Kerry should address Clinton's mistake.

[gulliver]

Perhaps he already has...

At some point, Kerry should write off the Clinton liability so he can capitalize on the Clinton assets. Kerry should remind people of what a successful presidency looks like, and even get the Big Dog out on the trail. Kerry can't do that if he doesn't stake out a position on Clinton. Without resolving the Clinton disgrace, even taking advice from Clinton is a net negative for Kerry. Kerry must contrast himself with Clinton on the matter of character.

How many of us argue with Republicans and independents every day about what has happened to our country since Bush took over? And how many of those conversations end up with some variation of the once-funny "yeah, Clinton sure liked his cigars" or whatever?

Dems are under the zeitgeist. Our people are braver, our goals worthier, our plans more positive and intelligent, our candidate more respectable than the Republicans'... Why then isn't Kerry winning in a landslide?

It's Clinton's disgrace. It needs to be resolved.

I resolve it by hating the sinner and loving the successful, world-loved president. How has Kerry resolved it? Does it even need to be resolved?

Bush is Clinton without the brains, the good heart, or the successful record. Somehow this has to come across. You can't get at Bush's lack of character until you bring Clinton into focus.

[Libby2]

1. What mistake would that be?

In his personal life?

I totally disagree.

[gulliver]

5. As president of the United States, you can't just ...

... "diddle" with some intern in the White House. Even Clinton admits it was disgraceful. Clinton has resolved it, but the Democratic and Republican parties have not. More importantly, voters have not, IMO.

I just don't think we realize how much damage we suffered and will continue to suffer if we don't find an accounting category for the Clinton liability. It's a tiny liability, it's personal, but it has to be realized.

[TexasBushwhacker]

11. It would be more of a liability to bring it up

Kerry is not losing any votes because of Clinton's infidelity. Gore may have, but let's not forget, HE WON THE POPULAR VOTE.

[Libby2]

13. It has nothing to do with Kerry

or the democratic party.

ZILCH

[Pepperbelly]

22. so f*cking what?

He is a man. Men make mistakes. Clinton made a mistake. Clinton is human.

Geez, how long do you think this has to be flailed?

:eyes:

[gulliver]

27. Pepperbelly, I'm not the only one flailing it.

It is alive and well in the zeitgeist. Clinton's one mistake has become a part of our culture that his hugely successful presidency has not. It's all so crazy that I can hardly stand to bring it up.

Our side is extremely touchy about it and in denial. Their side is extremely buoyed and fundie/faux-outraged by it. But it's there. It's in comedy routines every day. It's in nearly every political conversation I have with independents and Republicans.

I wish it weren't there, but it is. The insanity of it underlies Bush's perception as a man of character. That's how bad it is. Bush is a man of character.

My greatest fear is that if we don't find some way to resolve this to everyone's satisfaction we are going to have to suffer a lot more as a country.

[Pepperbelly]

33. they need some new material. This is waaaaay dusty.

I don't think any significant portion of the population that would even consider voting for Kerry would even think of this. The only ones who would think of this are the legions of ditto-heads who would vote for George W. if he ate a baby on live tv.

[Heath.Hunnicutt]

43. Gulliver you are right that others think of it a lot

My Republican relatives bring Clinton's affair up all the time. I think the poster who remarked that we need to find an appropriate accounting category for his affair and then set it aside next to his tremendous accomplishments.

[Democrat 4 Ever]

76. The only time it has been mentioned

is right here - when you raised the question. IMHO - its your issue but not anyone else who cares about this election.

Most people (65-67%) of the citizens - at the height of the "scandal" still supported Clinton. I personally did not elect him pope, my moral compass, guru, or even really wondered if he was a good father and husband (hoped he was, just because it is what a decent person tries to be) - I wanted the smartest guy for the job. He got my vote and he kept his promise. He did almost everything he said he would for this country - job growth, surplus of funds, didn't start any unprovoked wars - just wished he wasn't sucker punched about health care and Ken Starr. Can you imagine where our country would be if the nation hadn't wasted eight years and $70 million dollars on BS?

[gulliver]

94. Republicans and independents I know don't think ...

... the $70 million was that much of a waste. The dress vindicates them, they think. I'm not saying it's right.

[BootinUp]

36. wrong post (delete)

[Karenina]

61. Gimme a DIDDLING break.

WHO cut the cheese? x(

[Habibi]

84. Voters haven't resolved it? Really?

But didn't Clinton leave office with phenomenally high ratings, despite all the impeachment, blue-dress bullshit?

No. It's the Pubbies that keep trying to make it an issue. The rest of the world has moved on. And rightly so.

[mbali]

89. That's bull. Kerry does not need to be the morality police

in order to win. That's why Gore picked Lieberman and we see where THAT got us.

I don't know of one single person who is less likely to vote for Kerry because he has not publicly condemned Bill Clinton. And anyone who claims they are is likely a lying Republican who had no intention of voting for Kerry anyway.

We are not suffering a damned thing because of Clinton. We are suffering because far too many Democratic wimps have bought into the notion that Republicans are trying to sell us in order to denigrate the strongest and most effective political leader our party has had in a generation.

Kerry should apolozize for Clinton only after Bush apologizes for himself, his father, Newt Gingrich, Ronald Reagan, Dick Cheney, and Tom DeLay.

[mopinko]

2. bill clinton was no disgrace to me

if kerry wants to address what happened to clinton, he should send people to see "the hunting of the president" and get david brock out on the campaign trail with him.
but big dog is laid up, if you recall. i am hoping that he will be writing op-eds.

