Joe Mage

So did Jackson, J.Q. Adams, and many other presidents; didn' stop them from doin' their jobs; and they never had impeachment precedings filed against them for that behavior. I find it curious how an investigation inta a bad investment could turn inta an investigation inta Clinton's love life. Big waste of tax-payers money, in my opinion. The fact that he committed adultry doesn' prove that he was a bad president, it only shows that he's a lousy husband and only human.

__________________

"Believe in yourself, if in nothing else."
My myspace page: www.myspace.com/joemage

Cain

You know about the whole I dont think women should rule the country well...
Old fashioned or not, but remember when the woman's only role was to cook, clean, and take care of the kids?
Well when women started changing that, some of the women wanted to keep it the same way, because it was oldfashioned.
Now I ask you, would you still want that? We don't really know what we really want until we've experienced the other options. In fact, you don't really know what can happen, so why be against it?
Could it really be worse than Bush?
Frankly I like change, so I think it'll be relieving having something else.
However, I will not vote this time, just wait to see what happens, and I hope it's good whatever does happen.

__________________

Arrianna

None of them had affairs with someone under them in the chain of command. You think she was his only one? There were hundreds. No one cared till it was with an intern because that is an abuse of power just as it would be if a general seduced someone under their command in the military. Ask someone in the military what happens to officers caught doing stuff like that. Or a teacher having sex with a student. Not that we haven't been hearing about plenty of those lately *sarcasm* but of course everyone doesn't care and the teachers are NEVER penalized. Not only did he commit a clear abuse of power he lied about it under oath and THAT is why he was impeached. He deserved it, lost his license for it, and there is no excuse for it. Now how about getting over it. It only matters to the conversation at hand if you think the wife of a confirmed womanizer should or should not be president. Argue that one all you want.

__________________

l Stone Hold l Now We're Cooking! l Thanks to Kaos for the awesome sig!

Joe Mage

Military Brat, I know all 'bout military protocol, and even though u're correct on that one; I seriously doubt that, in politics, if it were any1 other than Clinton that we would've even heard 'bout it. It was 'cause Clinton was an unpopular president wit our Congress, that the affair was even brought up. And 5 will get u 10 that those same political "big wigs" were all havin' affairs wit their interns too, its all too common amongst career politcians. He was jus' singled out, not 'cause he had the affair and not 'cause he may or may not (even though he did) have lied 'bout it, but rather 'cause he was popular amongst the ppl and not popular wit the career politicians runnin' Congress. Regardless, it still didn' effect his job as president, what did was the billions of taxpayers dollars that went inta investigatin' a bad investment that turned inta a complete debacle 'bout his love life. So why were the impeachment precedings against him dropped? 'Cause the majority of americans didn' care that he had the affair (like my mom); they felt that it was between him and Hillary. Most felt that it was a personal issue that had little, if anythin', ta do wit politics and runnin' the country. If anythin' it showed, at least in the eyes of the majority of the public, that even the president is capable of makin' a mistake and made the office of presidency seem more down ta earth. Should he have lost his liscense? Yes, he should've. Did he deserve it? Absolutely. But should have Congress wasted billions of dollars investigatin' the private life of a president, start impeachment precedings against him; only ta later have them dropped? Absolutely not. When u have a country ta run, u do not have time for personal grudges and self-interests. That's 1 reason why I don' like career politicians, they never set aside their personal interests long enough ta do what best for the country as a whole. As far as a woman president is concerned, whose ta say that she would behave any different than a man? We could end up havin', 1 day, a female president who sleeps wit her interns and lies 'bout it. Are we ta do the same ta her? If, even though, it's not effectin' her job in any way; does Congress have the right ta prosecute (persecute?) her as well? Jus' a thought.

__________________

"Believe in yourself, if in nothing else."
My myspace page: www.myspace.com/joemage

Arrianna

Some of them perhaps but they are not the President (the Commander-in-Chief) so it isn't the same. Not to mention the Intern program is currently in danger because of attitudes like that. The person in charge of it either has or is considering halting the program because she cannot assure their parents of their safety. Say what you will about who is or isn't doing anything it is still not appropriate and Congressmen found fraternizing with interns in such a matter can and will find themselves out of office. (As has just happened this last year.)

Now, who told you the proceedings were dropped? They weren't. Clinton was IMPEACHED, period. He was not removed from office. They are two separate parts to the proceedings. Once a president is Impeached then the Senate votes on whether to remove him from office. The vote was taken but since it requires a 2/3rds majority and voting fell on party lines for the most part split 50/50 he was not removed from office. If he was really so innocent the Democrats wouldn't have been pushing for a censure vote instead of one for removal. Put simply they didn't want the first president to be removed from office to be a Democrat and are on record as saying so. As I said, get over it. He was guilty, was impeached, but wasn't removed from office.

Now do you think that a woman who has such poor judgment as to be married to a man who has had that many affairs should be president? It doesn't fill me with confidence. There are other women I would support but she isn't one of them. I wouldn't mind a Thacher or "Elizabeth" myself but you have to take each person individually.

__________________

l Stone Hold l Now We're Cooking! l Thanks to Kaos for the awesome sig!

Barronmore

Arrianna is right. An Impeachment is just a criminal trial conducted by congress against the president. Clinton was impeached. There's no denying that. He was also found guilty, but instead of being given the ultimate punishment of removal from office he was acquitted because democrats did not want the first president removed from office to be a democrat.

Clinton did receive punishement from the Arkansas state Bar and had is law license revoked for 5 years because of his perjury to the grand jury.

So, in short, Clinton was impeached (tried) and was was aquited by the senate. The charges were never dropped.

__________________

Joe Mage

Actually, it's exactly the same, whether u r the commander-in-chief or a congressman; adultery is adultery. U compared the office of Presidency ta the military and u really can' make such a comparision. This is 'cause most of the Presidents in our history have been "civilians" and not "military." So they don', usually, have the level of discipline that our military has, so thus the expectation for their conduct. And as far as the vote bein' along party lines, u jus' proved the point that I was gettin' at earlier. Career politicians r only concerned wit their own personal and bi-partisan ambition, not runnin' the country. If it were a republican and the democrats held the majority of Congress, u can bet the same exact thin' would happen; jus' as the vice-versa did happen. And it wouldn' happen 'cause it was "morally" correct, but 'cause of party bi-partisianship. My biggest point is that most americans don' care 'bout the personal conduct of our leaders, only that they can; effectively; do their jobs. And if their personal conduct isn' interferin' wit their jobs, then it's between them and whom ever is involved. The whole fiasco surroundin' the investigation and the impeachment of Clinton did more ta interfere wit the country then his affair wit an intern did, it was a waste.

Now what does this have ta do wit a woman pres.? It's not 'bout a person's race, sex, religion, or whether or not a person is an absolute "straight edge;" but whether or not ppl think that a person is capable of doin' the job. I don' think that Hillary is and not 'cause she's married ta a jack@$$ of a husband, but 'cause she has shown me that she is incapable of make hard decisions and stickin' ta them no matter what. Her indeciviseness and her inability ta stick ta her "guns" when she does make a decision, has shown me that she lacks the qualifications ta adequately do the job and has little, if anythin', ta do wit her taste in men. I, personally, want a candidate that will make a decision and stick by it, not b indecisive and "flip-flop" on the issues at hand.

__________________

"Believe in yourself, if in nothing else."
My myspace page: www.myspace.com/joemage

Miroku4444

Lets get back on subject guys this thread isn't about Bill Clinton's presidency.

__________________