Nope, Nan was Harding’s alleged mistress.
Clinton should have realized that the story probably would hurt him politically all that much and just admitted it. Grover Cleveland was elected despite stories that he had fathered a child while a lawyer in Buffalo, NY. Of course he was trying to keep it secret from his wife and daughter but he had been married long enough to know that you can’t do that either.
But, what could he have done? Anything along the lines of the New Deal would have been inconceivable for a Republican of his time.
Hoover was our greatest president.
While it was terrible, the internment was sanctioned by the Supreme Court in Korematsu v. United States, unlike the other blunders on the list. Additionally, it had a relatively positive outcome in that we now look upon it with shame and won’t be likely to try anything like that in the future. Any lessons that were learned in the other blunders are less clear.
[/QUOTE]
I have difficulty with the above statement that we, “…won’t be likely to try anything like that in the future.” I see many parallels between our actions toward the Japanese during WWII and our current treatment of Arabs/Muslims during the current “War on Terror.” I do not find there to be much difference between interring (Monica Lewinsky was an intern) people based on race/religion off shore as on shore. When the heads of state in this nation begin to address the ignorance with which they Texas Two-Step across the backs of other nations, maybe, just maybe we can begin to cross the cultural divides that so often lead to the blunders that are and are not our history. I am so often reminded of the cartoon symbolism of cash register slots with dollar signs spinning in the characters eyesockets when I see the actions taken by our leaders in the name of Democracy and freedom.
What?
The only thing I really take issue with regarding Clinton’s indiscretions is that the actions he was found guilty of, while some would argue should have been kept between the man, his wife and the dry cleaner, is they adultery is in violation of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. When our service men and woman are found guilty of adultery, they can be, and many times are, punished severely compared to the punishment currently meted out for the same offense in most U.S. civil courts. Should our troops be held to a higher standard with regard to their personal relationships than their Commander in Chief? The one thing I am not seeing here is an argument taking the position of counterintelligence, counterespionage and counterterrorism when it comes to a situation such as this. When someone with the knowledge and power of the U.S. President compromises their integrity in such a way, putting themselves in a position to be swayed in their actions based on knowledge obtained by another that can be leveraged against the individual (read: blackmail), that does present a significant risk to the interests of the country. My support for President Bill Clinton would have actually increased tremendously had he come out and said, “Yeah, I got a blow job… but she spit. I hate it when they spit.” Instead, he presented himself as the type of person who would succumg to a blackmail initiative. Therein is the true blunder.
The president is CinC but he remains a civilian – the only civilian in the chain of command. He is not under military discipline, nor under the jurisdiction of the UCMJ.
He may have a point. You know the phrase that goes something like, “Just smart enough to be dangerous.” Well, Hoover was so ineffective we really ould not give him credit for being smart enough. The rest were (smart enough)… and were (dangerous). Of course, even this line of thinking breaks down when it comes to GWB. 
And what point does this drive home? As long as a person does not break a law by which they are governed, then they are to considered morrally upright and a good leader? I hardly think this is the case, however much a whipping post it has bacome to CEOs and executives across the nation
I agree, at least in the part about Clinton being in a vulnerable position as long as he tried to hide.
I’m not so sure about the adultery in the military thing though. I think that it should be acourtmartialable (is that a word) offense only in the case of adultery with another member of the military. And then the charge really would be an action that is prejudicial to good order and discipline. It’s hard to have a unified organization if the members are screwing each others wives and husbands. Otherwise I think the military should stay out of the thing and if someone’s job performance suffers because of adultery outside other military personnel then punish them for failure to do their job, not for the adultery.
As to the argument that Clinton should be punished because military personnel are, I don’t think military personnel should be punished except as I noted. Yes, Lewinsky was in intern and therefore a lower ranking member of Clinton’s department and that’s bad. It seems to me that she was trying to do the equivalent of sleeping her way up the ladder of success, but I think he should have been mature enough to resist that. I would be today, but I’m not all that sure about 35 years ago. 
Whether you believe it was Clinton or his enemies, the effect is the same.
It is always best to read a post before responding erroneously to it, based on what you think it’s going to say. I already had indicated being dubious about this affair and its aftermath having much to do with the state of bipartisanship.
To cite just one more reason why Clinton’s inclusion on the list may be justified, I give you the 2000 election. Throw out the scandal, eliminate any real justification for Bush claiming he was going to bring higher moral standards to the White House, and toss out Al Gore’s possibly fatal error in distancing himself from Clinton during the campaign, and you might well have wound up with a Gore Administration.
Think there might have been a bit of an effect on history there?
Be that as it may, you stated that he violated military law. If he’s not subject to it, that doesn’t matter.
If we’re looking for things that damanged the country, how about Dwight D. Eisenhower’s boneheaded decision to sign off on the CIA plot to overthrow the democratic government of Iran and replace him with a puppet government headed by Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, the hereditary Shah of Iran.
That’s right, we fucking financed and otherwise abetted the fucking OVERTHREW of a democratic government in the Middle East. And not just democratic in form, democratic in FACT. Dwight may have been a brilliant general, but that was one dumbass move. We’re STILL paying for it. It EASILY eclipses Clinton’s blowjob impeachment.
Oooh, thats a good one, Evil Captor.
If the subjects of this poll were questioned on who made the worst presidential blunder I wouldn’t be surprised if they all would agree. That includes Clinton himself.
No, they should eliminate those anti-adultery rules. It’s no one’s business but the people involved.
In that case, the Republicans are again to blame, since they are the ones who made it matter in the first place.
I think he should have just said that his private life was private, and asked his accusers how they would like it if he started prying into their private lives and handing out what he found to the media, instead of them doing it to him. One of Clinton’s problems is that he was compulsively weasely; if you walked into a room and said “Did you hear about the guy who was murdered ?”, he’d probably blurt out “I wasn’t there ! Define murder !”. Not that he’d be guilty of anything, mind you; it’s just that his first impulse always seemed to be “Weasel ! Dodge ! Divert the blame !”.
Indeed it is. Had you done so, you’d have realized you were being that your claim that Blowjobgate was not a result but a cause of partisan rancor is not grounded in fact. Really, *do * you know who Newt Gingrich is or what he’s done with his life? Ken Starr? Tom DeLay? Bob Barr? Even Rush Limbaugh? Did they simply spring into existence with the Linda Tripp tapes? :rolleyes:
Setting aside the observation that Gore won, if you are now claiming that Bush’s bungling, arrogance, and isolation, and the damage they have caused are not *his * responsibility but Clinton’s, then your claim above actually does look reasonable by comparison.
Clinton was wrong to cheat on his wife. But when the information that he was doing so was revealed it should have been treated in the same manner we treated the recent Cheney shooting; we should have made a lot of bad jokes at his expense for a couple of weeks and then moved on. Nothing Clinton did rose to the level of “treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors” and it was purest partisan politics to try and pretend otherwise. As a Republican, I’m dreading the day when the Democrats are in a position for some payback.
Elvis, I regret your unwillingness or inability to understand what I was getting at.
Best of luck arguing with your phantom poster.