[Bandit]

3. Clinton went out one of the most popular Presidents of all time

I think you are barking up the wrong tree. Clinton is a major asset and I only hope he gets well enough to pitch in some more. His speeches are so inspiring one can't help but agree with what he says.

[tjdee]

4. Whaaa? What mistake was that?

Are you suggesting that John Kerry dig up Clinton's affair AGAIN?

Didn't we spend enough time on that?

The man hasn't been president for four years. If you are talking Iraq war, bad economy, and poor healthcare, and someone comes up with a dumbass "Clinton sure liked his cigars", they are basically saying they have no defense, or that they really are as stupid as they look.

Either way, that person isn't going to be receptive to anything you say, even if John Kerry begs forgiveness for Clinton's evil evil blowjobs.

[TexasBushwhacker]

6. Don't think so

First off, with Clinton recovering from quadruple bypass surgery, he has no business being on the campaign trail.

Second, Kerry is going to have a whole different situation handed over to him when he's elected than Bill Clinton had. First and foremost, he will have to deal with the situation in Iraq. He will have to deal with homeland security issues. I agree that Clinton's presidency was successful, in spite of the neocons trying to drag him down, but we are a different country now, with different problems. Some issues are the same, but many are not.

[Catch22Dem]

7. I cringe when I hear "sinner"

Waaay to fundie for my taste. I'd vote for Bill Clinton today if I could. Kerry doesn't need to address shit.

[gulliver]

14. That's not the point, really. It's being reasonable.

We need to admit Clinton's mistake. It was a huge mistake.

People who can't admit their mistakes can never be trusted. I'm not going out on a limb to say that either. It's completely obvious.

I'm not suggesting that Kerry make a speech about this. I'm just suggesting that when asked, Kerry should address the situation realistically.

The Republicans impeached the best president we've had in the last 40-odd years!! Why aren't they paying a price for it? We haven't admitted our mistake, so their grave crime goes unpunished.

[Catch22Dem]

30. How is that a huge mistake?

And why is it Kerry's responsibility to bring it up. Kerry didn't do it and Clinton isn't an elected official. So, what's the point? Unless, of course, you think it would be a good idea to get the media talking about Clinton's penis again. Yeah, that's smart! :eyes:

[mbali]

90. Why do WE need to admit Clinton's "mistake?" Clinton admitted it,

he was impeached, his reputation has been scarred. There's no reason for all Democrats to have to feel collective guilt because of Clinton's personal failing.

What makes you think that if Democrats suddenly start throwing around "mea culpas" for Clinton's personal behavior, we'll suddenly change our electoral prospects?

Please.

[Crachet2004]

99. I've got a better idea-ignore Clinton's past, and accept what aid...

An expresident who is still hugely popular with many, can give us.

Once Clinton heals a little, he will be right back out there slugging away for us, and if the GOP brings up any "mistakes" on his part, as you have, the whole country will believe they are IDIOTS!

Let the GOP dredge up trash from the past-if they dare.

On second thought, while we are atoneing for Clinton, why don't we do a confession about JFKennedy and Marilyn Monroe.

That has really tortured my soul long enough...I just gotta talk about it. lol!!!!

[underpants]

8. Are YOU, are WE, better off than four years ago?

A tried and true political strategy. We know what the answer is.

[Nite Owl]

9. Ok they both lied.

That's where the similarities end. * lied and he has the blood of thousands on his hands and we are sinking in a river of tears. What Clinton did was no one's business so if they bring it tell them to weigh the outcomes.

[Clinton Crusader]

10. I dont associate DISGRACE with CLINTON

The entire matter was a PERSONAL thing between him, his wife and his daughter, if you want to include her. How can you call a mistake in his personal life a disgrace when you have a giant asshat here who has had, what?, how many tens of thousands die under his watch, AT LEAST 4000 of them Americans???

Bill Clinton never disgraced ME. And before we drag the man out on the trail, yes Im fully aware how he is needed, let's let him recover from quadruple bypass a bit.

ADDED - I wonder how many HUMANS could endure the scrutiny and persecution he did and come out of it at the end with their sanity and popularity meter intact? Read or watch 'The Hunting Of The President'. This was hatched LONG before he became president. They WERE and ARE terrified of him, and if GOD FORBID were one of them, he would have skated through the entire thing without a scratch.
:kick:

[BootinUp]

37. agreed, the disgrace was the 70 million dollar witch hunt. n/t

[gulliver]

45. It isn't what you and I think that matters.

The Starr witch hunt was a major, major disgrace. The impeachment was a crime against the constitution. America itself was disgraced in the eyes of the world by Starr and the Republicans.

Why then are the Republicans in power right now despite the fact that objectively they have arguabl harmed the country and its future, possibly irreparably?

Because a lie fights for them. Because definite, DNA-level knowledge of the violation of a social taboo outweighs most people's hazy understanding of our country's government and political situation.

Sex sells ... or as Joni Mitchell says "Sex Kills."

[mbali]

91. They're not in power because Clinton got a blow job . . .

They're in power because Al Gore was totally freaked out by Clinton, he made ridiculous mistakes, allowed the election to be close enough for the Republicans to steal it.

This had nothing to do with Clinton.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

12. Totally disagree. Kerry did not commit this indiscretion, nor did the

Democratic Party. If Repubs in this country insist on electing losers like shrubya using Monica as an excuse they have only themselves to blame.

