Joho the Blog
An Entry from the Archives

I think it's pretty crappy that the Bush's can't compose themselves even for such an event as that.

How can anyone respect Clinton? A man caught red-handed with his cigars in inappropriate locations, not in some backstreet alley but in the White House.

David, do you have an age limit for posting? If so, I think it has been violated. I prefer to see adult conversation here, so if there is anything you can do about it, that would be great.

David, I also find it typical that the Wingnut fundies would try to tell black people what is acceptable at their own funeral service. They weigh in and tell us what we can do in our bedrooms, if we can die or not (Schiavo), and now they try to tell us how we can mourn our fallen.

They truly make me ill with how they force themselves into our most personal occasions. They obviously think that the goverment has a right to dictate how we live, love, and die.

I think the service was not WHITE enough for them!

How dare they criticize the people who knew and loved Coretta for the remarks they chose to make at her homecoming service.

If Bush Jr. was embarrassed, it's his own fault for being such a failed leader. Katrina was mentioned in the fact that it showed that the American Dream has not been true for all people. The fact that this true statement embarrassed Bush reflects on him, not the ceremony.

Perhaps he should not have attended a ceremony for someone he knew nothing about, and did not support or understand her cause. He attended to make a political statement, but we know better and the audience knew better. Nice try Georgie.

We worship the Prince of Peace, George. Born again Christian... right,... give me a break. PEACE.

He is the opposite of everything Mrs. King stood for and the world recognized that easily.

I love how conversations in America divide along party political lines. If I don't repsect Clinton, I'm obviously a rightwing nutjob. And if you do, you're obviously so far left that your neck is sprained. Any room for an independent, middle of the road view, one that cuts left here and right there, depending on the traffic? After all, if you only ever turn in one direction, you go around in circles.

Hi Noel. I stopped back by this morning to take back my remark about the adult conversation. I was pretty cranky yesterday, and I only 1/2 mean it today. You obviously have a right to voice your opinion. I do disagree though.

No worries, no worries at all, OLinda. It was a funny comment and made me laugh since it describes so many comments so well. ;-)

Noel and OLinda, it's heartening to see the two of you patch it up.

But, Noel, I was surprised at your intial comment. I don't see why Clinton's failure in this one regard means we can't respect him in other ways. Aren't we more complex than that?

In this case I would say no. I think it comes down to your personal character and judgment. Ultimately, the respect a person commands is based on these qualities because everything they do stems from them. They can make mistakes and be forgiven. No one is perfect. But when someone demonstrates such a weakness in their personal character and such very poor judgment when they occupy the most powerful office in the world, I can understand people losing respect. A President of a country should have the ability to sacrifice himself a little, deny his personal desires when it’s appropriate for the sake of his own reputation and his country’s reputation. The worst thing about the whole Monica Lewinsky fiasco is not that Clinton made himself a laughing stock, it’s why. It was so childish. And then he tried to talk his way out of it, the way a schoolboy caught stealing a candy bar might have done. Not what you’d expect from a grown man, never mind the President of the most powerful country on Earth.

Noel, Well, we disagree.

I'm not going to defend Clinton having sex with an intern. (The fact that Lewinsky worked for him bothers me more than that Clinton is an adulterer.) But adulterers lie. If you're an adulterer who doesn't lie, then you're in an "open marriage" and aren't cheating on your spouse. So, the fact that Clinton lied about it doesn't bother me hardly at all. As for what he did with a cigar: If we start judging people by how they have sex, very few are going to escape uncondemned.

So, Clinton had a weakness. Compared to the personal weaknesses of other presidents, Clinton's seems pretty minor to me. I still admire him for many other of his traits and for much of what he did in the world.

The fact that Lewinsky worked for him bothers me more than that Clinton is an adulterer

David, I'm not sure what you mean. I can't see why that matters since no matter who manages to secure a position around the President, the President can still be expected to be responsible for his own actions and have some understanding for the dignity of his position. And no matter what arrangements Clinton may or may not have had with his wife, the point is that it shows a personal lack of character and judgment, not to mention intelligence, to be caught with your pants down as President of the country, and to then subsequently try to lie your way out of the situation as poorly as Clinton did.

I can understand having other reasons for respecting a person, but I do not think Clinton has any integrity. Integrity may not be something you expect to find in a politician, but I couldn't see Jimmy Carter, for example, behaving like Clinton did. The fact that Jimmy Carter is a decent and honest man whose integrity is unquestioned means he is someone I can respect.

Well, first off, at the end of the day the presidency is just a job. An important job, a vital job, but still a job nonetheless.

This is one of the things that America different from other countries. There is no "majesty" in our government -- quite the contrary, and deliberately so.

