Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Re: Remember: Clinton brought this on himself

Author:Stan Purington
Posted:12/20/1998; 11:02:04 PM
Topic:Cardboard Cutout People
Msg #:1534 (In response to 1499)
Prev/Next:1533 / 1535

I get the same feeling when I listen to people calling in to Rush Limbaugh's show except I think they are the suckers and uninformed. Maybe there are too many people assuming that because people view things different that they must be suckers. Sounds a little arrogant to think that way doesn't it.

Just the same, I don't think that Clinton is the solely to blame for the problems he faces. He had a lot of help along the way by a lot of people who probably shouldn't have been doing what they were.

Is there any real difference, morally that is, between Larry Flynt's approach to the political process, and Linda Tripp's approach? In either case we have people with a political or financial incentive trying to embarass or bring down elected officials be digging for dirt in their personnal lives. This is a subversion of the democratic process.

Without Linda Tripp, there would probably be no impeachment. Without Larry Flynt, Bob Livingston would still be Speaker of the House. Yes, both Mr Livingston and Mr. Clinton had major personnal failings. But, they still both remain dedicated, hard working men who are genuinely trying to serve their country. In my opinion Mr. Livingston should not have resigned. By doing so he encourages future muckrakers in their efforts.

Isn't there more danger to our democracy posed by the likes of Mr. Flynt and Ms. Tripp than by the men trying to avoid embarrassment and shame in the public eye?

I hear those on the pro impeachment side saying that we need to look at the big picture of perjury and cover-up rather than the sleazy sex details. The way I see it they are the ones who don't see the big picture. The problem is not the little lies and deceptions that the President may have issued, but rather the process that got us there, the so-called politics of destruction.

There are similarities to the campaign finance debate here. One side wants to punish those who they claim skirted the limits of the law. The other side looks at the big picture and recognizes that the basic system is the problem and needs to be changed.

Perhaps this difference in the way we approach these problems is why all of this talk that has been going on throughout this year really tends not to change anyone's mind.

There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:46:49 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.