It would be unseemly and WRONG for Kerry to apologize for a personal indiscretion of Clinton's. I just couldn't disagree with you more.

[gulliver]

19. Kerry doesn't have to apologize for it.

And Clinton already has. Kerry just needs a position on it. It is a major factor in the current election as in the last one. This one little thingClinton did is a media, psychological, political, and motivating morality fable. It ain't over, even if we wish it was.

I have argued that the very ability to Gore-ize Democrats stems from Clinton's peccadillo, IMO. The world isn't like it ought to be. It's like it is. Everything changed when the blue dress showed up. You can say it is maddening that such foolishness could have such weight on our politics, but it's hard to argue that it isn't true.

Republicans are foolish enough to let Clinton's one disgraceful act justify a swine like George W. Bush (who is not even a true conservative). They can't point to Clinton's presidency with anything but humility. Bush's presidency is a disgrace. But Republicans can still point to Clinton's private parts and get a laugh.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

23. I agree it was a major factor in 2000. But I disagree it is in 2004.

I don't think it's an issue in this race. On this we simply disagree.

[mbali]

92. Why does Kerry need a "position" on Clinton's behavior?

It's not an issue. It's over. It's having no effect on this election. Why are you so obsessed over it?

Do you think Bush should take a "position" on Iran Contra or Watergate?

[unfrigginreal]

15. Where is this bullshit coming from?

That's got to be one of the dumbest ideas I've ever read. Yeah, let's get out there and call Clinton a liar, that'll do it for us. Jeesh :eyes:

[Libby2]

16. I agree

let's kill this thread.

[bushwakker]

17. You mean the 8 years of peace and prosperity mistake?

wtf are you talking about? if al gore had run with bc instead of running aaginst him - he'd be running a re-election campaign right now.

[gulliver]

24. That part isn't the mistake. Clinton himself has admitted ...

... the mistake I am talking about.

Gore didn't use Clinton. Gore himself could not resolve the politics of it, and he was our presidential candidate.

I fear that if we don't admit this all-too-trivial-all-too-important mistake, we will need to suffer tremendous loss as a country before we recover our sanity. People won't forgive Clinton's one little peccadillo if we continue to defend it or pretend that it doesn exist or doesn't matter.

The act itself doesn't matter. It's political and historical consequences do.

[SammyWinstonJack]

18. What mistake?

Kerry should bring up something was no ones business to begin with? Sure thing, bring it up and that's all the Media Whores will talk about non stop. Oh look, Kerry is apologizing for Clinton's "disgracing of the Presidency." :eyes: Sounds like a winning strategy to me. :silly:

[Pepperbelly]

20. I think you're tripping on this and way off on the reality.

To demonstrate this, consider one simple question: if Clinton were running against Bushie, what would the poll results be?

If you think they would resemble the polls against Kerry, I think you're way off base. I believe that Clinton would have Bushie in the high 30s.

[Pathwalker]

21. Better a Prez who GOT sucked than one who just SUCKS!

Shuts 'em up every time. Kerry is not Clinton, he is not responsible for Clinton, and pushing Clinton into this election is just another right-wing attempt to get the onus OFF Bush. Clinton is just SO....
LAST CENTURY!!!

[Libby2]

25. roflmao

:)

[unblock]

26. NO ONE should apologize for someone else's PERSONAL failings

the republicans should have apologized for watergate
the republicans should have apologized for iran-contra.
the list goes on, way on.

but the reason for needing an apology for these types of things is that these were matters of ideology and policy. without an apology, it's reasonable to assume that the next republican agrees with, and would continue, such policies and tactics.

but personal failings don't carry over the same way. no one (other than someone who is never voting for a democrat anyway) assumes that kerry will cheat on his wife just because clinton did.

that's just nuts.

[gulliver]

34. He doesn't have to apologize, unblock.

In fact, Kerry's position could simply be that he believes Clinton owed and gave an apology for "dirtying himself" while in the White House.

The personal failings aren't the problem, and they don't attach to Kerry. What attaches to every Dem, including you and me is an admiration for and a belief in the presidency of Clinton. Among reasonable people, Clinton's success is understood -- even reasonable Republicans. But the others all need time before they will let us Clinton-lovers (I'm of two minds) take unmuddied pride in the accomplishments of our eight years.

We don't have time for this all to fade naturally. Bush is threatening now.

Clinton was crucified politically. Those that follow are now subject to open mockery over the slightest cause -- sometimes as in Gore's case even without cause. We still have not recovered face, IMO.

But it's just an opinion.

[bread_and_roses]

107. "Dirtying himself"???

and below you say Clinton committed "the evil and un-American act "??? I hate to tell you but infidelity is about as American as apple-pie (Americans being humans) - and just as popular. People who think in terms like "dirtying himself" and "evil and un-American" about an act of consensual adult sex, and are still obsessing over it years and years later, are the ones with an issue - not Kerry. And anyone letting an old affair by a previous President decide a vote in 2004 is a lost cause, not to mention certifiable.

To even buy into the spin that Clinton's sex life is somehow about "Democrats" is to accept the premise that somehow "Republicans" are more moral than "Democrats" and have better "family values." This utter swill should NEVER NEVER be allowed to define the debate, which is what you are suggesting.

[readmylips]

28. Bill O'Reilly...is that you?

Bush Jr should address Nixon's, Reagan's, Bush Sr's big whoppers...

