To: tejek who wrote (137740 ) 6/21/2001 10:56:46 PM From: i-node Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1584948 He was president and I think should have been at a minimum more discreet More Discreet?!? Did you say more discreet?!? Jeez. How could you possibly do MORE to condone his activity? Clinton said his would be the most ethical presidency in history. Part of "ethics" is settings standards beyond even an appearance of impropriety. Yet, we got the most corrupt presidency in our lifetimes. Not only was the administration ethically bankrupt, it was morally bankrupt. Not a shred of decency, anywhere to be found. Not a single substantial accomplishment you can point to. More separate scandals than any president, perhaps in history. And the unprecedented pardoning of criminals who fled to avoid prosecution. This, ON TOP of sexually assaulting numerous women. Any you think he should have been more DISCREET? What kind of person thinks like that? I'll answer my own question: A liberal. A liberal bends the rules to meet his own requirements. There is no black and white, only gray. And after a while, the gray fades into a moral indistinction between "consensual" sex between adults and sexual assault of a near-child. If my 20-year old daughter was treated the way this 21-year old was, I'd want to the SOB tried for rape. In my mind it would take a sick person not to see it that way. There is a real danger when a president is morally bankrupt because others (for example, YOU) will come to justify his actions which lowers the standard for moral behavior. Thus, it is critical that our leaders be held to HIGHER standards of integrity and morality. The damage done by Clinton will take YEARS to repair.