a thorough investigation of their personal lives the way Clinton did, starting with Bush?
2007-02-05 15:28:37 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
I did not mean the dirt digging, mud slinging and slandering that's been going on by the press & opposing political parties. I mean an investigation that gets to the real truth & has merit.
2007-02-06 05:41:20 · update #1
Yes.. and there should be nothing that is said to be private. If they want to run for office and run the country, then they had better be squeaky clean. And there should be an absolute end to big business buying themselves a president or other political person... that is the worst crime of all.
2007-02-05 15:59:12 · answer #1 · answered by Debra H 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Yes and no. The CIA and the FBI should do thorough background checks on these persons. If these two agencies say that there is nothing that would prevent the candidate from performing the duties of their office, then no further checks need be made. On the other hand, examining a persons past for sheer muck-raking value should not be permitted.
2007-02-05 15:41:01 · answer #2 · answered by JJ 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Are you kidding? The media has dug up every little tiny piece of dirt that they could find on President Bush. The difference is Clinton kept wallowing in the dirt & mud. No digging required for Clinton's dirt.
2007-02-05 15:34:02 · answer #3 · answered by Wolfpacker 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Oh God- NO!!! Bill turned out to be nothing worse than your every day philanderer (just about EVERY family has one; you know the jolly uncle "Bill" who's always a big hit at the partys- but don't let him hang with your wife for too long...). He was good at what he did- & lousy with who he did it to. If you subjected all the candidates to what HE went through, all our leaders would be like Jimmy Carter was; squeaky clean- and fish bait. Pure as the driven snow doesn't last for very long in D.C..
2007-02-05 15:50:32 · answer #4 · answered by Joseph, II 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
If all presidents make a habit of porking anything that breathes on the campaign trail, engaging in shady real estate deals that culminate in financially ruining their neighbors and getting frisky with chunky interns in the freaking oval office, I say go for it.
'Cause Clinton didn't deserve any of the scrutiny he got. Darn neo-cons and their crazy witchhunts.
Puh-lease.
2007-02-05 15:33:54 · answer #5 · answered by dasvidas 3 · 3⤊ 2⤋
All public servants lives should be thoroughly transparent and open to investigation if and when necessary. Presidents are no exception!
2007-02-05 22:02:28 · answer #6 · answered by cramesh_2002 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Oh,They are,before they even decide to run. The press keeps an eye on all of them.
And its been going on much longer then bush.
2007-02-05 23:03:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Hardly. There are more important things than trying to dig up dirt. But when someone is so stupid that they air their dirty laundry, as Slick Willy did when he slimed up Monica's dress, then they get what they deserve.
2007-02-05 21:24:57 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
No,
Clinton took it to the white house, he should of kept it in hotels or the closet.
2007-02-06 04:05:05 · answer #9 · answered by sunflare63 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Y E S!!!
2007-02-06 00:20:45 · answer #10 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