English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2007-02-26 11:06:37 · 28 answers · asked by spackler 6 in Politics & Government Politics

I don't condone this type of behavior, but it just seems like people were scrounging for something to dig up on this guy.

2007-02-26 11:08:57 · update #1

28 answers

They couldn't find anything else on him, so they dug into
his private life. Why Americans let this be an issue, is
beyond me. You would think they would be giving him
a metal for being able to fool around & balance the budget
at the same time. Just my thoughts.

2007-02-26 11:17:45 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

For years, the media seemed to have a self imposed ban on reporting the pecadillos of presidents. In the modern era, we can point to Eisenhower and Kennedy, as well as Clinton being philanderers. And certainly many presidents before that had their flings.

But in those different times, the press didn't report on these issues, although one suspects that they knew.

News has become more sensational. Sex sells newspapers, especially when the details are so shall we say, "interesting" ?

And once the details got out, a whole generation of late night comedians had a story with "long legs" to joke about. Don't they *still* make Clinton jokes, and he's been out of office for 6 years.

2007-02-26 23:04:02 · answer #2 · answered by Charlie S 6 · 0 0

For two reasons, maybe three. He lied on television to America about it, he lied under oath to congress about it, and the media went after him on it. Back in the day the media kept quite about such things but not any more. He was impeached because of the second reason, not because of having an extra-martial affair, although some states count that as a felony still.

2007-02-26 19:13:58 · answer #3 · answered by phxfet 3 · 0 0

He lied to the entire country & denied it. Does the term pathalogical liar ring a bell??
Why did the immigration guy from the Bahamas resign after compromising photos with Anna Nicole Smith?? Do the words ethics & morals mean anything anymore? Not in the US evidently but clearly in a small country like the Bahamas!!

2007-02-26 19:35:22 · answer #4 · answered by COblonde 3 · 0 0

i would say that it is a different time in the nations media centered world. back in the 60s, when it was most likely known that JFK had affairs, the press knew not to get involved.

As for Clinton, i think what really bothered people, myself included, was his flings within the Oval Office, and if you believe some accounts, while he was on the phone conducting "buisness" with senators etc.

I dont blame Bill, as Hillary is reason enough to stray, but not on company time, please....

2007-02-26 19:11:52 · answer #5 · answered by rcm1454 2 · 0 0

He got embarrased about getting caught. He got in real trouble for commiting perjury. If Clinton had come out early in the Whitewater investigation and admitted to doing something questionable (but not illegal) ethicly, no one would have heard of Monica Lewinski. He certainly would not have been impeached.

2007-02-26 19:18:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The Starr report cost way too much! Clinton's integrity was terrible. He just couldn't control himself. He should have as a married man in the most respected office in the USA.

2007-02-26 19:13:55 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Because he was caught, lied under oath, and media took care every human been - all around the world - noticed it.
The way Hillary handled that affair, among others, can make her the future President from the US.

2007-02-26 19:51:17 · answer #8 · answered by robertonereo 4 · 0 0

They like to down grade someone that makes a mistake. As if they screamers haven't made any type of mistake in their life. They should look in Bush's closet before opening up their mouths. If they want dirt, they'll probably get a mud slide.
Or how aqbout their neighbors? Mom's, Dad's Brothers and Sister. Everyone has skelton's of mistakes, leave people alone.

2007-02-26 19:13:27 · answer #9 · answered by spiritwalker 6 · 0 1

Lying under oath will get your or my butts thrown in jail. It is not a small thing.

That said, the whole investigation was pretty petty and stupid to start with. Presidents generally have a notoriously hard time keeping their peckers in their pants.

2007-02-26 19:14:13 · answer #10 · answered by diogenese19348 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers