Skip to main content

View Diary: Bill Clinton tells Dems to Fight or "Find Something Else To Do" (428 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  He didn't let us down (4.00)
    The Republicans did. They went after him from the day he took office and looked in every nook and cranny to find a scandal they could hang him on.

    Let us down? My god, when are people going to get real? The man had a blow job! When oh' when are people going to get off their damn high horse and figure it out! SO FREAKIN' WHAT??????

    Disrespect for the office of President? You've got it wrong -- that was the Republicans, who thought that because "their guy" wasn't President, they needed to destroy the Democratic President.

    Please. Wake Up. The fact that there are STILL people like you that cannot see what truly happened here frustrates the hell out of me. You can't even see the real truth.

    "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross." -- Sinclair Lewis

    by Dunbar on Sun Oct 30, 2005 at 08:18:25 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  and he did "fight" (4.00)
      He was never removed from Office nor did he resign.

      He fought.

      "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross." -- Sinclair Lewis

      by Dunbar on Sun Oct 30, 2005 at 08:19:25 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  You sound like the Republican talking heads ... (2.20)
      ... that I'm hearing on cable right now. Many here wonder why the Republican supporters can't see how badly the Bush administration acted in the Plamegate matter, and wonder why they don't see how Libby's lies and obstruction are a sign of moral decay at the top. Well, the explanation is the same as why many Democrats won't admit that Bill Clinton lied under oath (and was later disbarred as a lawyer because he did). Democrats were blinded by partisanship back then, the Republicans are blinded by partisanship now. As long as we continue to defend the actions of Bill Clinton (the lying under oath he did, and if you don't think he lied then you really are blind), then we will have a lot less credibility when we condemn the actions of the Bushies now.  
      •  Spare me the false equivalency. (4.00)
        You're the one who sounds like a repug talking head. The majority of the American people (not just Dems) recognized that Bill Clinton was railroaded into this and that what he lied about was having sex. His (our) enemies, on the other hand, were trying to stage a coup. Their intent was to take down the elected President because they couldn't win at the ballot box.

        Democrats were blinded by partisanship? Give me a fucking break. There is simply no comparison.

        "Nobody's coming to get her." (the NOLA emergency worker's mother who drowned in the nursing home after five days waiting)

        by homogenius on Sun Oct 30, 2005 at 08:59:42 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

          •  most if not all of us... (4.00)
            were disappointed by Clinton's lying about the affair, and advocated censure by Congress. IIRC, that was Moveon.org's original raison d'etre: censure, then let's all move on.

            Saying his actions were not impeachable, and pointing out the difference between lying about a blowjob and lying a nation into war is not "proving your point."

            ...Freedom is on the march. Straight to the gas chamber. this is infidelica...

            by snookybeh on Sun Oct 30, 2005 at 09:27:21 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Even if you weren't agreeing with me... (none)
              I'd give you a 4 for "raison d'etre"!

              "Nobody's coming to get her." (the NOLA emergency worker's mother who drowned in the nursing home after five days waiting)

              by homogenius on Sun Oct 30, 2005 at 09:33:20 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  I don't understand how some Democrats ... (3.00)
              ... can dismiss one instance of lying to a grand jury as insignificant and then turn around and claim that another instance is significant. That sounds very similar to the recent like Kay Bailey Hutchison-type logic of convenience. As Patrick Fitzgerald so clearly pointed out in his press conference ... "truth is the engine of our judicial system. And if you compromise the truth, the whole process is lost." So, I can't dismiss Bill Clinton's lying to a grand jury as any less serious than Scooter Libby's lying to a grand jury, because I think the "whole process" of rule of law as a basis for our society is too valuable to give up for partisan politics.
              •  again... (4.00)
                I didn't say Clinton's lying to a grand jury was insignificant, and I don't know anyone, Democrat or otherwise, who feels that way. And again, as I said before, many if not most of us advocated censure for him - a very, very serious punishment for a sitting president, but one that is short of impeachment.

                But is there a difference between what Clinton did and what Libby did? You bet your ass there is. Acknowledging that is not saying that the one is "insignificant."

                If you can't see a difference between giving a false answer to a question about your sex life, a question that was irrelevant to the grand jury's probe in the first place and shouldn't have been asked, and giving a false answer in an investigation of a breach of national security... you either live in a seriously monochromatic world, or you're a freeper troll.

                (And if I were going to LGF or Free Rep. to bait some wingers, I'd probably take something like "Reagan Republican" as my screen name. Not that I'm implying anything.)

                ...Freedom is on the march. Straight to the gas chamber. this is infidelica...

                by snookybeh on Sun Oct 30, 2005 at 11:42:54 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  I can't see the difference ... (none)
                  ... and that is the point I was making. Lying to a grand jury totally corrupts our system, as Patrick Fitzgerald pointed out so eloquently (no special situations, no equivocation, just the absolute). Our entire system depends on truth. If we come to the point where we wink at some instances of lying under oath as being more acceptable because the underlaying motivation was minor, then we have abandoned our principles for expediency. That latter is what Bush and his cronies did in taking us to Iraq. I will not go down that road with them. If you are content to live in a society that winks at lying to a grand jury, then you have become part of the culture of corruption that we, as Democrats, say we want to do away with.
                  •  I'm glad I don't live... (none)
                    in your imaginary universe, where all transgressions are treated equally. I guess in your world, the burglar who steals a car stereo gets the same punishment as the contract killer.

                    Well, it certainly makes life easier.

                    Tell me one instance in any comment that I have made anywhere at any time when I "winked" at lying to a grand jury. I said specifically that I thought that what Clinton did was wrong, and he deserved to be censured. How the fuck is that "winking?"

                    I'll give you another chance: do you honestly believe that lying to a grand jury about a blowjob has the same consequences, and deserves the same punishment, as lying to a grand jury about a breach of national security in which lives have undoubtedly been lost, and the safety of our nation has been seriouly compromised? You really believe that?!?

                    I'm assuming you're aware that a sitting president cannot be indicted for a crime, and that Clinton would have had to have been impeached/removed from office in order to be tried for perjury. You really think Clinton should have been impeached, then removed from office, for lying about a blowjob?

                    If so, then, nothing personal, but you're fucking batshit crazy, Inspector Javert.

                    Or a wingnut troll who is trying to get a rise from me. And if you are, it's working.

                    ...Freedom is on the march. Straight to the gas chamber. this is infidelica...

                    by snookybeh on Sun Oct 30, 2005 at 05:01:14 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  It's about being consistent ... (none)
                      Clinton lied to a grand jury.
                      Libby lied to a grand jury.

                      Both are equally worthy of our condemnation, imo. As for what sentence should be given for their crime, I think there is latitude to consider the underlaying crime, but, as to the lying to a grand jury, both are equally guilty and equally dishonorable, imo.

      •  He lied about sex (4.00)
        If you can't see that, and understand that, than you're the one who is blind.

        Screw you about my credibility. I know a witch-hunt when I see one, and until people like you wake up to that fact, we're screwed.

        They should never have been allowed to get away with it. They should never have allowed my tax dollars going to a witch-hunt of a President. The Republican Congress who allowed this should have been removed. Its not any different than stealing elections.

        And if you even think for one minute that lying about a sexual indiscretion is even remotely close to the REAL "moral decay" of lying about a war, you really need to look at your priorities.

        The point is -- a witch-hunt of a PResident is 50 times more immoral than anything Clinton did. And what these guys have done to get us into a war is 1,000 times more immoral, if not more.

        <shakes head and walks away>

        "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross." -- Sinclair Lewis

        by Dunbar on Sun Oct 30, 2005 at 09:27:01 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site