Clinton Autobiography Hurts Monica Lewinsky's Feelings

Yes, eoe, but this is also the same man who was having the Arkansas Highway Patrol secure girls for him when he was governor.

Quite a pair, I'd say.

She's not a victim, except of a double standard. If Hillary was president and she had an affair I don't think the guy would be villified...do you?

villified no, embarrassed probably. Although I find Hillary attractive for one reason...she's powerful and you'd have to wonder if she were that powerful in the sack.....face it boys, talk about her all you want, you wouldn't turn it down.

You got that right. Power is an aphrodisiac;whether it's male or female

Ooh, YES!!! Gets me every time.

<shivering with delight at the thought!>

i read monica's book, and thought it was interesting reading. and i came out on monica's side, thong-baring and all. her crime was she cared deeply about clinton, and clinton gave her no indication that her feelings were off base.

in my estimation the truely amoral player was kenneth starr. presidents, and many married men have been bonking women other than their wives forever, and the families of said presidents have dealt with it privately.

on the lighter side of things, this scandal has feuled late night comedy and boosted the economy because, well, we want to know. so i see monica writing her story as a smart move, and her commenting on clinton's book to be expected. i give her credit for speaking her heart.

here's the thing about hillary-- they're not looking for her to have an affair with a man, they're waiting for her to be shacking up with a woman.

There is a great deal I would like to say here, but I think it better to bite my tongue.

I shall say only that I am awed to discover a number of my fellow A2kers are so without sin as to feel able to volunteer to throw the first stone, and so pure as to not be in a position to understand that, even when we have made mistakes, we still have feelings.

I so hoped the word "slut" was on its way out.

If I ran the world, there would be no hint of double standard here: neither Clinton nor Monica would, IMO, have anything to be judged by the public about. Two consenting adults. Period. What their spouses/families may have felt is different, but entirely their business.

The press and Ken Starr made this a public issue. What a bleepin waste of time and money.

Think about how much energy America might have to tackle REAL issues if we all just let go of our collective need to control/dictate each other's sex lives.

Yeah, I suppose you're right Phoenix. I overlooked the 'richest and most powerful' part of the the equasion. That's because those things have never impressed me. What attracts me to a man is his sense of humor, his kindness to others, his intellect and, of course, his looks. Johnson might have had power and money, but he definately was lacking everything else. I used to hate it when he picked his beagle pups up by their little ears...Ugh!

Maybe having the name Johnson made him more attractive to certain types of women.

So you're the one who read that book!

I feel sorry for the woman. In my eyes, she was a young woman who made a mistake that she will never live down. I can't even imagine how she must feel having everyone thinking of her as a no good slut because she was obviously infatuated with the man.

yeah, gussie, it was me who read that book, you were the one who lent it to me. remember? i found it under your mattress along with the goat-mating instruction manual.

Her mistake this week was granting an interview (and getting paid) about the ex-president's book.

eoe, i disagree, clinton is making a bundle, a fortune on his book. why shouldn't she make some money. too. she certainly paid the emotional price.

again, it's the double standard, monica, like so many other woman in history, who have dared to live their lives true to themselves, are expected to be invisible, to behave, and "not make waves."

Well okay then. If she's out to make a buck then make a buck but this 'hurt feeling' charade is weak. Daring to live one's life going against the grain is one thing but to then want to play the victim, well, that's just lame.

eoe, again, i disagree, her feelings are hurt, and she's sayng so. the fact is, no matter what she says, she'll be judged harshly. so why not be truthful?

I am puzzled that Ms. Lewinsky would choose to say anything at all.

When the affair became public--thanks to her misplaced trust in La Tripp--all sorts of creeps from her past crawled out of the California woodwork to the national microphones.

The more she talked, the more her reputation suffered.

Now, she's agreed to stand in the spotlight again, insisting that adultery is not "dirty and wrong" and that she has been misjudged.

I wouldn't call her a slut--I think she's selective about her ill-judged amours. In the last six years, she hasn't matured much as a person. Perhaps because of her chaotic childhood, she's not capable of mature thought--or of common sense.

She's also not taking any responsiblity for her part in the fun and games.

The mind boggles.

I can't imagine, after EVERYTHING that went down, that her feelings could still be genuinely hurt behind it all. Of course, just because I can't imagine it doesn't make it so but, is she being truthful or is she simply doing the media rounds and making a few bucks. That question comes to mind immediately but I guess she wouldn't be such a hot item at the moment if she was unconcerned about the book, huh?

If she's a victim of anything or anyone outside of herself and Linda Tripp, she was a victim of the media. Still is.

.
I just saw her as very immature, selfish and insecure. Who cares what she thinks? If she's upset about what the book says, maybe she should have kept her mouth out of the President's pants. She brought it on herself.

He's no peach either, by the way. He's just as screwed up (literally) as she is.

Gross.