Comments: I Feel ALL Warm and Fuzzy Inside

Key, thank you...

posted by Jack on June 14, 2004 09:38 PM

Well Jack...

I have had trouble getting Lewinsky out out of my head when I look at Clinton. I've realized though, that I'm actually more disgusted with him for getting caught!

I don't want the position disgraced any more than I want to know where his cigars have been.

He's suffered because of this. And I reluctantly admit...grown.

This morning Clinton said essentially that people should stop debating whether the politicians are good or bad, and start debating whether their ideas are right or wrong for the country.

I appreciated that. I was surprised by the level of sincerity and, - again reluctantly - I was impressed.

(No worries. I'll still be quite busy as I slice and dice those WRONG ideas!)

posted by Key on June 14, 2004 10:28 PM

Dear Key:

I might be banned for this - -but here goes:

We have to hold our leaders to a higher standard of conduct. Getting caught is not the issue.

If we don't, then morally it won't matter if we put a Clinton; a Reagan; a Hitler; or an Enron executive in the White House.

Our adherance to standard is what's differentiated us from every other country -- regardless of whether they're the tin-pot European and Asian dictatorships of sixty years ago, or the current crop of African 'regimes'.

Standards, Key! Standards!

Best,

-Will

posted by Will on June 15, 2004 12:32 AM

Will: Yes, standards are important. However, one must look at the exact nature of the "offense" in question. Which is worse, boffing an intern in the Oval Office, or circumventing the checks and balances in the Constitution by funding rebels in Nicaragua against the express wishes of Congress by selling arms to Iran, a nation that was (and still is) our enemy?

For me, the answer is obvious, and the answer has nothing to do with the sex life of the holder of the office of President.

As you said, Will, it is about standards, but it is also about what is *truly* important, not what is used to get political gain at the moment.

posted by Jack on June 15, 2004 05:43 AM

Yes, we must hold our leaders to standards, but let's pick standards that matter. What about Jefferson, for example. Can we say he wasn't a good president because he had children with a slave? What about Kennedy and his women? Can we not agree he was a decent president? Now we have a 'Christian' president, and look where we are,,,

posted by Michele on June 15, 2004 10:02 AM

Will,
Ban someone for interacting? Never. Educated debate is the goal.

I actually agree with you about standards, but ya gotta be real...as Michele pointed out - he is simply the first to be caught in office...in this day and age...with his pants down.

I'm still disgusted, and what I mentioned above was not a decided opinion so much as it was a realization/confession of what bothers me the most. Two things 1) Is 8 years such a gawdawful long time to go without having an affair?? 2) If he WAS going to have one, did it ever occur to him to be a little less sloppy?

I'm the first to crack the whip, but I have to admit that we don't make it easy on our Presidents from either side.

We want them to be almost perfect, just shy of robotic behavior with no gut reactions, when it comes to foreign affairs....

Yet if they maintain that disposition on social issues, they are criticized for lacking compassion.

Now, just because I'm willing to make this observation doesn't mean that I like it.

On a very personally level, I'd like to see MY ideal government come to pass, and if I had the power to make it happen, I'm sure there would be no moderates left by the time I was finished.

I'd be either loved or hated.

posted by Key on June 15, 2004 04:12 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?