EvelynVogtGamble(Divamanque) wrote:
> Although I didn't think much of his taste in women (how could ANYONE
> find Monika .ually attractive?) Clinton was only behaving like many
> other male humans.
You could say the same thing about stealing - or even murder...
:-)
=A0Are you actually saying that "lying" about something
> that was no one's business but his own (and maybe his wife's - CERTAINLY
> not that of Congress) is a more heinous "crime" than deliberately
> spreading false information to maneuver Congress into approving a
> unilateral attack against a sovereign nation?
Here we see your liberal "situational ethics" at work, Evelyn...
It certainly WAS everyones' business that Clintoon committed adultery
whilst in office. He lied under oath, which is a crime - and he is
barred from practising law...
Clinton stained the office of the Presidency, and that will forever be
his legacy - his *only* legacy...
Clinton behaved in a criminal manner, Bush has NOT in his pursual of
the Iraq war. They are *two* different issues entirely...the one is a
criminal matter, the other is a *policy* matter. Very simple...
Bush is no more a "criminal" in his pursual of war than FDR or Harry
Truman or LBJ or Bush #1 was...
--
Best
Greg
|