[gulliver]

44. Shut up!!

:-)

[JohnLocke]

29. I stopped reading at "Clinton liability."

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

31. Its such a fine line, between...

"Hide Thread" and "Nominate Topic for Homepage". Sigh...

[troubleinwinter]

38. Garbage

Let Bush apologize for his OWN transgressions against the American people, the Iraqi people and all who have and will suffer as a result of his megalomaniacal lies and slash & burn policies.

[no name no slogan]

32. But Kerry ain't Clinton-- so why should he appologize?

The only one who can appologize for Clinton's actions is Bill Clinton. And in case you haven't been paying attention to the news, he's in the hospital recovering from a double bypass operation. I don't think he'll be hitting the campaign trail any time in the immediate few days.

Why should Kerry compare himself to Clinton, anyway? Doesn't Kerry have a 20-year Senate record? Why shouldn't he run on those noteworthy accomplishments?

Maybe if we stopped giving so much weight to the issues of yesterday and paid attention to the very important issues of today we'd make some headway with potential voters.

Kerry is starting to do that now. He's attacking Bush on his failures, and touting his own strengths. He's got the fight in him, now he's using it.

[Evergreen Emerald]

39. Paaaleeeeesseeee

This is a joke. Bush has made so many fatal errors that have sent America spiraling into the abiss they are too numerous to count. Kerry could address one of Bush's mistakes a day and still not cover them all before election. What a crock of Cheney.

[gulliver]

42. Notice how we keep bringing up Kerry "apologizing"

I didn't say that, but it immediately occurs to everyone that I might be. That's because the context of what Clinton did can be construed as demanding an apology. Clinton has given one. Should Kerry be asked about it or be called upon to comment, Kerry's only obligation, IMO, would be to say that Clinton definitely did something for which he (Clinton) should apologize, Clinton apologized, and that should settle the matter.

Defending Clinton's one big mistake (as many here, including me) are naturally inclined to do is counter-productive. I often ridicule the "Clenis" fixation of Republicans, and that satire is effective. But humbly and in all seriousness admitting that Clinton did make a mistake and I did (and do) disapprove of it is, in a word, the big thing to do.

Kerry is doing good attacking Bush now. But part of the reason he is not getting through is that people see the future very, very poorly. They judge a tree by its fruits, and that is necessarily an appeal to the past.

Bush's record is just sitting there like a turd in the wading pool. But somehow Kerry scores lower in character than the characterless, simpering fraud George W. Bush. In part Kerry (and Gore before him, and you and I) are paying the Clinton character tax. It's not fair. It's not rational.

You can never dispense with the past. You have to come to understand it and resolve it. The past is always with us. Look at the Middle East. We all live in the Middle East.

[Crachet2004]

100. Clinton didn't make a mistake-Clinton got a BJ. The mistake was the...

BIG FREAKING DEAL the narrowminded made of it. No sexual act is a mistake, in and of itself, and the only people he needed to apologize to were his family.

And he did that, in front of God and everybody.

[Doohickie]

35. "and even get the Big Dog out on the trail."

Well, he had this little thing called bypass surgery that has a 3 month recuperation time.....

[gulliver]

48. I didn't know how long it takes to recover from the bypass.

I guess it takes longer than I thought. I really don't know. My grandfather had a quadruple bypass and was in much better shape then before the surgery in only a few weeks, IIRC.

Maybe Clinton could not make a speaking appearance; maybe not. I have to think that if anyone could find a way to get in front of a microphone with a chest full of barely-healed surgical wounds, it's Clinton.

[Doohickie]

62. There's a difference between getting up and around

and being able to actually become active.

It's a question of stamina.

[Tsiyu]

40. Yeah Sure, But it was Starr's Disgrace

Unless you actually believe there has never been a Republican President getting a little on the side in the White House. If you believe that, you're as naive as a 2-year old. The disgrace is that Repukes HAVE NO GRACE. They focused on Clinton's pee-pee instead of National Security.

It's time for America to get over their fascination with Clinton's penis. This is a sure sign of a very juvenile populace, and a vindictive Repuke party. They stop at nothing to win.

Kerry should emphasize Clinton's positives and leave the affair to the tabloids and the Repukes to salivate over.

[PittLib]

41. Why not leave the opportunistic moralizing to the ...

Repubs? They're better at it.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

46. Wow

Congratulations. The hands-down silliest, most inane thing I have read on this forum.

How crazy. Let's see, I think I'll bring up the personal affair of a president who served four years ago and apologize for it, even though I had nothing to do with it and it isn't in the news at all.

Uh-huh, makes a lot of sense, right.

You need to go sell that somewhere else, we ain't buying it.

[troubleinwinter]

47. Betcha Freepers would enjoy discussing such nonsense no end.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

50. No, I think the idea that DUers should raise $100K for bushco and become

"Rangers" or "Pioneers" to become inside moles inside bushco with the secret decoder rings so we can have some unspecified kind of influence inside the palace gates (like getting our picture taken with Cheney) might have been worse.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

51. OMG did someone actually suggest that here?

And please tell me no one fell for it, right?

Geez.

[Tomee450]

I strongly disagree

The only people still concerned about Clinton's affair are people who would never vote for a democrat. I remind you that even during the impeachment crisis most people supported Clinton. The polls consistently showed that to be the case. Clinton left office a very popular president. He is still well liked. Gore should have used him in his campaign. There is no need for Kerry to bring up Clinton's infidelity. Most of the nation is not interested in the matter.

