The problem is Bill Clinton isn't running for reelection

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let's not forget, in extolling the universal admiration for Clinton, that the GOP impeached him.

Yeah and the guys who did it were mostly cheating on their wives. Thanks for reminding me.

Newt Gingrich had to resign his speakership because of his affair.
Bob Livingston, the guy who replaced him as speaker, had to resign his office because of an affair.
David Vitter, the guy who took Bob Livingston's seat (not the impeachment proceedings), was caught using prostitutes.

After Clinton was impeached it went to the senate. The leader of the Senate prosecution, Henry Hyde, was outed for his marital affair.

So the lesson I learned is that Clinton cheated on his wife and Republicans are hypocrites willing to remove a sitting President for doing what they did, knowing that they too would lie under oath just like him in order to avoid the scandals if they had the chance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's not forget, in extolling the universal admiration for Clinton, that the GOP impeached him.

Yeah and the guys who did it were mostly cheating on their wives. Thanks for reminding me.

Newt Gingrich had to resign his speakership because of his affair.
Bob Livingston, the guy who replaced him as speaker, had to resign his office because of an affair.
David Vitter, the guy who took Bob Livingston's seat (not the impeachment proceedings), was caught using prostitutes.

After Clinton was impeached it went to the senate. The leader of the Senate prosecution, Henry Hyde, was outed for his marital affair.

So the lesson I learned is that Clinton cheated on his wife and Republicans are hypocrites willing to remove a sitting President for doing what they did, knowing that they too would lie under oath just like him in order to avoid the scandals if they had the chance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's not forget, in extolling the universal admiration for Clinton, that the GOP impeached him.

Yeah and the guys who did it were mostly cheating on their wives. Thanks for reminding me.

Newt Gingrich had to resign his speakership because of his affair.
Bob Livingston, the guy who replaced him as speaker, had to resign his office because of an affair.
David Vitter, the guy who took Bob Livingston's seat (not the impeachment proceedings), was caught using prostitutes.

After Clinton was impeached it went to the senate. The leader of the Senate prosecution, Henry Hyde, was outed for his marital affair.

So the lesson I learned is that Clinton cheated on his wife and Republicans are hypocrites willing to remove a sitting President for doing what they did, knowing that they too would lie under oath just like him in order to avoid the scandals if they had the chance.

The major point was that Clinton lied under oath.

[Anonymous]

yes, because after years and years of trying to get him on some other bullshit charges, they finally caught him using his achilles heel. And whether he technically lied is debatable - he was really careful to parse words, as we all remember.

What a sad, sad episode in partisan politics that whole mess was. And it definitely exposed all those jackasses in Congress (and I was working there at the time - in a minority committee office) as hypocrites.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Clinton and Obama have a very similar appeal to me. They are both smart, third-way moderates who give great speeches. They have different working and personal styles, but they have a lot more in common than not. Both are committed to public service and to working towards a fair capitalist society. Both want to see Americans have jobs and access to health care. Both want a balanced budget and realistic taxation. I see much more similarity than difference.

Unless you're hung up on race, that is.

So if we think Clinton is a better leader than Obama we must be hung up on race? Sorry, other than the fact that they are both extremely gifted orators - I don't see much similarity. Clinton got things done and he wasn't afraid to lead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

So if we think Clinton is a better leader than Obama we must be hung up on race? Sorry, other than the fact that they are both extremely gifted orators - I don't see much similarity. Clinton got things done and he wasn't afraid to lead.

no, the major difference is that the republican leaders in congress don't seem to give a damn about even attempting to work together for the good of the country they claim to love. They would rather screw the president and watch the country go down in flames.

in the 90s, compromise was not considered a dirty word. It is now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's not forget, in extolling the universal admiration for Clinton, that the GOP impeached him.

Yeah and the guys who did it were mostly cheating on their wives. Thanks for reminding me.

Newt Gingrich had to resign his speakership because of his affair.
Bob Livingston, the guy who replaced him as speaker, had to resign his office because of an affair.
David Vitter, the guy who took Bob Livingston's seat (not the impeachment proceedings), was caught using prostitutes.

After Clinton was impeached it went to the senate. The leader of the Senate prosecution, Henry Hyde, was outed for his marital affair.

