Forum Thread

The Return of Monica Lewinsky

Reply to ThreadDisplaying 31 - 45 of 96 Prev 1 2 3 4 5 .. 7 Next
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    The point of the article was that society collectively shaming certain individuals for any situation, but especially ones involving sex or sexuality, is destructive and cruel (see: Tyler Clementi. see: Amanda Todd.) Ms. Lewinsky is using her spotlight to draw attention to a real and prevalent problem in this country: whatever you think of how she got that spotlight, that's a good thing.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    The old Ends Justifies the Means theory.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Yes, how Machiavellian of me, actually reading what's in the article. Giving publicity to real issues is not "justifying the means," it's a step in the right direction.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    So should we turn eyes away with a "wink, wink" attitude because this individual does or did so many other good things ? Where would we draw the line on the wink,wink, attitude and hold these people accountable for their actions?
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    johnnycee Wrote: So should we turn eyes away with a "wink, wink" attitude because this individual does or did so many other good things ? Where would we draw the line on the wink,wink, attitude and hold these people accountable for their actions?
    I'm not winking at you, Johnny, I'm disagreeing with your insinuation that because of the Clinton scandal Monica Lewinsky needs to be publicly shunned for the rest of eternity. Firstly, it's a Vanity Fair article, not the front page of Time: if this is still an outrage, you should read up on their article where they compare Gwyneth Paltrow to Kim-Jung Il. Secondly, what is it you would do to hold her accountable for her actions, further than what has already been done? Put her in the stocks and hurl cabbages? Have you actually read the article? Because the point that was being made was actually directed at sentiments exactly like yours: the idea that we need to inflict shame on people for consensual acts.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Agreed!
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Lewinsky....from my understanding never leaked it (get it?? leaked it) It was her best friend who did...some fat white lady on Clintons team. I could be wrong....
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    AdHoc Wrote:
    johnnycee Wrote: So should we turn eyes away with a "wink, wink" attitude because this individual does or did so many other good things ? Where would we draw the line on the wink,wink, attitude and hold these people accountable for their actions?
    I'm not winking at you, Johnny, I'm disagreeing with your insinuation that because of the Clinton scandal Monica Lewinsky needs to be publicly shunned for the rest of eternity. Firstly, it's a Vanity Fair article, not the front page of Time: if this is still an outrage, you should read up on their article where they compare Gwyneth Paltrow to Kim-Jung Il. Secondly, what is it you would do to hold her accountable for her actions, further than what has already been done? Put her in the stocks and hurl cabbages? Have you actually read the article? Because the point that was being made was actually directed at sentiments exactly like yours: the idea that we need to inflict shame on people for consensual acts.
    I am not insinuating anything other than if someone lies to Congress and the American people , they then should be held accountable, I am not the morals police, but I don't like being lied to. If Monica makes a few dollars, so what, she wouldn't be the first one to turn a scandal into a money maker, but Clinton is a born con man a real schmoozer AKA a liar, if he can get a women 30 years his junior to drop her drawers for him more power to him, but if caught don't try and make an ass out of everyone by claiming there wasn't anything going on between them. I feel that his outright lying was a total disrespect of the Office that we , as the electorate elected him to, and a total disrespect for the citizens of this country for allowing it to proceed the way it did, if he had fessed up from the beginning, he would have saved this Nation a lot of grief and money , but he chose to lie to save his own legacy and embarrass this country. so instead of praising him , he should be ashamed for what he did.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    To L.A. Citizen: Hello, I think you said Linda Tripp who leaked the situation was a fat white woman on Clinton's team. I don't know how fat she was, but she was definitely NOT on Clinton's team. SHE was the "intern" to Geo H.W. Bush, (prez #41) (Daddy Bush) who was a REPUBLICAN President. He was also the father to Geo.W. Bush (prez #43) Another Republican President. BOTH would have a lot to gain if Clinton was impeached.

