Question for Republicans...

[CoffeeCat]

Remember when Clinton's affair with Lewinsky became public? Republicans were
beside themselves, worrying about "the children". They were so concerned that
"the children" of America would be morally corrupted because our President had
engaged in an affair.

Over and over, I remember the Republicans saying, "We can't even turn on the evening
news in front of OUR CHILDREN because of what this immoral President has done." It
was all about concern for "the children" and what the Republicans would tell them.

I'm certainly not excusing Clinton's behavior. In fact, I was grossly disappointed in
his conduct.

However, I'd like some consistency from the Republicans here. On one hand, Clinton's
affair with an ADULT FEMALE cultivates deep concern for "the children" as Republican parents
frantically contemplate what--and how--they will tell "the children".

At this point, I'd like to ask the Republicans....what about "the children" now? Foley's
abuse involves sexual exploits with a teenager--who is a minor or a child--in the eyes of
the law.

What about "the children" now? Are you still as concerned for them now?

[MrModerate]

1. And the obvious answer is . . .

If Clinton hadn't shagged Monica, Foley wouldn't have stalked interns.

Because, ya know, Clinton lowered the moral standing of government generally.

It's all Clinton's fault!