I once fired an employee for fucking his girlfriend at work. His fucking his girlfriend was none of my business…until he did it at work on company grounds. The president works for us. It IS our business…more so than simply an employee fucking his girlfriend because HE IS THE GOD DAMN LEADER OF THE COUNTRY. Get it?
Religious people are adversely affected because what he did offends them. Folks who have children are adversel affected because it sets a pretty poor example…and the president is supposed to set an example, to maintain a public image. People who look to their government are adversely affected by this casual dismissal of Clintons responsibilities as the leader of the nation…a nation that has certain standards of behavior and expectations reguarding the behavior of the guy we choose to run the country.
I’m adversely affected because its humiliating that our president was too stupid to keep it zipped…or to at least pick some bimbo who wasn’t going to let the cat out of the bag. The guy is the president…that means he has a big fucking target on your forehead, especially to the opposition party. Is it REALLY to fucking much to ask that he keep it zipped for 4-8 years? After that I really don’t give a shit and I doubt anyone else does either.
Look…you don’t get it. You will never get it. Why continue with this? I’ve already told you I voted for the man and that there was a lot there I thought he did a good job on. But it was a real scandal, he really did fuck up, and a lot more than just foaming at the mouth Republicans and fundies take exception to Clinton’s behavior.
No. I DON"T get it. He’s entiled to stick his dick in anything he wants and it’s no one’s fucking business but his own. There is nothing in the Constituion or the presidents job description that says he can’t get blow jobs, and there is nothing about getting a blow job that hurts anybody else or affects his ability to do his job.
Pardon me while I roll my fucking eyes. :rolleyes:
There is no such thing as a right to not be offended. Any offense they take is purely voluntary. I’m offended by practically everything the current president does. I’m offended by his religiosity, his smirk, his phony cowboy posturing, his fake Texas accent, the goddamn flight suit, the list goes on. That’s all too bad for me. I havn’t been “adversey affected.” Where the fuck did you get the idea that if someone else does not live according to your religious morality that you are somehow being harmed.
xtisme, I generally think you’re pretty intelligent, reasonable and thoughtful. I respect you even if I haven’t said it and even though we never seem to agree on anything. But you are completely full of shit on this one. Clinton’s blow job did NOT hurt anyone just because it did not accord with their own personal religious practices. That’s like saying Muslims are adversely affected if the President eats pork. Don’t be ridiculous.
But you’re talking about a purely RELIGIOUS issue. The president has no obligation to set a RELIGIOUS example for kids. Amd I don’t agree that the Prez is supposed to be a moral example at all. I’ve never voted for someone to be my minister or my baby daddy. I vote for them to run the country. Raising my kids is my job.
People who look to the government for moral guidance are freaking morons. They are adversely affected only by the completely idiotic decision to do so.
I think your anger is misplaced. If we live in a country where a blow job is actually considered an issue, then that’s the fucking problem, not the blow job.
To me, a real scandal is something that actually pertains to corruption in office and to something which relates in some way to the president’s JOB, not his personal life.
Sure he can…as long as he keeps it out of the publics eye. When he doesn’t, its a scandal. It doesn’t matter if no one is hurt, or if it affects his ability to do his job or not…it is what it is. Governments have fallen since there have been governments over such scandals…and the US is more prudish than some other countries out there.
Well, I’m an agnostic myself, so my own ‘religious morality’ isn’t really very high. I like to think I have other morality though. But my morality, religious based or not isn’t really where I’m coming from. As I said, with myself it was the embarrassment factor more than any moral outrage that Clinton boinked some intern in the Oval Office and spoiled her blue dress.
I conceed though that ‘adversely affected’ is a judgement call though and based on an individuals outlook. What is an adverse affect for one may not be for another…and vice versa. In fact its interesting to me that you take this tact with Clinton but generally don’t conceed that what is an adverse affect for you against Bush isn’t for a died in the wool Republican. You could make the same general arguement about the abortion issue, legalization of drugs, gun control, evolution vs creationism/ID or myriad other issues. I guess its who’s ox is gored and all that.
Well, I appreciate that. I’ll have you know though that I have just as much right as the next guy to be ridiculous occationally. Perhaps I AM being ridiculous on this issue. To be honest my own ox isn’t really gored much by Clinton OR his blowjob. I was more annoyed than horrified at Clinton. I do however know several folks who would disagree with you about what constitutes a adverse affect and what does not.