    Somebody said Nixon was NOT IMPEACHED, but that is mostly a matter of semantics (words). He was GOING TO BE Impeached, but he took the easy way out and RESIGNED instead. He was guilty (indirectly) of the Watergate affair, trying to rig an election, paying out millions of dollars for "hush" money to keep the Watergate Burglars silent, (they were breaking into & "bugging" the phones at Democratic Hdqtrs), murder of the Atty General's wife (Martha), -- & the Republicans set up a brothel (for black-mailing of Democratic clients) --- just to name a FEW.

    Somebody said there were only 2 Impeachments, in US History -- (ie) Bill Clinton, & Andrew Johnson. TRUE, but "impeachment" only means an accusation, & a Trial. -- BOTH Bill Clinton and Andrew Johnson were found NOT GUILTY. Andrew Johnson became President because he was VP when Abraham Lincoln was assassinated. (1865) -- It was at the end of the Civil War, and the Reconstruction was beginning with great turmoil. (Some people did not want to free the slaves, some fought over states rights, & many battled over the rights of ex-slaves (& women) to vote).
    --- But I am not here to be a HISTORY TEACHER, but only to comment on "current affairs" (no pun intended : )

    Now, was Clinton LYING? Well, it depends on what the meaning of "sex" is. He said "he never had sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky." And it is true, that in Bill's generation, you did not have sex unless you had vaginal insertion with a penis. (I hate to use those terms, but in order to make the issue clear, it takes that much to convince some people). If they did hand massage or anything else, it was not technically "sex", it was only foreplay or something. So HE DID NOT LIE, when he said he "did not have sex with M.L." So therefore, he TOLD THE TRUTH. And most of the men in the jury (Senate) knew what he meant, since they all used the exact same vocabulary. And thus, he was found NOT GUILTY.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    bluesage it's not as much about ..."enjoying a little something extra"... It's much more about all the lying that Clinton did afterward.

    As is often the case, the cover up was worse than the crime.

    If he would have just come out and told the truth, most of America would have forgiven him, forgot it, and then moved on. By dragging it out with all the lying and denying, he just made it worse. Everyone makes mistakes, Bill just compounded his mistake with all his lies. He had been having affairs, lying about it, and getting away with it for decades...he just got caught this time...that's all.

    EF glad you got it right about the impeachment. It's important to try to get our facts straight.

    As far as Clinton and Monica having sex, we know about the BJ, we do not know how many other BJ's, or how many times they had sexual intercourse. Maybe never, maybe many times. We DO KNOW about the one BJ and Clintons many lies and his many attempts at apologies.

    The truth is (or at least SHOULD BE) important.

    Thanks,
    Somebody
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Who cares? Practically every President in History has had mistresses or engaged in affairs. To name a few:

    J. Garfield........Lucy Mercer

    W. Harding........Calhoun

    F. Roosevelt................Britton

    D. Eisenhower.............Summersby

    L. Johnson............Glass

    J. Kennedy............Monroe

    T. Jefferson.............Many slaves to choose from

    G. Washington........reported slave by the name of "Venus"...oh how appropriate

    Of course, Clinton!

    Apparently every President has had mistresses except Carter and Truman and just maybe history will say the same for Obama unless the Republicans find it in their favor to create a lie. Michelle will most likely be the first of First Ladies to kill a sitting President if Obama strays. She's one tough lady.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    I never heard about the LBJ affair. Honestly, I didn't -- Where did you hear it from? I hope not the National Inquirer!! ? (ha)
    Jamesn, I may have clarified the Monica/Clinton deal, with explanation of the definition of "sex." (above). That really explains it.

    OFF TOPIC ALERT: The following is about JFK & Marilyn Monroe, so some may consider this "off topic". I am sorry ----
    Now with the mention of JFK & Marilyn Monroe, that could be a whole book in itself. They did know each other, & she also knew Bobby (Atty General) quite well, & called him frequently. The Kennedy Family had made much of their fortune in owning movie theaters, & being involved in the Film Industry. But JFK was pretty much faithful to Jackie after their marriage, the maids said they usually turned down the sheets in the afternoon near 2 PM, as they both slept together at that time of day. JFK usually got up early & went swimming in the WH pool, (for back therapy) & she read the newspaper in bed with her coffee. Jackie was pregnant with John-John when they entered the White House, & they already had Caroline, (called "Buttons"). Jackie already had one miscarriage before then. And before they left the White House, just before JFK was murdered, she lost a baby boy (Patrick) 2 days after he was born. They were so sad -- & then 3 months later, JFK was assassinated.