[Tomee450]

49. duplicated deleted

[cidliz2004]

52. Sorry, You are way off on this one

When someone comes up with that bs, I just start to rattle off other presidents that had affairs while married. I then follow that up with the only thing different between Clinton and the "others" was that the "other side" didn't evesdrop, they weren't peeping Toms, they didn't delve into the President's private life, there was a "hands off policy" before Clinton was President. I continue with "What Clinton did wasn't so different than many other presidents and nobody is saying that is was right, but it was a "sin", and tell me which President hasn't sinned." "Tell me who decided which "sin" was the worst sin?" "Who has rewritten the Bible" Clinton's private life was private UNTIL the other side advertised it everyday and brought it into our livingrooms.

Last I heard there wasnt' a 2nd coming, so as far as I know - we are all sinners - and we all live in glass houses.

I go right to the heart of what they judge Clinton on. They are hippocrates. I don't care what they may think of what I have to say to them in response. If they want to tote their Bible beliefs about what Clinton did, then they have to accept all of what the Bible says and not just the part that makes them feel superior.

[gulliver]

53. I agree with your position.

I use similar arguments (and will add some of yours) in fighting back the Clenis fixation. But that's your position and mine, not that of the Dem party or its leaders. As with so many other crucial areas where leadership is called for, many Dem leaders just want to whistle and hope the problem goes away. It hasn't gone away.

[Democrat 4 Ever]

87. Gulliver - you are beating a dead horse out in a field all alone

Enough, you aren't convincing this crowd of your silly little idea. You want some one to apologize so bad - think you owe the DUers a big one. You don't even make any rhyme or reason in your argument, yet you persist.

[demothinker]

57. You're missing the point

It's not that others did it as well - it's that it was "wrong" to do. The others were "wrong" to do it as well. Does it matter? It doesn't to us in how good a President he was, but to the voters where "moral character" in their leaders is important, it does matter.

In addressing Gulliver's point, address what the non-political populace THINKS, not what we think. We're the choir here, and preaching to it doesn't make much of a difference. We need to discuss ways to get through to the populace, and I think that's what Gulliver is trying to do. And as I mention in another post, I generally agree with Gulliver's point.

[cidliz2004]

66. No, YOU ARE missing the point

which is OF COURSE what Clinton did was wrong. Any dummy knows that much. The point is that WE ALL ARE HUMAN BEINGS, WE ALL SIN - every single one of us. For US to sit in judgement of ANOTHER sinner is hippocritical.

Name one President that hasn't sinned? ONE OF THEM!!!!!!

Now, tell me where it says in the Bible which sin is worse than the other? Tell me where it says that adultery is the WORST of the sins. Tell me where it says that adultery is the third worst sin.

YOU CAN'T because it doesn't.

What is fact is that all human beings sin and one sin (for the most part) is pretty indistinguishable from another. Why don't you understand this really SIMPLE concept?????? I sin, you sin, and all of the Clinton bashers sin..every single one of them. For them to judge Clinton because of his sins is .... as it says in the Bible "Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones" Do you get the simple wisdom of the message.

We elect a President to run our country and we expect him or her to have moral integrity, we do not or should not expect them to be PERFECT because the only perfection is God himself. Even the Pope is a sinner. So for you or anyone else to swallow this garbage is pure ignorance and hippocracy.

Bush has lied his way into the Iraq war where there are 10s of thousands of death.

Bush has stolen the election of 2000.

Isn't lying causing subsequent 10s of thousands of deaths a sin or two?

Isn't stealing a sin?

Where is the moral outrage of the Religious Right on that?

Where, in the Bible, does it say that we can pick and choose which of the 10 commandments that we should be adhering to?

Come on get with the program.

It isn't so hard to see hippocracy if you just open your eyes to it.

[demothinker]

70. I see the hypocrisy, but you're still missing the point!

It doesn't matter if I see it - I KNOW how good Clinton was, and I KNOW how bad Bu$h is! But WHAT I THINK DOESN'T MATTER - I'M ALREADY ONE OF THE CHOIR! So why are you wasting your time trying to convince me of what I already know?

This is about the people who let their view of character issues dominate their thinking. And no "Clinton was no worse than anyone else" argument is going to matter to them. The only way to reach them is with a contrite "we know it was wrong, but it's over, let's move on" attitude. Shouting about "hippocracy" until you're blue in the face is not going to change their perception. Do what works instead of giving yourself an aneurism about the "hippocracy" of it all.

[cidliz2004]

79. Again, I disagree

When people start talking about Clinton's dirty deeds, I toss it right back in thier faces, point my finger in their faces and ask "Since when did you become so perfect that you could look down your nose at Clinton and judge him?"

I further add "If you are so STUPID that you want to nail Clinton for his sins and you want to stand in judgement on him, then you are no better and actually much worse. Who has given you the authority to sit in judgement of him? Who do you know can say that they haven't sinned!? WHO??!!

Skirting around the issue is not the best way to deal with it, apologizing for what Clinton did is not the way to deal with it.

Isn't evesdropping and gossipping wrong? Who, after all blabermouthed it on the news everynigt? NOT CLINTON.

When people start on that I look them straight in the eye and ask them "since when did you become so perfect?" I don't make excuses, I just try to enlighten them as to the absolute STUPIDITY OF THEIR POSITION. If they don't get it then they are not worth my time, because they are either really stupid or they are just going to ignore the truth so that they can justify their Republican Government Official.