Come now. You know its not JUST a religious issue. Presidents ARE expected to maintain a certain image. Otherwise why do they (with the exception of Bubba) try so hard to conceal their various boinkings and other minor misdeeds? Because they know that it will adversely affect their chances for re-election. Afaik you are right…there isn’t really anything in the constitution forbidding the Prez or any other member of the government from boinking who ever they choose whenever they choose to do so…but there are a lot of unwritten ‘laws’ in this country as well. And Clinton crossed one of them by having that affair become public knowledge.
As to your last point, well, surely you realize by now that your outlook is not the same as everyone else’s in the country. YMMV and all that. I agree with you…I don’t look to the Prez as a moral beacon of all thats right and holy either. I think they are mostly all slimy dogs. However I realize that MY outlook is not that of all of my fellow citizens…and in fact I’ve come to realize that my own outlook isn’t even the same as the majority of my fellow citizens.
Well, I agree (even though this seems to be saying I’m a ‘freaking moron’ too since I said I was adversely affected…ah well if the shoe fits and all that ). But just because they might be freaking morons doesn’t mean you can simply discount them or that their perception of being adversely affected is any less real. Ox’s and gores and the like.
Well, I wasn’t really angry…just having an incredibly bad month this month (nothing to do with this board). We DO live in such a country. The only good thing is…it used to be worse as far as this kind of thing goes and its getting better.
Thats because you have no real problem with Clinton as Prez and your ox wasn’t gored by all this. I bet you had a lot of outrage in 2000 over Bush’s silver spoon National Guards thing though, right? Think about it.
At any rate I’m going to conceed the field to you on this because my heart just isn’t in it to debate Clinton’s blow job. As I said, personally I was more annoyed than anything so I just can’t work up the outrage to carry on.
To each his own I guess. I think the Prez is expected to maintain a certain public image, you think its a steaming pile. YMMV and all that.
Dunno. I bet you don’t either. Perhaps most American’s don’t really give two shits about the scandal…or maybe they do. Whatever baggage there is will probably be carried by Hillary (and as someone earlier said it didn’t seem to affect her Senate bid much afaict) as Bubba got his 8 and is out of it.
Well, then, I guess that means we don’t need to waste our time with honesty or ethics or accountability any more, following the examples set by our current POTUS. It’ll sure make filling out my tax returns so much easier…
I’ve read this through twice and I still don’t have a clue what the hell you are talking about. Clearly this is written in english…but the sentences don’t seem to go together nor do they seem to actually address my own points. Did it make sense to you when you wrote it?
Well, I’m off to bed before my head explodes. :eek:
Messy, that. Perhaps you can work on both post formatting and vocabulary. A “person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets”. — Wordnet
Maybe that is the great flaw of the modern left — a denial of history born of an ill-conceived revisionism.
If we’re going to include offending, upsetting, or otherwise pissing off people as part of a Presidential legacy than I suspect our current President is going to be right at the top of the list. Not only is he reviled, mistrusted, and just down right hated by a pretty big chunk of the American public, but he’s got quite a few people all around the globe who think he’s a complete idiot as well.
I didn’t think the OP included GW in the list. I would certainly put GW towards the bottom, though I’d still rate Carter and Johnson as lower down…Johnson still gets the bottom billing IMHO, even if we include Bush II. YMMV.
He started out more liberal than he ended up. He campaigned on promises to rein in the federal government. He wanted to eliminate the departments of Energy and Education. He wanted to put what he called the “closet socialism” of Social Security and Medicare into the hands of the free market. He in fact cut marginal tax rates. But… he increased spending on “defense” (I use quote marks because a vast amount of military spending is not defensive in nature). He drove up deficits. He lost sight of his principles, and was effectively used by conservatives for their own causes. By the end of his second term, he settled for a legacy of Great Speaker. So-called “neo-conservatism” was born. And the classic American liberalism of Barry Goldwater disappeared from the radar. Today, we have campaigns between people who want to raise spending 2% versus people who want to raise spending 3%, and people who want to invade countries under an American flag versus people who want to invade countries under a UN flag. The train is too big now for a conductor to make a difference. It’s going downhill and operating on its own gravity. The brakes burnt out a long time ago.
Insofar as he started out as a New Deal Democrat, and only switched to the Republican Party when he started to shill for GE, I think we can say that he was once a liberal
). But just because they might be freaking morons doesn’t mean you can simply discount them or that their perception of being adversely affected is any less real. Ox’s and gores and the like.