Kara wrote:dys, I love Kucinich. Even more, I love Ralph Nader, a totally brilliant guy who is doggedly unappealing to voters and would probably screw up royally if he was governing. We need bright secular men or women who can win and then govern as leaders, not followers. Is it even possible for a leader to slough off all of the influences and the money -- without those, he could perhaps not ever be elected -- and walk ten steps ahead of us? I think Clinton was one of those but we were too provincial to accept his peccadilloes. I was, too. I remember recoiling at his blatant recklessness and then wondering later if that was really a small thing, not an issue that affected his national and international focus.
You call Clinton's behavior, "blatent recklessness"! What, the Republicans were sneakier? Picture Newt Gingrich, Speaker of the house, at the same time he was impeaching Clinton, for having sex, Newt was carrying on an affair with HIS AIDE, while his wife, was dying of cancer! To make matters worse, he asked his wife for a divorce, while she was dying! He MARRIED the aide! He is having an affair NOW, with someone else and is divorcing his paramour during the Clinton, era! Did it get the press, Clinton, got? NO! One of the other impeachers, was found to have had a son "out of wedlock", while waving his fists at Clinton! He said it was a "youthful indescretion"! He was 41 at the time! Clinton, having sexual pecadilloes? What about the Repug from Florida, trying to lure the congressional PAGES; Mr. Foley, I presume! Clinton? Look at the Repugs! They invented scandal! Enron, warrantless wiretaps, 9 billion in cash, that can't be accounted for in Iraq! How's about Abramhoff and Bush's connectins to the Saudis? Scandals? I got a million of 'em!