In other words, don't apologize, deal with it directly and throw it right back at them, and if that doesn't work then they are HOPELESS and why worry about them at all????????? THAT IS THE POINT!

[foo_bar]

73. I think the Bible predates the glass house

http://www.bartleby.com/81/7232.html

[cidliz2004]

80. You know, you may be right

but the Bible does make reference to that in some way - which I will have to investigate at another time. The point though still stands.

There was something in the new testament when I believe someone was going to be stoned for adultery or something like that and Jesus stepped forward and said something to the effect "Those without sin should cast the first stone" - maybe this is what I was thinking of.

Anyway the message is still the same.

[iwantmycountryback]

54. FDR liked to mess around a bit as well

I guess we should adress his mistakes before invoking his name as well? The only people that will be bothered by the use of Clinton's name are Repukes anyway. They have nothing on him regarding what he actually did as President. Monica is all they have to talk about. Let them harp on it. They just sound dumb.

[demothinker]

55. I partially agree

While I agree that we need to address Clinton's mistake (and I wish that people would think about what you're saying instead of just reacting like they usually do when someone brings up Clinton's indiscretion), I don't agree that it would boost Kerry that much. I think it's major benefit would be to help take the popular "party of character" misconception that the general non-politically involved populace has of the GOP. That would help the party in the long-term.

Does anyone need to apologize for it? Nobody but Clinton, and he has. Should Kerry condemn it? Absolutely not. But if it comes up, Kerry should indicate that Clinton was a great president, but had a flaw that unfortunately will forever be a part of his legacy (mostly due to the GOP and their flogging of it, of course, but c'est la vie). He needs to indicate that Clinton made a mistake, but that mistake must be part of the past, and that we need to look towards the future.

We can't keep fighting the battles of the past. We need to say as a party "We're sorry one of us made a mistake, but we all make mistakes. It's time to move on and look at the good that has been done and the good that we can do." PEOPLE LOVE CONTRITENESS. I think politicians forget that too often.

[flaminbats]

56. Clinton isn't running, Bush and Kerry are...

Republicans and Democrats may hate the facts of life, but both must face them. Republicans don't like to hear this because they don't get to blame Bush's screw-ups on Bill and Monica. Democrats don't like it because Bill Clinton was one of our country's best Presidents.

But every election determines the future, and Democrats only win by focusing on the best and worst possible outcomes. This means highlighting the dangers and obvious opportunities voters shall choose from.

[gordianot]

58. The Past

Remote events in the past have dominated this election. Why create another diversion attacking Bill Clinton? Why not just hand the election to B*sh this time?

Get people out and register to vote.

[Moonbeam_Starlight]

59. Why is this still hitting the top of the page?

No offense to the OP, but um, this is one of the most WACKED OUT suggestions I have ever heard for a campaign. Any campaign.

And yes, I realize I just kicked it again, but seriously.....if Kerry were to do something like that, I'd know he either lost his mind or was doing some hard-core recreational drugs.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

60. People that would let that indiscretion sway their vote are already lost.

Al Gore tried to distance himself from Clinton, blah blah blah, that worked out greeeeaaat. I agree that he should remind everyone how great everything was under Clinton, but forget the damn intern already. As Chris Rock said, he's PRESIDENT Clinton, not Pope Clinton.

[liberal N proud]

63. Not Even an ISSUE! Bringing it up would only give Carl and the media

Something else to divert the voters from the real issue:
It's the WAR STUPID!

[agincourt]

64. I tell repub coworkers,

That if they don't vote for Kerry now, they'll get Hillary in 2008. It always seems to take them back. Though no one talks about Bill's problem anymore, I find most have forgotten

[WilliamPitt]

65. Strangest. 'Kerry Should' Thread. Ever.

[gulliver]

67. Come on, Will! You can do better than that.

You know, argue the point or don't. This tactic of zipping in, dropping a bomb, and then beating it back to the high grass is unworthy of you.

This is just a "suggestion thread." That's all. Looking back at the original post, of course I would change some parts to make sure that people didn't read into it what I was not trying to say. For example, the paragraph break before "It's Clinton's disgrace" makes it sound like that is the only reason Kerry is not leading in a landslide. That is certainly not the case, and I don't think it. I do think the Clinton sex peccadillo and the witch hunt atmosphere and bitterness which accompanied it are a major albatross around our necks.

Sorry if you think that's wrong or strange. Maybe we are just talking to different people or watching different shows on late night television. It seems to me that maybe half of Bush's campaign is being run against Clinton in one way or another.

We Dems have a problem if we aren't big enough to admit Clinton's mistake and join our Republican and independent friends in disapproving of it. Is that grating? Yes it is. Why, the hell should we have to admit that Clinton did something wholly unpresidential and unacceptable when the Republicans and Ken Starr did something that was -- there is no other word -- un-American in hunting and impeaching him?

There is a simple answer: Because we can't control whether other people admit their mistakes. We can only control ourselves.

By pettily fighting the admission of Clinton's mistake or dancing around it or trying to just let it fade into the past or adducing Ken Starr or whatever, we are doing ourselves a disservice. We are setting a precedent of not admitting when we are wrong, and it is a precedent that is being and will continue to be used against us. Bush will continue to skate when he isn't half the man Clinton is or one tenth the president Clinton was.

