Never mind, found one!
I’m a big fan of both Clintons, but I said then and say now that’s what he should have said. “None of your goddam business. Now, let’s get back to work.”
But who was it that selected this as the definition? The rest of the link provides 2 other choices.
"2) Contact between any part of the person’s body or an object and the genitals or anus of another person or;
- contact between the genitals or anus of the person and any part of another person’s body."
Number 1, quoted by Shodan, was “circled” in the link he provided. I’m nost sure what exactly that means. Did Clinton circle it? Did the accusing attorney circle it?
Personally none of the listed choices meets my definition of sex. Namely “Any interaction between people intended to sexually stimulate each other.”
I should also note, that even though I disliked Clinton in many ways, I thought he had another out (at least for me). He could have come forward when the lie was revealed and say simply that he lied to protect the reputation of the girl. A protest of “none of your business” would most certainly have been taken as implicit confirmation of the affair. He could have argued that the lie was necessary to (or at least he hoped it would) protect her from any harassment.
Having said all that, I also think it was dispicable for the Republicans to have taken the affair scandal so far. When the evidence for the other accusations that Star was investigating did not pan out, they should not have glommed on to this one so eagerly. There was no need for the impeachment, for instance.
You might be interested in reading “Blinded By The Right” by David Brock. He writes of the far-right “hit squad” that he was part of, that devoted all their time and resources to digging up dirt and/or slandering Clinton, and nothing else.
Interestingly, the book wasn’t a partisan anti-conservative screed like I thought it would be; he pointed out that the majority of conservatives/Republicans were not like these folks.
Oh please. What do you think he used to insert the cigar - tongs?
IIRC, she also testifed that he put his tongue up the Hershey Highway as well.
Besides, read the freaking cite. “For the sexual gratification of ANY PERSON…”
Sheesh.
Regards,
Shodan
Ah, I did remember it right.
January 7, 1998 Lewinsky, in a sworn affidavit, denies having an affair with Clinton.
January 12, 1998 Linda Tripp contacts Independent counsel Kenneth Starr’s office, providing 20 hours of taped conversations with Lewinsky.
Monica undoubtedly would have kept her mouth shut had the busybody Linda Tripp not taped their private conversations. And then Monica was threatened with charges, and forced to testify as a condition of immunity.
Thanks for the idea. I will look the book up.
I was surrounded by these sorts of conservatives during that time. I remember quite well the nonsensical crap they were spewing. I was ashamed to be a member of that party at the time. There have always been mudslingers in political contests. Read any of the contemporary Roman histories and you’ll find denegrating stories floating around concerning various politicians. Some of them may have had some truth, sure, but the only reason to repeat such stories is for the political effect.
That’s why I was so disappointed with the House Republicans over Clinton’s impeachment. A good political move, perhaps, but an unforgivable breach of their oath of office. And more importantly a blatant betrayal of the principles with which they took office. I remember thinking at the time that the Contract with America could have ushered in a bold new age of American politics. If both parties started making concrete promises about what they would do in office if given the house or senate or both, political debates could have swayed away from the sensational and centered more on issues. But alas…
As has been repeated many times here, Clinton lied because he thought he could get away with it.
And as I told many people during this period who tried the “It’s just sex, who cares” justification…
It’s not the sex, it’s the perjury.
Perjury is illegal. Clinton lied under oath. He’s guilty of perjury. But your reaction to the issue depends on your ideology. The same people who fell all over themselves excusing Clinton wanted to hang Bob Packwood.
I was particularly amused by the National Organization for Women’s silence. I guess if you beleive the right way as far as they are concerned, you can harass all the women you want.
Monica shouldn’t have offerd herself to Clinton.
Clinton shouldn’t have accepted the offer.
Monica shouldn’t have told Linda Tripp about it.
Linda shouldn’t have taped Monica.
Linda shouldn’t have gone to Starr.
Starr shouldn’t have investigated it.
Clinton shouldn’t have lied under oath.
Congress shouldn’t have impeached.
Plenty of mistakes to go around
From google.com:
-
Results 1 - 10 of about 72,900 for “oral sex” clinton.
-
Results 1 - 10 of about 54,700 for perjury clinton
Very unscientific way of pointing out that the “legacy” of Bill Clinton (that the Republicans managed to attach to his name) is “oral sex” not “perjury”.