This line of questioning was entirely appropriate. It is alleged that he used his position as Governor to prey upon those underneath him. The Lewinski affair established the fact that Clinton had no inhibitions when it came to using his position to get sex. It establishes character which is admissible.
Such questioning would be inappropriate if the allegations were unrelated to sex. Asking Cheney about sex during an Enron investigation would be inappropriate.
I think you're taking this a little too personally, then. That's between him and his wife.
When he's getting blowjobs in the Oval Office while on the phone with a Congressman, it's my business too. He's at work. He's working for us. If I was get'in some at work with one of my employees, my boss isn't going to walk away. Is it too much to ask the President follow the same standards as the rest of us?
Hmmm, why? She has her own life and her own agenda. How do >YOU< know that this isn't okay with her?
The problem is I do think she's ok with it. Their marriage seems to be more of a business partnership rather than a marriage base upon love and respect. That's just one more reason that I don't want her in the White House. I want a leader that thinks more like me. BTW, I thought the Women's Movement - which I assume she supports - said that you don't have to put up with this kind of crap from your husbands. What kind of role model is that?
Hmmm, maybe I'm more cynical than you but I don't see any difference in the >PEOPLE< in that job than the >PEOPLE< in any other job. I know cops that take drugs. I've heard of priests that molest boys. You're focusing on what the >POSITION< should be and not the >PERSON< in that position.
I'm cynical too, to a degree. But the people who obey the law, who have a conscience, out number those who don't. Just because there are bad cops, priests, managers, programmers, etc. doesn't mean it's ok to have a bad President too.
Or are you saying you're content with Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, and friends....?