Now, should Dem leaders like Kerry throw themselves on their knees and beg forgiveness for Clinton's mistake? Of course not. But when they need to address issues of character (and Bush is leading our guy in perception of character!!!!!) we need to be preemptive and (to use another posters well chosen word) contrite about the Clenis. Reinforce it, stipulate it was wrong, scold Republicans for not "getting over it" and segue to the real contrast between Bush and Kerry.

Maybe I didn't "write it right." I wasn't trying to make the whole case by myself. It's just an idea, and I don't think it is even very original. It's just a discussion of how manners can be used when offense has been perceived by one or more parties.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

69. Great stuff!

For the Lounge.

[gulliver]

71. I've been to the Lounge about 3 times in the last 3 years.

Is that where you bring up stuff like this?

The fact is, I tend to be in an extremely serious mood when I come to DU. Probably too serious. These Bushies scare me, not so much because of their ill intentions but because they are so damned foolish, dishonest, and incompetent.

Anyway, why did you steal the CA governorship? Now I can't watch Predator any more and I just got a widescreen. :-)

[A-Schwarzenegger]

72. You should go more often.

Your first post wd fit right in. (big manly smiley)
I know what you mean about my flix. I can't watch
the motherfuckers either.

[sadiesworld]

68. Yes, I too would like to see Kerry address NAFTA and WTO.

[ContinentalOp]

77. Funny, that's what I thought this thread would be about too.

Don't you think it would be a better idea to pressure Bush to take a stand on the Nixon issue? After all plenty of Nixonites are still connected to the Bush administration. It's not like Lewinsky will be an intern again in the Kerry White House.

[NV1962]

74. Wha...? "the Clinton disgrace"!? get OUTTAHERE!!!

One: do you imagine W putting his daddy's legacy front and center? Or Reagan's?

Two: why on Earth should Kerry parade around with Mr Previous Millenium's President?

Three: *IF* at al you opt to capitalize on Clinton's strengths (and there are MANY) you wouldn't win over any of the vicious Clinton-haters that you want to "disarm" with Kerry's disclaimer. If you run with the Big Dog, you run with it warts and all - those who appreciate his strengths are well aware of the weaknesses.

What the heck is this reminiscing of Lewinski good for ferkrissakes!?

Awful idea. Really awful.

Just my opinion of course...

[Strawman]

75. Political quicksand

You're right...

Tens of thousands dead and wounded in Iraq over Bill Clinton's out of control penis.

10% of the workforce is unemployed or underemployed because of Bill Clinton's out of control penis.

45 million people without health care, again all because of Bill Clinton and his sex crazed penis.

When is someone in the Kerry campaign going to bring this up?

Kerry had better talk about that troublesome penis of Bill Clinton's, so we can be credible on the issues. I can see it now, some right-wing reporter asks Jon Kerry about the Clinton legacy and he responds, "Yes, I'm glad you asked that question. Let me say something about my good friend Bill Clinton. He was a remarkable President who provided this country with 8 years of peace and prosperity, but I've gotta admit that guy had one crazy penis." If Kerry just says something like that, then maybe we can get the press to focus on the issues between now and the election.

GIVE ME A BREAK!!! Are you serious? Your post makes me want to bang my head against my desk until I am unconscious. God bless you, gulliver, you sound like a nice person, but COME ON! The LAST thing we need is another sideshow. Imagine what would be in the headlines after Kerry said something about the Clinton sex scandal. Another sideshow. Another diversion from the real issues. Just what the Republicans want, another chance to run out the clock in the news cycle between now in the election talking about Bill Clinton's infidelity. When we said "why are you talking about that," they would just say, "hey John Kerry brought it up!" And they wouldn't give him moral credit, they'd spin it by saying something like "John Kerry thinks that just because there was a stock market boom created by entrepeneurs during the Clinton presidency, it excuses Bill Clinton's immoral behavior in the Oval Office."

Bad idea. You are advising John Kerry to wade into political quicksand!

[democracyindanger]

78. There's no "liability."

It's completely manufactured by the right and the news media. Don't forget Clinton's approval rating went UP during the sham impeachment.

The American people don't give a shit. The American people love Clinton. It's the talking heads that keep talking like it matters.

He got a blowjob from a consenting adult. Big fucking deal.

[sonicx]

81. um, no

The election's against bush, not penis.

[molly]

82. Dah - uh - NO!

:silly:

Whose side on you on?

[gulliver]

83. Ours. Actually, I trust that Kerry will handle the issue ...

... appropriately when and if it comes up in an interview or a debate. No one seems to remember the impeachment, but that whole thing is still rippling through our culture.

Will the Republicans ever be made to feel ashamed for impeachment and for foisting the current Ass-in-Chief on us? Not as long as some angry, outraged Clinton supporters can't find it in themselves to face what really happened. To me, Clinton's mistake was nothing. The Republican response was a sheerly evil and un-American act. But if he had just kept his pants zipped that day, the evil and un-American act would not have taken place. He was playing with matches in a room full of dynamite. He took a big chunk out of the Democratic party and all of the good it represents.

Many leading Democrats, notably Gore, have addressed Clinton's mistake, so it is "nothing new" to suggest that a party leader have a position on it. I haven't heard Kerry asked about it yet. If and when he is asked, I hope he uses the opportunity to admit the "mote in Clinton's eye" and put it behind us all.

I'm sick of hearing about it or I wouldn't have brought it up. This thread is not an attack on Clinton. If you see it that way, then either I have said something wrong or you are mistaking my intent.

