton's punishment was SO out of propotion to his crime that this is what would be needed to come close to the same level for bush.)

i'd much rather have someone lie about their sex life than lie and send thousands of people to their deaths needlessly. of course, i think what clinton did with monica was reprehensible -- because she was so much younger than him and so plainly in awe of his political stature it amounted to exploiting her.



I don't agree- she was 20 years old at the time and an adult free to do what she liked.

I don't agree- she was 20 years old at the time and an adult free to do what she liked.
yes, but i still think if you're president, and fifty, and so obviously being idolized, you're taking advantage. particularly when you look at the specifics of their coupling -- i forget where i read this quote but he used her as a "sexual service station." never reciprocated. it's not that it was illegal but from the point of view of his actions rather distasteful.

yes, but i still think if you're president, and fifty, and so obviously being idolized, you're taking advantage. particularly when you look at the specifics of their coupling -- i forget where i read this quote but he used her as a "sexual service station." never reciprocated. it's not that it was illegal but from the point of view of his actions rather distasteful.


*shrugs* I guess. No, you know, I don't agree still.  She was not forced.

*shrugs* I guess. No, you know, I don't agree still.  She was not forced.
kinda a low bar for immorality, yes? it reminds me of 50-year-old professors have sex with their 19-year-old freshman students because the students idolize them; it's legal, and no, it's not rape, but it makes my flesh crawl nonetheless. they quoted some russian guy saying, 'i don't see the problem, clinton is a world leader so he should be allowed to keep a concubine, because it's his due.' that seems like that's the attitude behind it, he's using the office to get sexual favors and i think it diminishes everyone involved.

kinda a low bar for immorality, yes? it reminds me of 50-year-old professors have sex with their 19-year-old freshman students because the students idolize them; it's legal, and no, it's not rape, but it makes my flesh crawl nonetheless. they quoted some russian guy saying, 'i don't see the problem, clinton is a world leader so he should be allowed to keep a concubine, because it's his due.' that seems like that's the attitude behind it, he's using the office to get sexual favors and i think it diminishes everyone involved.


I think it's immoral, but I don't think it's criminal.  If I was Monica I'd probably give Bill a blowjob.  ;D

I think it's immoral, but I don't think it's criminal.  If I was Monica I'd probably give Bill a blowjob.  ;D


You don't realise what you just let yourself in for do you.

You don't realise what you just let yourself in for do you.


Not exactly  ;D

If the rightwingers are bringing up Bill Clinton today it is a lame attempt to divert attention for the utter disaster their party and their policies have brought about since they took over the country in 2001.

Monica went after Bill, and Bill did the typical male thing, he let the little head think for the big head.

Paula Jones' case was dismissed for lack of merit.

Juanita Broderick's charges didn't even hold enough water to warrant a hearing. It was only Sean Hannity keeping that crock of BS alive.

Furthermore, all of Scaife's horses and all of Newt's men couldn't get the articles of impeachment against Clinton through the senate.

Finally, which is more abhorrent? --

Bill Clinton: cheated on his wife.

Tom DeLay: facilitated sweatshop labor and sexual slavery on Saipan.

Hmmmm......
???

I think it's immoral, but I don't think it's criminal.  If I was Monica I'd probably give Bill a blowjob.  ;D
oh, i definitely agree. it wasn't criminal. i just think that a lot of people who want to defend the liberal cause end up totally defending clinton when i think it's better to acknowledge that what clinton did was messed up, while at the same time insisting that what dubya's been doing is immensely worse, isn't even in the same ball park.

oh, i definitely agree. it wasn't criminal. i just think that a lot of people who want to defend the liberal cause end up totally defending clinton when i think it's better to acknowledge that what clinton did was messed up, while at the same time insisting that what dubya's been doing is immensely worse, isn't even in the same ball park.


I totally agree. Clinton did a bad thing, but that doesn't mean he was a bad president.

