SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: SilentZ who wrote (190819)6/18/2004 1:05:12 PM
From: Tenchusatsu  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1573215
 
Z, If Clinton had been single, I'd see NOTHING wrong with what he did -- not even a little wrong.

Lying under oath and obstructing justice, setting a bad moral example, redefining words to squirm out of any legal accoutability, getting sexual favors at work under taxpayer's dollars, taking advantage of a girl's naive starstruckedness (what if Monica was your daughter?) ...

No need to play moral relativism here. The Lewinsky scandal is being brought back only because the so-called "summer of Clinton" is starting. (http://www.insightmag.com/main.cfm/include/detail/storyid/687782.html) Too bad for Clinton, he's not off to a good start explaining away his role in the tango ...

The only person he wronged was Hillary.

Yeah, like Kobe, I'm sure Bill had to buy Hillary a seven-carat diamond ring just to restore their "relationship." LOL!

Tenchusatsu



To: SilentZ who wrote (190819)6/18/2004 1:39:48 PM
From: i-node  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1573215
 
BS. Lewinsky did what she did because she wanted to do it.

If Clinton had been single, I'd see NOTHING wrong with what he did -- not even a little wrong.


You are totally confused on this subject. The concept of "consensual sex" cannot exist between a near-teenager and the most powerful man in the world. While I'll agree there are some 20 year-olds who can handle it, on a basic ethical level Clinton had a total responsibility to avoid the situation. Altogether. And now, even he has admitted it (sort of).

Was Lewinsky influenced by Clinton's power? I don't know. But there is certainly an indiputable appearance that she was.

Unfortunately, as a kid in her early 20s she simply didn't have the experience to be engaged in any kind of relationship with Clinton. It wasn't HER fault. The responsiblity is TOTALLY on Clinton.

This is not to say Lewinsky couldn't have a consensual relationship with a DIFFERENT 50 year old; she could. The thing that makes it ethically and morally corrupt is his power. This is tantamount to some kind of sexual assault IMO. Although, I don't believe Clinton should be criminally responsible for it, since it is unprovable. (The Juanita Broaderrick rape clearly happened, and I'm very sorry she didn't put him out of commission at the time).

Power comes with responsibility. Clinton obviously abused his power (he has said this much) with regard to Lewinsky. The question of whether it ought to be a crime, well, that's a different question.

The world is full of criminals who obtain power and use it inappropriately. That, in fact, is what a criminal does -- whether it is a rapist, a murderer, bankrobber, or dope dealer. It is all about abusing power in some form or another. The thing that separates a powerful criminal from other powerful people is that non-criminals use the power ethically, morally, and legally. Clinton failed on two of these grounds.



To: SilentZ who wrote (190819)6/18/2004 3:40:50 PM
From: tejek  Respond to of 1573215
 
It is an interesting remark. An admission he abused his power over Lewinsky. Yet, somehow, he still doesn't quite get it.

BS. Lewinsky did what she did because she wanted to do it.

If Clinton had been single, I'd see NOTHING wrong with what he did -- not even a little wrong.

The only person he wronged was Hillary. And heck, you guys don't even like her, so why would you care?


Good post!

DR likes to think that Lewinsky was this helpless maiden that Clinton deflowered inspite of the fact Clinton was her third married man.

ted



To: SilentZ who wrote (190819)6/18/2004 6:16:24 PM
From: steve harris  Respond to of 1573215
 
Z,
Nothing?

How about lots of people are in jail today for committing perjury. Bill lost his law license instead of going to jail. And paid Paula Jones $750,000 was it? What else?

K?



To: SilentZ who wrote (190819)6/22/2004 2:07:18 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1573215
 
If Clinton had been single, I'd see NOTHING wrong with what he did -- not even a little wrong.

Having sex with a subordinate in the office and then lying about it under oath isn't even a little bit wrong?

Tim