>>>Actually, I think much criticism is due. It is mind-boggling that so many (aver 50% according to some polls) do not care and think he should still stay in office. Our moral standards are sinking fast.
>>
>>It's even higher than that--about 70% think he should serve out his term, from an NBC poll I saw.
>>
>>I think you're ignoring some of the great strengths (and weaknesses) of the United States. First, we're basically a democracy. That means if the people don't care about Clinton's sex life, that that's OK--prosecutors shouldn't either. Second, we hold to a very high degree the principle of individual freedom--that people should be able to do what they want if it doesn't hurt others.
>>
>>In the context of both those points, our "moral standards" are rather irrelevant. You adhere to your moral standards, I'll adhere to mine, and let Bill adhere to his.
>
>Typical Clinton apologist. First we do not just let criminals off just because the majority think it is OK to excuse. If there is sufficient evidence of perjury, etc., Clinton should pay the price regardless of what the public thinks. The only difference is there is a double standard in this country, one for Democrats and another for Republicans. It is fairly evident that Republicans are held to and maintain the higher one. If this had been a Republican Prez, NOW, and other liberal groups would have run him out of office during Genifer Flowers revelations.


Okay, so this is my second post. My ONE friend who openly supports Clinton brought up a good point. Clinton leaves (His choice or ours). That puts Gore in. The Campaign Finance takes Gore out. That leaves us with Newt. Who would be a better president, Clinton or Newt. I voted against Clinton twice, but Newt isn't a better answer!