What is worse? Screwing an intern (which he didn't do) or screwing the nation?  ::)




Cat

Heck, I didn't even like the guy. Of all the Dem candidates in the '92 primary, I liked Clinton least, but I voted for him because that's what it took to get the Bush crime family out of the White House. I never dreamed they'd be back bigger and badder! By 1996 I was so mad at Clinton's economic policies I didn't even vote for him.

The only people that make me like Bill or Hillary are the rightwingers who hate them!

Heck, I didn't even like the guy. Of all the Dem candidates in the '92 primary, I liked Clinton least, but I voted for him because that's what it took to get the Bush crime family out of the White House. I never dreamed they'd be back bigger and badder! By 1996 I was so mad at Clinton's economic policies I didn't even vote for him.

The only people that make me like Bill or Hillary are the rightwingers who hate them!
bill i'm lukewarm about; he was a pretty shameless opportunist but he WAS smart as a whip. i think he kinda came out 50-50. he was quoted once as saying that the lines between left and right were so skewed that he governed at about the same place in the political spectrum as eisenhower and got called a radical leftist. so at least he recognized why the far right hates him so much, and the left has never had much enthusiasm for him either.

hillary i really, really don't like. i hope they go with mark warner or biden, they might have a chance of winning.

oh, i definitely agree. it wasn't criminal. i just think that a lot of people who want to defend the liberal cause end up totally defending clinton when i think it's better to acknowledge that what clinton did was messed up, while at the same time insisting that what dubya's been doing is immensely worse, isn't even in the same ball park.


But maybe I don't think what he did was messed up?

bill i'm lukewarm about; he was a pretty shameless opportunist but he WAS smart as a whip. i think he kinda came out 50-50. he was quoted once as saying that the lines between left and right were so skewed that he governed at about the same place in the political spectrum as eisenhower and got called a radical leftist. so at least he recognized why the far right hates him so much, and the left has never had much enthusiasm for him either.

hillary i really, really don't like. i hope they go with mark warner or biden, they might have a chance of winning.


I love Clinton.  He's a cool cat, and he is very bright. VERY bright. I'd say he is probably the most intelligent President we've had post-World War II(the man does have a 163 IQ!).

I don't care for his stance on the death penalty, and I hated NAFTA, but I think overall he was a really good President and hes a really likeable guy to me.

So, you see nothing wrong with exploitation?


I don't think he exploited her.  She wasn't a brainless automaton, she was an adult.  Isn't it possible she *gasp* wanted to do what she did, and she wasn't under Slick Willy's magical spell? :D

I don't think he exploited her.  She wasn't a brainless automaton, she was an adult.  Isn't it possible she *gasp* wanted to do what she did, and she wasn't under Slick Willy's magical spell? :D
that's not really at issue. the co-ed who boffs her 50-year-old professor probably wants to do it too, but it's hard to figure how much of the desire has to do with the power of the professor's position. when the power relationship between two people who get involved is so lopsided, like, say, lowly intern vs. president of the US, red flags should go off that someone is abusing the power of their office.

anyway, didn't monica all think he was gonna leave hillary and run off with her? and meanwhile it's pretty obvious bill was just using her for sexual gratification. it's obvious in the nature of the only sex act they apparently committed (aside from the cigar thing).

that's not really at issue. the co-ed who boffs her 50-year-old professor probably wants to do it too, but it's hard to figure how much of the desire has to do with the power of the professor's position. when the power relationship between two people who get involved is so lopsided, like, say, lowly intern vs. president of the US, red flags should go off that someone is abusing the power of their office.

anyway, didn't monica all think he was gonna leave hillary and run off with her? and meanwhile it's pretty obvious bill was just using her for sexual gratification. it's obvious in the nature of the only sex act they apparently committed (aside from the cigar thing).


I agree, it's not ethical.  It's taking advantage of your power.  I wouldn't call it a sex crime or anything; I would say it's more like using a prostitute. 

So, you see nothing wrong with exploitation?

