Atlantic: Feminists on "wrong side of history" with Bill Clinton (USA), time to make amends now with reckoning

I agree with the essay, but cracked up at the author's name.

Bill Clinton was impeached by the Republicans for quibbling about a consensual BJ.

This was after a years long investigation into a land deal in Arkansas in which

two special prosecutors found no wrongdoing by Clinton (who lost money on the land deal).

When Ken Starr took over the investigation, the Whitewater deal was 13 years in the past and the BJ wouldn't happen for another 15 months.

After many years and tens of millions of dollars Ken Starr told congress all he had was Clinton lying about a BJ.

Newt Gingrich said "I like BJs."

The whole thing was an abuse of power by the Republicans (Gingrich) to try and destroy the Clintons.

It started with Richard Melon Scaife (wealthy republican operative) putting up millions of his own money to start investigations into Clinton over many years, went through the congress putting up tens of millions of dollars to investigate Clinton over many years, includes the helium suicide guy (wealthy republican operative) putting up millions of his own money to start investigations into Clinton, and includes Barbara Ledeen (Senate Judiciary staffer working for Chuck Grassley) conducting her own private investigation into Clinton.

The House Speakership at the time was Newt Gingrich (banging a congressional staffer while his wife is in the hospital - he resigned), then Bob Livingston (cheating on his wife by banging another woman - he didn't even get to be speaker), then Denny Hastert (making secret payments to wrestlers he molested as a coach - he was speaker for 10 years, no doubt touting his family values all the time).

That is some record of Republican family values.

Not to mention the successor to Livingston's seat in Louisiana, David Vitter, who paid prostitutes for diaper sex.

Or other Republicans who testified against Clinton citing family values, like Senator Pete Dominici who had a one night stand with Michele Laxalt (daughter of fellow senator Paul Laxalt), fathered a child with her and hid the kid for decades while making secret payments, all the while touting his family values.

The "both sides do it" meme is the media's way of protecting Republicans.

George Bush was an incompetent moron who invaded the wrong country and caused the deaths of half a million civilians while wasting a trillion dollars, but Obama wore a tan suit.

See? Both sides do it.

Donald Trump is an ignorant buffoon who lies to the American people all the time, uses illegal workers on his buildings, defrauds people with scam companies, incites violence, violates the constitution to enrich himself, buddies up with Putin and puts America and Americans at a greater risk of harm, but Hillary coughed that one time.

See? Both sides do it.

Give me a break.

Roy Moore sexually assaulting young girls in Alabama is not the same as Monica giving Bill a BJ.

Neither is Trump grabbing them by the P***y.

The media is just trying to protect Republicans. Again.

Huh.

The sensoring algorithm won't let you post the word "blow" and the word "job" next to each other.

I had to us the BJ short form.

Or maybe I could have used the number 0 instead of the letter o.

I'll try it here: "bl0w j0b"

If it does appear, it is a work-around of the spelling.

You are welcome.

In forty years-plus as a voter I've never pulled a Dem lever for any office, but I find myself really, really tired of the "whataboutitis" that I keep reading and hearing from GOP apologists.

Yes, individual Democrats have done some rotten things through the years (one reason I haven't voted for them). That does not somehow excuse misbehavior from current politicians, be they Dem or GOP, and I want people to stop acting as though it does. The current GOP crew seems to think "Well they did it!" (and they didn't always, btw) somehow pardons the excesses of the current regime. Wrong is wrong, and if you're saying something was wrong when a Democrat allegedly did it before, then don't suggest it's somehow okay if a Republican allegedly does it now.

stateroftheoblivious wrote:

Huh.

The [censoring] algorithm won't let you post the word "blow" and the word "job" next to each other.

I had to [use] the BJ short form.

Or maybe I could have used the number 0 instead of the letter o.

I'll try it here: "bl0w j0b"

If it does appear, it is a work-around of the spelling.

You are welcome.

"blow job"

What's the problem?

I have it on good authority that Bill Clinton is a rapist. It's a good thing for the young intern Monica that she consented or he may have raped her too.

Are you going to source any of this?

You sure beat the stuffing out of that straw man. He never even had a chance against you.

And during all the time you spent writing that screed, I think several billy goats got across your bridge.

stateroftheoblivious wrote:

Bill Clinton was impeached by the Republicans for quibbling about a consensual BJ.

No. You are clueless.

That was the cover story, the reality was a JFK files "incident" which needed to be sanitized.

In forty years-plus as a voter I've never pulled a Dem lever for any office, but I find myself really, really tired of the "whataboutitis" that I keep reading and hearing from GOP apologists.

The Atlantic is hardly known as a GOP apologist joint?

Consider the source wrote:

In forty years-plus as a voter I've never pulled a Dem lever for any office, but I find myself really, really tired of the "whataboutitis" that I keep reading and hearing from GOP apologists.

The Atlantic is hardly known as a GOP apologist joint?

Read the comments to this, 100% of people defending Bill Clinton. Sexual harassment (and rape) has been politicized - by the left.

What a Bubba wrote:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DOk8HnUXkAApJM6.jpg

Anyone who watches Lisa Myer's interview of this woman, which was broadcast the day after the senate vote to remove the slickster, and still claims to support women is nothing but a callous leftist.

Watch the interview on youtube. You will never again see such a credible, broken witness. She was interviewed by a police, rape intake officer from Chicago before the impeachment vote and the results of those interviews were made available to the reps. That was a big factor in the slickster being impeached.

I read like 2 lines of your rambling bias.

NYT weighs in, believing Juanita (belatedly), but blaming the popular sense of the issue on the various "right-wing conspiracies" (giving Ann Coulter on Paula Jones as an example) that Hillary would so often invoke.

And of course failing to censure Dateline NBC for withholding the report until after the impeachment trial concluded.

https://twitter.com/nytopinion/status/930403527410831360

This was bad wrote:

What a Bubba wrote:

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DOk8HnUXkAApJM6.jpg

Anyone who watches Lisa Myer's interview of this woman, which was broadcast the day after the senate vote to remove the slickster, and still claims to support women is nothing but a callous leftist.

Watch the interview on youtube. You will never again see such a credible, broken witness. She was interviewed by a police, rape intake officer from Chicago before the impeachment vote and the results of those interviews were made available to the reps. That was a big factor in the slickster being impeached.

So according to what you wrote, if you watch the interview, there are two possible outcomes:

1) You still support women and are a callous leftist

2) You do not support women and more (and presumably are not a callous leftist)

sdfsdfsdfsdfsdf wrote:

This was bad wrote:

Anyone who watches Lisa Myer's interview of this woman, which was broadcast the day after the senate vote to remove the slickster, and still claims to support women is nothing but a callous leftist.

Watch the interview on youtube. You will never again see such a credible, broken witness. She was interviewed by a police, rape intake officer from Chicago before the impeachment vote and the results of those interviews were made available to the reps. That was a big factor in the slickster being impeached.

So according to what you wrote, if you watch the interview, there are two possible outcomes:

1) You still support women and are a callous leftist

2) You do not support women and more (and presumably are not a callous leftist)

English language skills are a must in a debate, even on LetsRun.com

Your jokey response is a loud enough proclamation of your indifference to the attack in question. I'll bet you also think Sandusky and Joe were framed.