Why is President Clinton's marital indiscretion starting to look mild?

Answer 1

Who cares what any of them do in bed.....how bout we fix things like social security, medicare, medicade, etc.

Answer 2

In light of the current Presidents lies about a war that never should have happened, and torturing people in our name, making the rest of the world laugh at us, and then spying on his own people, Clintons private indiscression, which should have stayed private, was mild in comparison. Europeans laughed at us because over there a sexual thing is usually private and here it's all over the place. The Republicans told Clinton right after his swearing in ceremony, "You're going down and hard"..and they then spent the rest of his Presidency making his life miserable, and yet we were still better off, safer then now. I didn't even like Clinton, but after what he tried to do "FOR US"..and how he was treated by Republicans compare to how the current Pres, gets away with every lie he tells, it makes me sick.

Answer 3

The only person who should have taken Bill to the woodshed over doing the intern is Hillary and if she didn't do it, it's not my job. I'll quote Mel Brooks for my reaction to Bill getting blown while on policy making conference calls "It's good to be the king"

If Bush was doing an intern or Condoleeza Rice then it might make the news and that would be about it. The majority of the country would quote Mel Brooks (It's good to be the king) and continue with their day. What Bush is doing is far more insideous and worrysome.

Answer 4

they always were mild.
that was a personal matter best left between a husband and a wife. Just goes to show how much the right-wingers want obtrude into our personal and private lives, to make sure we aren't doing anything they consider immoral.

they claim to want less government, but in reality they just want to pay less for it, while it morally polices the nation.

Has Bush pardoned Clinton yet? after all, he only lied about having sex. something every person has done once in their lives, and it didn't jeopardize national security near as much as ousting a CIA agent.

You ever wonder why right-wingers always claim that something that mild is disgracing the Presidency and the country, while they spend millions to investigate and publicize it but when it is something severe they try to cover it up so it won't disgrace the Presidency??

Answer 5

It always was mild. He wasn't impeached for getting a BJ from a young intern, he was impeached for lying in a federal courtroom, while under oath, as the sitting president of ther United States. THAT'S not mild, it is a disgrace.
If he had told the truth from the beginning it would have been all over and we never would have known that he is dishonest. I'm glad we found that out, it will help keep him or Rottenham from ever being in the White House again.

Answer 6

Ummmm, that should be plural. Indiscretions. And as far as I'm concerned they never looked mild. At the very least they showed a lack of judgment that is dangerous in a man with the power and the prestige of the United States in his hands.

Maggie

Answer 7

They WERE mild, just blown completely out of proportion by the media. But I believe that Bush's indiscretions will make the most iron stomached person nauseous when they come out. He will make Nixon look like a boy scout!

Answer 8

I always thought Clinton was a no good president, but the witch hunt he was put through because he received a few BJs from Monica (that woman) was just ridiculous.

To impeach a President because he lied under oath in a civil case that had nothing to do with his job or the gov't was wrong.

Of course, he is responsible for making it worse than it was. If he wouldn't have lied under oath, and also got up in front of that podium, and lied bold faced to the American people, it wouldn't have been as big of a deal.

Answer 9

Maybe because he had consensual sex with a woman.

Compared to Allen - who attempted to pay an undercover male officer $20 to allow him to give the officer a b.j. - Clinton was a saint.

Answer 10

Marital indiscretion?

You mean committing adultery in the oval office, committing perjury and intimidating others to commit perjury (a felony)? You mean witness tampering? Creditable allegations of rape?

Nope. Not at all.

Answer 11

It always did. We should never have known a thing about it, but of course Ken Starr kept digging until he finally found something he could use against Clinton.