So the lesson I learned is that Clinton cheated on his wife and Republicans are hypocrites willing to remove a sitting President for doing what they did, knowing that they too would lie under oath just like him in order to avoid the scandals if they had the chance.

The major point was that Clinton lied under oath.

He lied under oath about having an affair. Really, is it the proper role of a prosecutor to investigate affairs, in the absence of any complaint on the part of the intern?

[Anonymous]

no, the major difference is that the republican leaders in congress don't seem to give a damn about even attempting to work together for the good of the country they claim to love. They would rather screw the president and watch the country go down in flames.

in the 90s, compromise was not considered a dirty word. It is now.


I guess his first two years with a democrat majority in the house and senate don't count, huh?

[Anonymous]

Everyone misses Clinton the policy guru, but I don't think anyone misses Clinton the Drama King.

Interestingly, I think the country is definitely looking for people who don't come with that kind of distraction. Whatever you may think about George W. Bush or Barack Obama, whatever the differences in policy or governing style, the one thing they both have in common is that there hasn't been a hint of scandal about either of those marriages. I don't think Newt Gingrich realized how much of a non-starter he was.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:no, the major difference is that the republican leaders in congress don't seem to give a damn about even attempting to work together for the good of the country they claim to love. They would rather screw the president and watch the country go down in flames.

in the 90s, compromise was not considered a dirty word. It is now.

I guess his first two years with a democrat majority in the house and senate don't count, huh?

When Kennedy died after a few months Obama lost his "filibuster-proof" majority, and that became the equivalent of a GOP majority. They had actually done pretty well even before, with their liberal (excuse the pun) use of the filibuster, since there were a few conservative Dems they could usually count on to destroy the 60 vote margin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Clinton and Obama have a very similar appeal to me. They are both smart, third-way moderates who give great speeches. They have different working and personal styles, but they have a lot more in common than not. Both are committed to public service and to working towards a fair capitalist society. Both want to see Americans have jobs and access to health care. Both want a balanced budget and realistic taxation. I see much more similarity than difference.

Unless you're hung up on race, that is.

So if we think Clinton is a better leader than Obama we must be hung up on race? Sorry, other than the fact that they are both extremely gifted orators - I don't see much similarity. Clinton got things done and he wasn't afraid to lead.

Really? You don't see the similarities? Can you name any other national political figure who is more like Clinton than Obama? From the New Yorker:

My theory is that the two men are more similar than they perhaps realize, and that the obvious differences in their characters have disguised this fact. Both of them are essentially moderate liberals who favor traditional Democratic goals—fostering equal opportunity, strengthening the safety net, reducing poverty and inequality, and making America a more enlightened place.

Read more http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2012/09/is-barack-obama-a-clintonite.html#ixzz25mzVHFp8

[Anonymous]

Thank god he's not running. He's a slut.

[Anonymous]

On the slut front - Watching John Kerry speak last night made me think what an effing scandal a VP Edwards could have been.

Of course, he met his baby momma during the 2008 campaign, so the affair baby would not have been the issue. But no doubt there were other women.

Still wish Bush had NOT been re-elected, but Edwards would have been a mess for Kerry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:On the slut front - Watching John Kerry speak last night made me think what an effing scandal a VP Edwards could have been.

Of course, he met his baby momma during the 2008 campaign, so the affair baby would not have been the issue. But no doubt there were other women.

Still wish Bush had NOT been re-elected, but Edwards would have been a mess for Kerry.

10:33 again. Yeah, don't get me started on Edwards. I never believed in Clinton but I believed in Edwards. Still mad at him for having an affair and with such a flake!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:On the slut front - Watching John Kerry speak last night made me think what an effing scandal a VP Edwards could have been.

Of course, he met his baby momma during the 2008 campaign, so the affair baby would not have been the issue. But no doubt there were other women.

Still wish Bush had NOT been re-elected, but Edwards would have been a mess for Kerry.

10:33 again. Yeah, don't get me started on Edwards. I never believed in Clinton but I believed in Edwards. Still mad at him for having an affair and with such a flake!

I liked both, but Edwards' story was compelling and he seemed to be pretty committed to the poor/low-income. I just shook my head at Clinton, but I was mad at Edwards.