    While Jackie was First Lady, she liked to run around with Adlai Stevenson, & go to parties with him. He would introduce her to foreign diplomats, & she would learn little details that would be interesting for folks in our Diplomacy Corps. She went to the Louvre Art Museum in Paris with Charles de Gaulle, & picked out her favorite painting (a nude). But here was a little-known Fact of interest. Jackie liked to sneak out of the White House a little bit, to have some "fun" but keep her identity "private." So she would put on a blonde wig & go out in public, & nobody would know it was her.

    However, if she sneaked down the WH elevator at night with the blonde wig, some secret service guy who saw her might think it was Marilyn Monroe. I'm not kidding, they were that much alike. Sometime pay close attention to recordings of their voices. BOTH of them spoke in a soft breathy voice, calm & slow. Almost the exact same voice. Get a recording of Jackie giving a tour of the White House & compare it to Marilyn in any of her movies, when she is talking slow. You almost cannot tell the difference. It's uncanny.

    Then Marilyn had a housekeeper, who saw her leave the house at night, wearing a black wig. When she was wearing that wig, she really did look a lot like Jackie. They both were very close to the same age, same height, & similar features, & same voice. When Marilyn went out, she was learning to speak Spanish, & so with the black hair she could blend into a Spanish crowd with her Mexican producer boyfriend. It was a bit strange that both were doing the "opposite" hair color, during that same period of time. But many rumors went around that JFK was seeing Marilyn, & maybe the guards had just seen Jackie, wearing the blonde wig, a few of those times.

    I tested my theory by taking a photo of Jackie & cutting out the blonde hair from a photo of Marilyn & pasting it over. Then cutting out a photo of Marilyn & pasting on top of it the black hairdo of Jackie. In BOTH cases, I asked somebody to identify who those pictures were. And they identified it as being the "opposite" woman, apparently just going by the hair color. And they could do that, because the faces were so very identical that they couldn't tell the difference. So either woman COULD impersonate the other, quite easily. //

    As for Marilyn being a girl friend of JFK, that is doubtful. Marilyn dated Frank Sinatra, & a Mexican movie producer, & Joe DiMaggio during that period. And she had other male visitors at her home also, according to her housekeeper. Then Marilyn had a cute little cottage home, with words inscribed upon the sidewalk, that said "the end of the road" - or - "the trail ends here." (in Latin). After a photo shoot, a few days later she was dead. The guy who took the photos was so scared, thinking she was killed, that he left the USA, & didn't come back for many yrs.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    Amc ..."Who cares?"... Well you named 9 out of 44, not exactly a majority, definitely not ..."Practically every President in History"...

    But, it's not about Clinton having a little "extramartial affair" I think we all know he did that, and most of us think it was not a big deal, it was all the lying after he got caught that was worse than the act itself.

    Impeachment anyone?

    It takes two, and they both did it, and they deserve everything they got. No excuses.

    When they get caught, if they would just come clean, "Tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" and then ask for forgiveness, they will nearly always get it, and THAT is always the best way to go. The more that they lie and deny, and then when the truth comes out, as with President Clinton, well, the lying always makes the scandal even worse.

    They never learn. Never have, and never will.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    President Clinton, with all his faults, who was a pretty bad person, was STILL the last good president we've had.
  • Are you sure you want to delete this post?
        
    jamesn Wrote: President Clinton, with all his faults, who was a pretty bad person, was STILL the last good president we've had.
    I disagree. Clinton just happened to president when the .com boom was happening. Forget whitewater???? Clinton also is responsible for the most massive addition to the war on drugs. He expanded it 10 fold


    it's like when truckers tell me what a great guy jimmy Hoffa was...... Hoffa was a thief and a crook who just happened to be president during great strides by workers...... He was shit. I promote unions as a culture amongst working people...never as an institution. Workers are the union, not the leadership