It should go without saying nobody approved of Clinton's philandering. It was both a contemptible and irresponsible way to behave, especially for the President of the United States. Sleazy yes, dangerous no. Reasonable people believed it was up to Clinton, his wife, his conscience, and his God to sort out. Clinton's behavior did not interfere with his job performance, nor did it threaten national security--that is, until the Republicans decided to make it the scandal of the century.

I found it supremely hypocritical that Reagan got away with illegally selling arms to our "enemies" (Iran) in order to illegally fund one of the world's bloodiest guerilla armies (the Contras) in order to depose a democratically elected head of state in Nicaragua (Ortega)...and then lying about it. Ronald Reagan committed treason. He should have been impeached, convicted, and spent the rest of his sick life in prison. But oh no, Reagan not only got away with it, his treason was and is portrayed as a heroic fight for freedom on the Right.

Clinton cheated on his wife and got busted. Reagan sent funny-money to butchers who raped nuns and murdered priests in Central America and got off scot-free. Go figure.
::)

that's not really at issue. the co-ed who boffs her 50-year-old professor probably wants to do it too, but it's hard to figure how much of the desire has to do with the power of the professor's position. when the power relationship between two people who get involved is so lopsided, like, say, lowly intern vs. president of the US, red flags should go off that someone is abusing the power of their office.

anyway, didn't monica all think he was gonna leave hillary and run off with her? and meanwhile it's pretty obvious bill was just using her for sexual gratification. it's obvious in the nature of the only sex act they apparently committed (aside from the cigar thing).


I just don't see it the same way as you do.

So, it doesn't matter what promises he made to her?  I certainly hope noone promises you anything in return for sexual favors, then reneges on it.....oh, what am I thinking....you'd do just about anything to get sex ::)


No need to get personal. I think that is a very abrasive thing for you to say to me..

I know Im just scum

I just don't see it the same way as you do.
touche.

BUT, IF he wasn't President, do you honestly think she'd have thought twice about doing anything?  Maybe I'm wrong, but I do.  He took advantage of his power and used her.  It's no different than people being exploited in 3rd world countries or migrant workers in OUR country.  I could use the same argument "Well, they KNEW what they were getting into when they started working for me"  Do you honestly thing that argument would fly?


You're comparing workers in third world countries who haveno other choice but to work under slave conditions for peanuts, to a 20 year old intern who gave the president a blow job so she could advance her own career? I'm sorry but that just seems a little absurd.

She chose to give him head. He didn't force her to do anything against her will. Whether or not she would have done it if he wasn't the president means squat.

You say he used his power and took advantage of her. I say she saw an opportunity to try and advance her career and used him.

You're comparing workers in third world countries who haveno other choice but to work under slave conditions for peanuts, to a 20 year old intern who gave the president a blow job so she could advance her own career? I'm sorry but that just seems a little absurd.

She chose to give him head. He didn't force her to do anything against her will. Whether or not she would have done it if he wasn't the president means squat.

You say he used his power and took advantage of her. I say she saw an opportunity to try and advance her career and used him.


That's a good point.  After all, maybe Bill is being "used" too.

No, el duderino is saying that he sees nothing wrong with what he did.

Well, I guess I can't speak for the Dude, then.  My point is the Right turned our national discourse into a farce over Clinton's behavior. Our allies didn't care. In a lot of cultures this kind of thing is expected of powerful men. I'm not saying it's right, I don't think it is, but you can make an unethical situation into a dangerous situation if you over react.
A local new story last week was the "baby shower shooting" in Springfield, Mass. Basically, a guest got so mad at another guest serving the first guest's underage daughter alcohol that the first guest took out a gun and gutshot the second guest. What's the worse crime, serving alcohol to a monor, or assault with a deadly weapon?
That's what we saw with the Clinton impeachment. The political hacks on the witch hunt for Clinton were far more immoral than Clinton could ever be. I mean, look at that sanctimonious hypocrite Ken Starr. He was a lawyer for the f**king tobacco industry!

That's a good point.  After all, maybe Bill is being "used" too.

