neither....they were both oh so "american"
2006-08-08 00:40:32
·
answer #1
·
answered by free 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
I don't know if "white trash" is the term I'd use; maybe "inappropriate" instead. But that's just me.
President Clinton himself signed the bill allowing the evidence of other alleged incidents of "sex for advancement" in sexual harrasment cases. Lewinsky was offered a job at Revlon (later the offer was withdrawn) - do you think it would have been offered if not for her "special services" to Clinton?
If you think the issue was "no one's business" then I assume you are in favor of repealing the law Clinton signed. If not, I think it's hypocritical to criticize Starr for following the law.
My answer would not change based on the political party of the person involved. We all need to play by the same rules.
2006-08-08 00:44:29
·
answer #2
·
answered by American citizen and taxpayer 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Clinton & Lewinsky. As for publishing the details, Clinton is the one who chose to run for a public office in which any president's life is always on display and under moral scrutiny. Thanks to Clinton, the religious right has really banded together and will not be stopped.
There are also problems with oral sex in the middle and high schools because a President, under the advice of lawyers, declared that oral sex is not sex.
From Dictionary.com: white trash
n. Offensive Slang
1 Used as a disparaging term for a poor white person or poor white people.
2 Used as a disparaging term for a white person or white people perceived as being lazy and ignorant
Don't you think it was ignorant of Clinton to lie to the American public?
2006-08-08 00:42:18
·
answer #3
·
answered by whozethere 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
As trashy as Clinton's adulterous affair with Monica Lewinsky was, it pales beside the much greater trashiness of what Martin Luther King, Jr., was doing with prostitutes in the Loraine motel the night before he was shot. Is he Black trash? And even that pales beside what Black Mr. Paul W. Turner did with his 2-year-old stepdaughter a few weeks ago. If Martin Luther King, Jr., is Black "trash," then do we call Mr. Turner Black "garbage"?
2006-08-08 00:43:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by David S 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Billy doing it with Monica - Kenneth Star had the right to publish the story - Billy boy was the guilty one.
2006-08-08 00:41:15
·
answer #5
·
answered by ha_mer 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not bad, 19 answers in 10mins..
seems like society thrives on topics like death and sex ( to which nobody has the perfect speech for)
anyway, in my opinion:
kenneth star published the details because he knew that he cld get smth out of doing that; society does love to know more abt someone else's misdeeds that will possibly get him/her into trouble for being socially deviant.
As for bill and monica, i cant say who's the trashy one cuz i dont know the details abt their affair, as in who started it cuz who knows who is lying?
therefore, i can only conclude that the whole affair + tabloid fodder thing was trashy, white trash because the characters were white people , so well, perharps, society is the rubbish bin itself c:
2006-08-08 00:53:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Clinton should have declined comment about the situation. It was no one's business but his own. However, once he went on national TV, and with his crocked finger looked straight in the camera, straight into our eyes, and said "I did not have sexual relationship with that woman" and lied, he lost all credibility with me.
Had the economy been bad, he would have been kicked from office by the public. However, since people were happy with their pocket book, people turned a deaf ear to his lies (which we later found to be more serious, culminating in the mysterious deaths of 2 of Clinton's best friends), and disregarded morality or decency.
2006-08-08 00:42:07
·
answer #7
·
answered by EDDie 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Bill Clinton's affair was not "white trash". It was using his power to manipulate an intern and benefit himself personally. Kenneth Star was doing his job and attempting to futher his career.
Ethical? Probably not. "White trash?" No...
2006-08-08 00:41:01
·
answer #8
·
answered by Miranda 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Keneth Star publishing the details. Talking about it is much more white trash than doing it.
2006-08-08 00:39:57
·
answer #9
·
answered by grinningleaf 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Neither. Race wasn't the issue. Ken Star, by virtue of the law and his oath of office, had no choice as to whether or not publish the details.
2006-08-08 00:41:51
·
answer #10
·
answered by 4999_Basque 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Wow, that's a loaded question!!!! I would have to vote for Bill's affair. Without that, there would have been no Ken Star report.
2006-08-08 00:39:35
·
answer #11
·
answered by joe s 2
·
0⤊
0⤋