So, to me, that Clinton lied about his personal affairs is only to be expected. After all, no one had any business asking about off-the-job issues like that in the first place.

Contrast that to Mr. Bush... Who has invaded a country, and ordered our brave men and women in the services to die and lose limbs for him... All so he could brag to his father. (See his abandonment of his family, including father and mother, on Thanksgiving 2003, followed by his "triumphal" return.)

So I don't deny that they both have foibles. I used to say Clinton was the least honest president, day-to-day, since Warren Harding.

Trouble is -- that's no longer true. He's been exceeded. At a far more terrible cost.

Noel, could Clinton's behavior be a problem that cannot be respected because it involved SEX? if his failing had been gambling say - could you still respect him for the way he governed? Something to think about.

Also, thank you for your gracious comment following my lacking apology.

PS Everybody, I know how to spell government. It was a typo! :)

OLinda, because it involved sex I think it was made more personally embarassing for Clinton since what people get up to in their bedrooms really is a private matter, but if it had concerned some of those other human weaknesses like, for example, gambling or drinking or embezzlement or whatever, it would still have caused me to lose respect for him if he had tried to talk his way out of it the same way he did over Lewinsky. It's not like he was lying so as to protect other people who had been loyal to him and were now in trouble for having done something dumb which would still be wrong, but I could understand it. Clinton's concern was for his own backside.

I don't think it is the nature of the scandal that matters so much. It is what it indicates and Clinton's example showed for the world to see a disturbing lack of personal judgment and character and ultimately integrity, not to mention a lack of understanding of, or a disregard for, the responsibilities of the position he was holding

Hal, though there may not be "majesty" in the American Presidency, I think it is reasonable to expect a little dignity and self-control in the person occupying that position and some regard for the responsibilities that go along with it. No one was asking Clinton to be celibate, but it is pretty sad when you've got a guy in the Presidency who leaps upon anything vaguely female, as he is reported to have done all through his Governorship and the race for the White House, and obviously, in the White House itself. Womanizer, gambler, drunkard, drug addict, bank robber, take your pick - these are not Presidential traits, or at least shouldn't be.

If there is one thing I can say about the photo showing Bush and his wife displaying not a shred of respect for the Clintons, it is that it would have been only polite for Bush to resist letting his personal feelings towards them show in public.

I think dressing up in a flight suit and landing on an aircraft carrier (delaying the return of the troops waiting to see loved ones) to declare "Mission accomplished" displays a far bigger character weakness, and one that is actually relevant to the office of the presidency.

David, I don't think staging a PR stunt demonstrates a flaw in someone's character, even in the much detested George Bush who at the very least is not internationally known for where he likes to store his fine cigars! Now if you'd said Bush had hoodwinked the country into invading Iraq under false pretenses, I'd say you had more of a point.

And in fairness, we shouldn't forget that Clinton without warning bombed Afghanistan and Sudan in retaliation for the terrorist bomb attacks on US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Who knows how he would have handled 9/11.

So, as far as I can tell, Noel, what you're really saying is you don't mind so much that Clinton had affairs, as that he got caught at it. And that's cool, and all -- as far as I can tell, that Mrs. Clinton's position, as well.

I guess my position is, my priorities for the Presidency have more to do with job performance than personal life. When it came to national security, Clinton delivered. When it came to the economy, Clinton delivered. When it came to respect for the USA abroad, Clinton delivered. When it came to preserving, protecting, and defending the Constitution, Clinton delivered. All of that is in stark contrast to the coward who currently occupies 1600 Pennsylvania.

Clinton obeyed his oath of office. Bush violates his every day. Which one has more integrity?

*^*^*

And, I should point out, this country has fought wars -- real wars, against real armies -- with the President having his mistress living directly in the White House. Take a look at "No Ordinary Time", a history of the White House during WWII, and observe the sleeping arrangments in the residence.

Oddly enough, I'll take getting out of the Great Depression, and beating Hitler, Mussolini, and Tojo, as evidence of genuine integrity, instead of a facade to keep Mrs. Grundy happy.

But right now you're sounding like a voyeur who's complaining people shouldn't be doing that sort of thing in a place where you can watch with binoculars and listen with microphones.

Very well organized site. I particularly liked the resources section.
Will use it to plan my next trip to NWT. See you soon.

you don't mind so much that Clinton had affairs, as that he got caught at it.

That's right. I mean how stupid can a President be? It's not that it's okay to have an affair if you're not caught, it's that it is particularly stupid when you are caught, especially when you're the President since it's obvious you don't have brains enough not to be. Remember that warm embrace he gave her while a barrage of cameras flashed?