Nah, I couldn't go that far. When you are the most powerful man in the world, quite literally, you can't be "used" by a 21-year-old intern. I mean, maybe if she was blackmailing him or something, it would have been a bit different. But no, he wanted some nookie as he always did, and disregarded the repercussions. He had to know the vast right-wing conspiracy was waiting for him to slip up on ANYTHING! They already tried to say he and Hillary had Vince Foster murdered. That didn't work. Then were was so-called "filegate," and so-called "travelgat." and theat dumb old "Whitewater" real estate deal in which the Clintgons had actually lost money. Yawn. The public couldn't care less. And then...MANNA FROM HEAVEN! A sex scandal. So long as they kept the name "Monica Lewinsky" in the news and leaked all the salacious details, they thought they could whip up enough public outrage to oust Clinton. In spite of the lapdog corporate press inthe palm of their hands, Clinton's approval ratings stayed high, and the public actually didn't support the imepeachemnt.  Rush Limbaugh and friends spread the delusion that the public was outraged, but most folks just didn't care. Hate to sound sexist, but every guy either got a bj from the loose chick at work, or wanted to get a bj from the loose chick at work. If anything, they identified with Bill.

So there ya go. The impeachment debacle was a good preview for the Bush presidency. It showed the Republican party to be full of self-righteous and hypocritical stooges who have no interest in serving the public, only dishing out vindictive plots, and they're even bad at that. All they do is derail the nation from important priorities and leave behind a big mess for everybody else to clean up!

No more absurd than trying to justify Bill Clinton's affair.  See, some of us take the "vows of matrimony" very seriously.  I've never cheated on anyone (not even a boyfriend) so the mere action of cheating makes someone pond scum in my book. 

No, she didn't choose to give him head, she agreed.  I could choose to give Dubya "some lovin'", but unless he asks me to come to him, do you think I'm going to get even close enough to shake his hand?  Not likely.

How could she "use" him?  What power did she have over him?  The concept of "using" someone implies a position of "power" over someone.  Monica had no power, Bill did.


She only agreed to give him head? He asked, she decided to say yes. She could have just as easily said no. And if she said no, that would have been her choice.

I already said how I feel she could have used him. She saw a man in a position of power that could help further her career.

You're right, but HE asked HER to come to him....HE asked HER for head....see a pattern here?  Being president, it's HIGHLY unlikely that she could have initiated the relationship because it's HIGHLY unlikely that an intern would have the opportunity to get him alone much less alone long enough to ask.  He, however, had the opportunity AND power.  You are making it seem like HE had no responsibility for his actions.

No no. I'm not saying that he shouldn't be held responible for his actions. I just don't see her as an innocent little girl who was manipulated by Slick Willy into doing something that she didn't want to do.



Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that she was an innocent schoolgirl that he made do things against her will, but HE was in the position of power and (as a married man) should not have done what he did.


Agreed.

And, haven't you said time and time again that you're looking for someone to have sex with?  I'm just trying to make you see how YOU sound sometimes.


I don't know what you mean.  Any young man wants sex, its natural. 

I'd love to be manipulated for sex.. that'd be so awesome.

"She USED me! Wait- I was used.. cool" ;D

Maybe I should become a filekeeper for a really powerful and hot lady attorney.. yes..

"Alex, wheres the file on the Thorne case?" "Its in my pants ;) " :D

My point exactly.


so are you saying my opinion on this has no bearing because I wouldn't mind if someone did it to me anyway?

No.  But, don't rip on me and call me "abrasive" when I point out the obvious to you.  If you're going to dish it out, you'd better learn to take it as well.


Where'd I dish anything on to you though? All i said was i dont think he did any wrong, but where the heck did i get personal? Show me please.

I made your welcome back thread and i tried to back you up in another thread too.. I'm trying to be friends

You haven't dished anything onto me, but you certainly have to others.  I'm just trying to make you see how you can come across.  It's the same thing I try to get across to my husband.  It's not necessarily WHAT you say, it's how you say it (and on here, since you can't really express emotion, the interpretation is a bit more difficult.)  It was the same thing with a "former member"....it wasn't necessarily what he said that made people (in his words:) "jump all over him", but how he said it and how he reacted to someone challenging his beliefs.


