>You surprise me on daily basis, I mean on days when I get here.
>There are people disliking Hillary by association with Bill's presidency, so, as long as we stay rational, these people should dislike Bill more, just because he was a President.
>I cannot help but the opposite approach indicates some level of irrationality. Try to analyze your own thinking. Does your negative feeling to Hillary, specifically more negative than to Bill, happen to grow up during last few months, or you always had them?

I certainly was/am one of those not really interested in having such a hoopla over the Oral Office affair and the quetion if he should have been more explicit in describing the nature of the encounter. The land deals raised more of an eyebrow. The political influence H. was said to have had during the presidency I never really took an interst in, from what I remember it was considered more of a failure and I remember wondering if she went off in that direction because of his tendencies, vice versa or he sent her off to have more room...

Getting her a seat for NY whithout trouble smacked so much of wire pulling it soured me to her candidacy looong bfore she actually ran. The other side is: I don't beleive in a Clinton-"dynamic duo". Either she was the driving force and he was only a royal figurehead, then she should have been running the political circus from start. Or perhaps she thought that her brain was her best asset while mostly hanging on (my assumption) and nepotism creeping up in US politics makes me uneasy.