When it came to respect for the USA abroad, Clinton delivered.

You must be joking.

Clinton obeyed his oath of office.

"I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Faithfully, Hal?

And, I should point out, this country has fought wars -- real wars, against real armies -- with the President having his mistress living directly in the White House.

So what? FDR was unfaithful, therefore I can cheat on my wife too? Or because of FDR's example, it's okay for future Presidents to cheat on their wives and lie about it to the country?

people shouldn't be doing that sort of thing in a place where you can watch with binoculars and listen with microphones.

Well, yeah. Aside from the complete lack of moral fibre in the man, the Monica Lewinsky fiasco was a test of intelligence and Clinton failed it ... miserably.

"When it came to respect for the USA abroad, Clinton delivered.

You must be joking."

Speaking as a European, I have to agree that it's completely true.
Europeans had no problems with the image that Clinton projected of the USA.

We were all mildly amused at the moral indignation towards his sexual life.
We couldn't see any relevant connection between his professional competence and his sexual mistakes in his private life, there was nothing new or shocking about a man having an affair to us.

It happens to perfectly good and bad people every day, for a myriad of reasons, it in itself is not an intelligent measure by which to measure a mans whole ideology.
It might even be that Hillary was driving him crazy with an asexual celibacy, for example.

If you don't think respected business executives do this and a lot more and always have done, you haven't met any.
Yes, I know that Clinton was not a business executive, but I bet you respect some of them, and I bet many of them have committed the same moral sin, yet that would not waiver many peoples opinions of their professional competence.

Professional competence is even more important in a leader of a nation than a leader of a couple of hundred or thousand employees.
If my leader is unfaithful, great, I hope his wife whups his ass, but as long as he does his job of protecting me and my economy, his sex life is his private sex life.

Pretty much the whole Western world has a strong dislike for Bush and his admin, as does most of the undeveloped world, as does half of the USA.
In fact, it's only the 0.05% of the world that voted for Bush that doesn't view him as being a clumsy, rude, and dangerous ideologist who's absolutely nr.1 solution for everything in international affairs is to bang square pegs into round holes until the board starts to crack, merely because the USA currently has the biggest hammer.
This absolutely reflects on all americans, to us in Europe, Canada, Australia, etc.
He has severely changed our perception of americans.

Europeans had no problems with the image that Clinton projected of the USA.

Ha! I'm European.

Hal your position seems contrite with many modern liberals. That is believe any position as long as it suits your party.

I find it astounding that you find Clinton's personal life had nothing to do with him the president. How contrar... He purgered himself under oath, wihch lead to his impeachment.

This alone says much about his character, and should thus be used as a rule about the man. Thus what else did this habitual liar lie about? The man had his finger on the button.

It is also obvious you are not a fan of the truth when it suits President Bush. He did not invade a country, the US finally did what the UN should have done. The fact they draft 16 resolutions is a clear sign that Saddam was in control, not the UN.

It is amazing at this date that modern liberals also haven't begun reading the facts from Saddam's on journals or the claims from Gen Sada. He had WDMs, and after a dam collapse in Syria back 2003 found an opportunity to ferry them over the border to Lebanon and Syria.

But since you must have your own facts, I'd like to read more on what you think the following:

- When it came to National Security Clinton Delivered
When and how? Giving North Korea Nuke technology?

- When it came to the economy Clinton Delivered?
When and how? George Bush Sr Tax cuts helped create a win fall into the 90s which Clinton benefits from. But please explain your rational here.

- When it came to respect for the USA abroad Clinton delivered. No need to answer this one, he kissed butt more than the French. That is a given, bend over backwards willy

- When it came to preserving, protecting and defending the contitution Clinton delivered?
When, how and are you kidding? The man had his hand on a bible and swore to uphold US laws, then proceed to lie and break US laws. It was an illegal act for Clinton to launch cruise missles like he did. The man was out of control, but always kept his eye on the polls, got to have high ratings!

I find it amusing that you call Bush a coward. He has stood up against the gutless wonder called the UN. He has done more to beat back Trial Lawyers who are financially ruining America.

Clinton said after every American bombing (Cole, 2 US emabassies, World Trade Towers 93, etc...) that he would track down and make them pay. He did nothing of the sort because his poll ratings would have suffered. No Spine, no gut for action, that is a coward my friend.

And if you truely believe your comments inferring that Iraq and Afghanistan are not real wars, who aren't real enemeies, then if your views prevale, then the US will not.

Islamic fasict are not interested in destroying the US and Israel, they are interested in converting the entire world to Islam. As a result that means destroying freedom and liberties.

Chatting on blogs is fun and all, but read something other than CNN and Mother Jones.