Do you feel different about Bill Clinton's sexual past?

[Crossless2.0]

So I was way to young to know about this while it was happening, but compared to the kind of stuff Donald Trump thinks is completely normal, what did Bill Clinton do wrong?

You mean other than use the power and prestige of the office of the President to seduce a junior staffer, risk exposing himself to all manner of blackmail, lie about the affair under oath, and involve the country in a completely avoidable impeachment hearing?

And that's just the Lewinsky affair.

Mind you, I don't give a damn about his marriage. His exploits were well known before 1992. If Hillary put up with that shit, that's on her. Power couples are strange creatures, anyway. It's the carelessness with the office that bothered, and continues to bother, me. If you're going to slither through miles of shit to win the Presidency, is it really so hard to keep it in your pants for 4-8 years to accomplish what you set out to do and protect your legacy?

---

Trump lies to the public all the time and he has most certainly had sexual relations with many women. What makes one impeachable and the other electable?

Lying under oath is the difference. Trump just lies as a matter of course, but as long as he avoids doing so after saying the magic words, he can't be impeached for being a dishonest jackass.

But don't worry, there's still plenty of time for him to perjure himself and, if not him, Junior or Jared.

[shadow]

So I was way to young to know about this while it was happening, but compared to the kind of stuff Donald Trump thinks is completely normal, what did Bill Clinton do wrong?

You mean other than use the power and prestige of the office of the President to seduce a junior staffer, risk exposing himself to all manner of blackmail, lie about the affair under oath, and involve the country in a completely avoidable impeachment hearing?

"When you're a star, they let you do it"

Lying under oath is the difference. Trump just lies as a matter of course, but as long as he avoids doing so after saying the magic words, he can't be impeached for being a dishonest jackass.

Morally this makes no difference to me. With Trump being proud of sexually harassing women vs. Clinton being ashamed of it / denying it, I don't see a clear winner.

[Catholic_Lady]

He was accused of rape by at least one woman, if I remember correctly.

Okay... but it's not all that hard to accuse a high-profile person of rape. I'd bet every president has been accused of rape. That doesn't mean much on its own because if it does a lot can be achieved by lying about it. You'd need a conviction or something for that to be meaningful in my opinion.

The woman's name was Juanita Broaddrick. She did an interview on Dateline (in 1999) where she spilled the beans about everything that happened. But since she didn't admit to it until 20 years after the alleged incident, there was no way to find "proof" or take this to court at that time. She could be lying, she could not be. Who knows. But the allegations do exist.

[Whateverist]

I wonder if in a post Weinstein world, where people are having a new understanding aboutsexual harassment by men in power, if anybody feels different about Bill Clinton?

It would be hard to imagine a feminist today defending him the way that they did in the 1990s, i.e. Gloria Stienems slut shaming article.

https://hotair.com/archives/2017/11/14/a...otect-guy/

Nope, about the same.  Not a big fan of his sexual predatorishness.

[Haipule]

You mean other than use the power and prestige of the office of the President to seduce a junior staffer, risk exposing himself to all manner of blackmail, lie about the affair under oath, and involve the country in a completely avoidable impeachment hearing?

"When you're a star, they let you do it"

Lying under oath is the difference. Trump just lies as a matter of course, but as long as he avoids doing so after saying the magic words, he can't be impeached for being a dishonest jackass.

Morally this makes no difference to me. With Trump being proud of sexually harassing women vs. Clinton being ashamed of it / denying it, I don't see a clear winner.

Clinton was impeached for saying, "I did not have sex with that woman" under oath and on national TV. He also said, regarding smoking marijuana, "I did not inhale". Partly I believe him because he also doesn't know what a cigar is for. Or does he???

[Fireball]

I wonder if in a post Weinstein world, where people are having a new understanding aboutsexual harassment by men in power, if anybody feels different about Bill Clinton?

It would be hard to imagine a feminist today defending him the way that they did in the 1990s, i.e. Gloria Stienems slut shaming article.

https://hotair.com/archives/2017/11/14/a...otect-guy/

At least he's not a child rapist unlike the current incumbent.

This is a poster child comment for the term "Damning with faint praise".  

Ninja'd by Vorly.

[Mermaid]

Does anyone feel differently about Clarence Thomas?  Our society has evolved...much as the republicunts hate to admit it.

Completely different thing than Clinton. Monica Lewinsky was a starstruck and willing participant. Anita Hill was sexually harassed.

[CapnAwesome]

He was accused of rape by at least one woman, if I remember correctly.

Okay... but it's not all that hard to accuse a high-profile person of rape. I'd bet every president has been accused of rape. That doesn't mean much on its own because if it does a lot can be achieved by lying about it. You'd need a conviction or something for that to be meaningful in my opinion.

---

I'm not comparing him to trump. He stands on his own merits. The only defense cannot be comparing him to others. Do you see the problem with that.

Well, it's sort of the topic of this thread to reconsider Bill Clinton based on current events. Nothing should objectively change after Wienstein if we're not comparing.

Secondly, what I'm getting at is that he was impeached for lying to the public about having sexual relations with that woman, right? Trump lies to the public all the time and he has most certainly had sexual relations with many women. What makes one impeachable and the other electable?

Lol, some people think of a way to tie trump into everything. If we all got to excuse our behavior by comparing it to Trump, the lot of us would be up for Nobel prizes. I'd say it has limited relevance, other than as an easy way to change topic and excuse the behavior of those we selectively endorse. Perhap there is nothing wrong with Weinstein either, if you are going to compare him with trump.

---

Does anyone feel differently about Clarence Thomas?  Our society has evolved...much as the republicunts hate to admit it.

Completely different thing than Clinton. Monica Lewinsky was a starstruck and willing participant. Anita Hill was sexually harassed.

And all the women who said Clinton harassed or exposed himself to them were lying?

[chimp3]

I have always known the difference between Clinton's consensual affair with Lewinsky and predatory behavior with Paula Jones. Nothing has changed. I tend to think politicians are scum and have never voted Republican or Democrat. At times I am amused in a dark, morbid sort of way. More so these days.

[Mermaid]

Okay... but it's not all that hard to accuse a high-profile person of rape. I'd bet every president has been accused of rape. That doesn't mean much on its own because if it does a lot can be achieved by lying about it. You'd need a conviction or something for that to be meaningful in my opinion.

---

Well, it's sort of the topic of this thread to reconsider Bill Clinton based on current events. Nothing should objectively change after Wienstein if we're not comparing.

Secondly, what I'm getting at is that he was impeached for lying to the public about having sexual relations with that woman, right? Trump lies to the public all the time and he has most certainly had sexual relations with many women. What makes one impeachable and the other electable?

Lol, some people think of a way to tie trump into everything. If we all got to excuse our behavior by comparing it to Trump, the lot of us would be up for Nobel prizes. I'd say it has limited relevance,  other than as an easy way to change topic and excuse the behavior of those we selectively endorse. Perhap there is nothing wrong with Weinstein either,  if you are going to compare him with trump.

---

Completely different thing than Clinton. Monica Lewinsky was a starstruck and willing participant. Anita Hill was sexually harassed.

And all the women who said Clinton harassed or exposed himself to them were lying?

No, I did not say that.