Replies

I had a bad feeling from the start that this is what it would be all about. Affairs like this know no political party. They are about human weakness. Republicans can have affairs and so can Democrats.

This is why in the 1990's I was against attacking Clinton over his behavior, bad as it was. I knew this would blow back on the Republicans/Conservatives. The News Media would make the conservatives look like hypocrites. It was bound to happen and it has. The Democrats have John Edwards, Elliot Spitzer, etc. and now we have Ensign and Sanford.

It's not about political alignment, it's just human nature (weakness). The "conservatives" to decided to make a big deal out of Clinton's behavior are now bearing some sour fruit.

If as you think everything that occurred during Bill Clinton's impeachment was about bad behavior, rather than abuse of power, perjury, and breaking the law, then you and the Dems were right about it being really no one’s business.

If I was right that it was about him influencing a lawsuit, lying under oath, and maybe raping Juanita Broderick(?sp) then it certainly should have been pursued.

As the years have gone by, your comments and those of others on this board makes me think it really was, “All about sex”, and that is unfortunate and a shame IMO.

We also had Newt, Livingston, and Henry Hyde, it should never have been about sex, it should have been about what he did after the sex and whether he/they broke the law.

I think your position is turning out to be right and the Repubs and many Conservatives are looking like huge hypocrites, at least Sanford is owning up to it at the start.

The Conservatives have to stop letting others define the rules and set the boundaries of the arguments, but they also have to get their own crap in one shoe before calling out someone else’s crap.

Things like this is why regardless of how bad our current President messes things up, the GOP and Conservatives are going to have to be at the top of our game to make inroads in 2010 and 2012,...... IMO