[molly]

85. Peace - it should not even be addressed

we, as DEMS, should not be apologetic. After all, they, as PUGS, committed many similar SINS. Why did Newt leave along with all that came about because of Clinton's impeachment? As far as I am concerned, * has committed far more offensive crimes against humanity than any DEM leader in the past 50 years. Let's start addressing things like BCCI, Iran-Contra - and all of the numerous things that pugs have done to harm our COUNTRY - Clinton's affair harmed noone but himself.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

86. "I'm sick of hearing about it

or I wouldn't have brought it up."

You must be sick of hearing it from those voices in yr head.
You are the only person in the entire country bringing it up.

[gulliver]

93. Um right. We Dems never hear about it.

I guess that about sums up your credibility.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

96. We Dems are hearing about it from one person.

Thee.

I guess that about sums up your obsession, Ken.

[gulliver]

97. Just the same.

I hope you won't delete anything from the post where you aver in your wisdom that I am the only one who hears anything about the Clenis. I'm happy with your leaving it that way.

LOL!! You're a riot Arnie. But you express your opinion so weirdly that I don't know whether I'm laughing with you or at you.

[EST]

88. Mistake? One of the most beautiful things Bill Clinton ever did

was show that poor beknighted girl some affection! Why, just think of it! imagine the absolute leagues of women who would simply DIE to be in her position, and republican women at that, let alone a guy, here and there. Why does anyone think macho repuke men were so damn angry with Clinton? Perfectly obvious, their wimmen would suck da big dawg off in a heartbeat and these guys know it and it pisses them off! Plus, remember-the pukes had busted their asses for more than six years, trying to get something on him and restart their fascist takeover.
Also-don't forget who it was that sent this particular Delilah into the game to entangle Clinton in a sex scandal in order to kick him out. WTF Is it so unusual for a man to fall for one of the oldest spy-bait tricks in the proverbial book? Add that to the the number of people creaming in their jeans to do the Lewinski shuffle and no wonder the whole thing makes some of us uncomfortable!
The bottom line is that Clinton did a normal loving, generous, sweet and caring thing, never suspecting that she was an undercover hooker, and got whacked for it. Who should apologize? Obviously the demented maggots who put her up to it.

[Crachet2004]

95. There is no better way of ruining our chances, than what you propose.

You want to drag Clinton's "mistakes" into the center of the campaign debate?

I'm sure the GOP would like nothing better.

Forget it.

[gulliver]

98. I give on this thread.

I'm beat.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

101. It was a strange one, gull.

Almost otherworldly. Take it easy.

[diplomats]

103. Whenever a Republican mentions Clinton's indiscretions,

I'm reminded of Rudy Giuliani, who, while he was still married, wanted to move his mistress into Gracie Mansion while his children were still living there! And he made no bones about it! Talk about family values! For some reason or other, he gets a pass when it comes to morals and character. They're talking about him making a run for president in 2008. Hmmm..... wonder if his less than stellar past will be a hindrance? He's also pro-choice.

He did handle the 9/11 attack well and should be commended for it. The point I'm making it that a politician can make good decisions in one area of his life while making a mess of another part of his life. I'm not defending Bill Clinton's behavior with Monica, I think it's a character flaw and I was terribly disappointed when it happened, but I do think he was an excellent president overall. His decisions were the best for the country.

I don't think Kerry should mention Clinton's infidelity. It has nothing to do with him. It's in the past and Kerry should be concentrating on current issues, of which there are many that the Bush is vulnerable on.

[n2mark]

102. A Big Mistake

It would be a big mistake for Kerry or the Dem Party to address Clinton's mistake. Clinton was a great president who had some personal problems. It was the pugs who played on this to cause distractions so Clinton couldn't do his work.

I agree his personal mistakes are between his wife and daughter. Of course if you want to look at mistakes, how interesting, Chelsea is vibrant, intelligent and beautiful even though she experienced all the scandals. The Clinton's did something right.

So if Shrub is so perfect --- how much did the twins spend at a drink fest in New York? Wasn't it something like $43,000? How many times were the twins arrested for drinking and nudity?
Hmmm, there seems to be some problems here. It seems the cycle is continuing.

How many of our people in the service died under Clinton? How many of our people in the service died under Shrub?

If the Democrats or the American people cannot let go of Clinton's personal problems, and they accept this current corrupt, hateful, and revengeful administration maybe they need to look at their own priorities. Geez Louise, wonder how many of those criticizing Clinton have skeletons in their closet? How many pugs quit during the scandal?

The one thing that I've learned, you do not mull over the past, you admit your mistakes, and then move on. Clinton did and does now, but Bush continues to say he is perfect and that God talks to him.

There is something wrong with this picture. I'll leave it at that because I don't think this should be an issue unless we create it.

[CouriousDem]

104. The big dog died a long time ago

It's time to rebuild our party without the haunting of the big dog. The past is gone and now we must find a newer way to win.

[LoZoccolo]

105. "Clinton liability"? What "Clinton liability"?

His approval rating went up during the scandal! It got close to 70%!

[Bridget Burke]

106. Kerry should address Bush's "mistakes"

Ignoring the warnings before 9/11, starting 2 unnecessary wars--working to destroy the economy, the environment, education, medical care & our international standing. You know, that stuff?

He needs to wish Bill Clinton a full recovery.

Who but a few dried up old prudes still cares that Clinton engaged in a bit of consensual whoopee?