Excuse me for a somewhat lengthy off-topic response, but I've just got to respond to previous posts about Reno and Clinton, and to get my feelings about Clinton off of my chest.
In my opinion, Janet Reno is her own person, not owned by anyone including Clinton. That applied during Waco, it applied during Ruby Ridge, and it applies now. She sets her own agenda and lets the chips fall where they may. For that she is to be admired.
As for Clinton, I'm really sick about this situation. In my opinion, he's been one of the better presidents we've had (I realize that many disagree with me, so be it), and I will hate to see him go if it comes to that, which is increasingly likely.
Its clear that Bill Clinton is very "sexually active", which I just plain don't even care about; in my view, sex between consenting adults, even married consenting adults, is not, in and of itself, AUTOMATICALLY wrong. I don't acknowledge that Bill Clinton has been deceitful to Hillary (which I WOULD consider wrong), although it could be that such is the case. Ms. Clinton cannot help but be aware of the situation and of having been aware of it for a decade or more. I don't know what the relationship is between them, but it may be such that there is no deceit between them, they may have an "arrangement" that works for both of them, and if so, in my view, that aspect of the situation is simply none of anybody else's business.
As for Monica, she is a single adult, and free to do as she wishes as long as it was truly consensual and not by direct or indirect force.
In dealing with the public, yes, Bill Clinton has apparently lied about this, but any politician would have, indeed most politicians and presidents have lied about much more serious matters. Would I prefer to have completely honest presidents and politicians ? Absolutely. Have any such people been viable candidates ? Not generally; they run (Paul Tsongas and the guy with the bow tie might have been two), but they don't get nominated or elected. In our current political system (which is far from perfect), Presidents come from the ranks of seriously political people, and I believe that Bill Clinton, while not perfectly honest, is MORE honest, and more disposed towards putting the nation's best interest first than MOST of the politicians who have any realistic shot at the presidency, or for that matter, than most of our past presidents.
By the way, my apologies to Jimmy Carter, who was and is a most honorable human being and an exception to everything I've just said, except that he was, regretfully, not a very good president. Which, in part, is my point: the people who say that character is EVERYTHING, are just plain wrong. Mind you, I'm NOT saying that character is nothing, it is important, but it's NOT everything, in my opinion. Further, I believe that Clinton's character is actually reasonably good, once you get past the fact that his views and attitudes regarding sexuality are clearly very liberal (even by my standards).
All of that said, there is, however, the probability that Bill Clinton lied under oath, and the possibility that he encouraged perjury by others and/or obstructed justice. Given the nature of the lie and the circumstances, I would probably -- with great reluctance -- forgive the former. I probably could not forgive the latter. What we have to do now is wait for the facts to come out, which is happening all too rapidly.
Finally, the one thing of which I am absolutely certain is that this whole affair (no pun intended) cannot be anything but a tragedy not only for Bill Clinton, but for the entire country. I know that many don't like Clinton, and will cheer his departure whenever it occurs, but I don't believe that this situation is going to have been in ANYBODY's best interest.
Barry Watzman |
