Let me post this question to the neocons, please?

Question

If undermining the President strengthens our enemy, what do you suppose questioning a sitting President under oath about his sex life does?

Answer 1

Some people are still running that lied under oath thing into the ground. WHY can't they get a grasp on the FACT that NO ONE had a right to ask him that particular question IN THE FIRST PLACE! There is nothing about a BJ that hurts the economy, that kills people, that destroys the lives of millions, that takes away our freedoms the way the Patriot Act does. I could go on and on, but I don't have time right now! It makes me angry when the neocons harp on a lie about a BJ, under oath or otherwise, like there is some kind of correlation. If I were to say Jay walk, and you robbed a bank, and I lied under oath saying I didn't do it, then I was caught in my perjury, because someone had a video tape of me jaywalking. And you the bank robber LIED TOO, but NOT UNDER OATH. Are you really going to tell me that my crime is worse than that of a bank robber just because I lied under oath and he didn't?????

Answer 2

I believe the difference is in the timing of the inquiry.
I certainly would want to stay out of the way of the US government when it decides to go to war. They have their reasons and more knowledge of the situation than I could ever hope to obtain. Admittedly, the haranguing of Clinton
lasted for an inordinate amount of time. Millions of dollars were spent and for what end? Revenge, humiliation, Ken Starr's desire to ride the clock? It seemed absurd to me and I lost interest after reading the headlines the first time. People obsess too much over things sexual in our society, that in itself almost seems to be a deviant fetish.

Answer 3

It very simply demonstrates that we are a country of high moral expectations. The only enemy in this instance is poor morals and bad judgement. What liberals do not seem to understand is that the American people want more than the tactics of bash Bush 24x7. How about actually doing something about immigration and reforming our tax system?

No, that would be a risk. It is much easier to sling mud without actually accomplishing anything!

Answer 4

Undermining our president concerning his war decisions does strengthen our enemies. They are watching.

Clinton brought the sex stuff on himself.

Answer 5

That was a law suit about sexual harassment..we were NOT at a TIME OF WAR and the original questioning about his CRIME of perjury was done behind closed doors...something that the Dems wish to forget...1 CRIME...none by GW
2 First interview behind closed doors.....EVEN THE DEMS admit there is no illegal action here....they just want to embarrass GW...if we want a true investigation...lets also look into the firing of the 93 by Clinton and the travel staff by Billary....we can do it all at once....but that would be fair...the DEMS DO NOT WANT THAT

Answer 6

I would rather have the president screwing an intern in the white house, than screwing all the people out of it!!

Answer 7

If you can connect oral sex to radical Islamic Fundamentalism that attacks innocent civilians then I'm glad, just proves the point of no real questions on Yahoo.

Answer 8

I'm not a neocon... just wanted to send you kudos for posing this question.

I often wonder where the Anne Coulterites were when the Republicans were committing "Treason" those 6 years myself.

Answer 9

One has nothing to do with the other. Clinton lied under oath and got caught. Pretty dumb for an attorney.

Answer 10

If oral sex is treason, I'd like to be forever known as Benadict Arnold.