Oh okay.  Thank you. :)

I'd applaud you, but I don't want to change your "number" ;)


;D ;D Go right ahead if you want to

I'd applaud you, but I don't want to change your "number" ;)
Hmm, I

oh, oops. i mean i was.

yeah im afraid im gonna be stuck here for awhile cause people think it looks cool :P

yeah im afraid im gonna be stuck here for awhile cause people think it looks cool :P
Nope. Somebody de-69ed ya.

awwww....that sucks :( ;)
Well, technically, it no longer sucks, and that's the problem.

Sorry.
:-[

You're comparing workers in third world countries who haveno other choice but to work under slave conditions for peanuts, to a 20 year old intern who gave the president a blow job so she could advance her own career? I'm sorry but that just seems a little absurd.

She chose to give him head. He didn't force her to do anything against her will. Whether or not she would have done it if he wasn't the president means squat.

You say he used his power and took advantage of her. I say she saw an opportunity to try and advance her career and used him.


Of course, people tend to forget the entire reason that Monica became an issue in the first place.

Paula Jones filed a sexual harassment suit against Bill Clinton in 1994.  This was after her name became public in an expose` that made public the efforts of the Arkansas State Police in covering up Clinton's affairs.

Then there is the molestation charges filed by Kathleen Willey.  And the affair with Gennifer Flowers.  Bill Clinton gave misleading statements in all of these cases.  In fact, he was fined for giving false statements, and they were so severe that he lost his law license.

I do not care who he slept with.  But I do care that a man has an apparent history of useing his position to coerce sexual favors from women.  Some of these even border on outright molestation.

I can't understand how anybody can condone those activities.  If it had been a Republican, they would be lynched.  But because Clinton was a Democrat, you see the groups that claim to protect women actually attacking those who made the charges.  To me, it makes as much sense as the NAACP endorsing Robert Byrd.

Of course, people tend to forget the entire reason that Monica became an issue in the first place.

Paula Jones filed a sexual harassment suit against Bill Clinton in 1994.  This was after her name became public in an expose` that made public the efforts of the Arkansas State Police in covering up Clinton's affairs.

Then there is the molestation charges filed by Kathleen Willey.  And the affair with Gennifer Flowers.  Bill Clinton gave misleading statements in all of these cases.  In fact, he was fined for giving false statements, and they were so severe that he lost his law license.

I do not care who he slept with.  But I do care that a man has an apparent history of useing his position to coerce sexual favors from women.  Some of these even border on outright molestation.

I can't understand how anybody can condone those activities.  If it had been a Republican, they would be lynched.  But because Clinton was a Democrat, you see the groups that claim to protect women actually attacking those who made the charges.  To me, it makes as much sense as the NAACP endorsing Robert Byrd.
but weren't these either allegations, or withdrawn, or settled out of court? we're back to the old thing where if it's republicans, or the pentagon, you say, now now, let's wait until the facts are in, but if it's democrats, the allegation is the same thing as establishing guilt.

Of course, people tend to forget the entire reason that Monica became an issue in the first place.

Paula Jones filed a sexual harassment suit against Bill Clinton in 1994.  This was after her name became public in an expose` that made public the efforts of the Arkansas State Police in covering up Clinton's affairs.

Then there is the molestation charges filed by Kathleen Willey.  And the affair with Gennifer Flowers.  Bill Clinton gave misleading statements in all of these cases.  In fact, he was fined for giving false statements, and they were so severe that he lost his law license.

I do not care who he slept with.  But I do care that a man has an apparent history of useing his position to coerce sexual favors from women.  Some of these even border on outright molestation.

I can't understand how anybody can condone those activities.  If it had been a Republican, they would be lynched.  But because Clinton was a Democrat, you see the groups that claim to protect women actually attacking those who made the charges.  To me, it makes as much sense as the NAACP endorsing Robert Byrd.


So what, he was a good president (IMO). What things he's done in his personal life doesn't matter any more than what Joe Blow's done.

but weren't these either allegations, or withdrawn, or settled out of court? we're back to the old thing where if it's republicans, or the pentagon, you say, now now, let's wait until the facts are in, but if it's democrats, the allegation is the same thing as establishing guilt.


One was withdrawn.  Kathleen Willey later stated that she made it all up.  The other was settled out of court.  Paula Jones setled her suit out of court, for $850,000.  In this case Bill Clinton was charged with contempt of court, and fined an additional $91,000 for giving "evasive and misleading answers".  This is also the case which lead to his perjury charges, since he claimed to have not had an affair with an "unnamed intern".  And in the Paula Jones case, there were multiple witnesses who backed up her story, including the Arkansas State Troopers who covered for Bill Clinton during his meetings with her and Gennifer Flowers.

"All feminists who sincerely support sexual harassment guidelines should indeed defend Paula Jones, since Bill Clinton's alleged behavior broke every rule. She was on the job at the time, and he was her ultimate boss; he illegally used state troopers for a private escapade; and he began his approach by coercively mentioning a friendship with her immediate boss. Feminist leaders would have tarred and feathered any Republican who carried on like this." - Camille Paglia

One was withdrawn.  Kathleen Willey later stated that she made it all up.  The other was settled out of court.  Paula Jones setled her suit out of court, for $850,000.  In this case Bill Clinton was charged with contempt of court, and fined an additional $91,000 for giving "evasive and misleading answers".  This is also the case which lead to his perjury charges, since he claimed to have not had an affair with an "unnamed intern".  And in the Paula Jones case, there were multiple witnesses who backed up her story, including the Arkansas State Troopers who covered for Bill Clinton during his meetings with her and Gennifer Flowers.

"All feminists who sincerely support sexual harassment guidelines should indeed defend Paula Jones, since Bill Clinton's alleged behavior broke every rule. She was on the job at the time, and he was her ultimate boss; he illegally used state troopers for a private escapade; and he began his approach by coercively mentioning a friendship with her immediate boss. Feminist leaders would have tarred and feathered any Republican who carried on like this." - Camille Paglia




Billy admittedly isn't perfect, but at least he hasn't molested the Earth and started a pointless war.

So what, he was a good president (IMO). What things he's done in his personal life doesn't matter any more than what Joe Blow's done.


So what, what Michael Jackson was a good singer (IMO).  What things he has done in his personal life doesn't matter any more then what Bill Clinton's done.

Again, I am puzzled.  Here I am, the "Enemy of all things feminist", who is taking the side that sexual harassment is wrong.  And I am being told by others that it is OK, because other then that, what he did was OK.

So what, what Michael Jackson was a good singer (IMO).  What things he has done in his personal life doesn't matter any more then what Bill Clinton's done.

Again, I am puzzled.  Here I am, the "Enemy of all things feminist", who is taking the side that sexual harassment is wrong.  And I am being told by others that it is OK, because other then that, what he did was OK.


And I'll still listen to Billie Jean.

Don't take this the wrong way; you're one of the few Conservative posters here I really think knows what they're talking about.  What he did was not OK, in my opinion, but it's not any worse than what Bush has done.  As for people who are defending the Monica Lewinsky thing, they're doing it on the basis that they don't see it as unscrupulous, and that they don't believe the other allegations (personally I'm not sure what to believe).

Comparing Bill Clinton with GW Bush is like comparing apples and oranges, they're 2 TOTALLY different things.  What Bill did was in his "personal" life involving very few people, what GW did had to do with the entire country.  I think it would be interesting to see if there was an inquiry (i.e. Ken Starr) if it were GW instead of Clinton ???


It's like comparing Scott Peterson to Saddam Hussein.  Anything Clinton did is nowhere near the magnitude of what the Bush Administration has done.