Dowd: Because They Could

[kskiska]

(snip)

"I did something for the worst possible reason," he told Dan Rather about his march of folly with Monica. "Just because I could. I think that's just about the most morally indefensible reason anybody could have for doing anything."

(snip)

The former president engaged in a relationship of choice, not necessity.

As a friend of mine explains: "It's a guy thing. We're not likely to get up off the couch if we don't have to. We might cheat with a chick who just happens to be there if we feel we could get away with it."

In his memoirs, Mr. Clinton complains about Republican droit du seigneur, writing that impeachment was driven neither by "morality" nor "the rule of law" but, as Newt Gingrich said: "Because we can."

The Clinton alpha instinct on Monica, fueled by a heady cocktail of testosterone and opportunism, was the same one that led W. into his march of folly with Iraq. After 9/11, the president, vice president and secretary of defense wanted to go to the Middle East and knock the stuffing out of somebody bad — because it would feel good, because it would put our enemies on notice, and because it would make the president look strong.

(snip)

But one thing you can say for Bill Clinton: His "Who's gonna stop me?" Oval Office power surge produced a much lower body count.

more…
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/20/opinion/20DOWD.html

[The Zanti Regent]

1. Get a life, Whoreen

So tired of this one trick whore!

[myopic4141]

2. You really should read the article before commenting.

At least do so before defaming someone. The snippet about Clinton is only the opener. The body is that Shrubby used the same excuse to invade Iraq and it is relatively hard on Shrubby. The only thing she got wrong was that Shrubby and company wanted to invade Iraq long before the 11Sep01 opportunity to do so came along. The ache to invade was so bad that if 11Sep01 did not occur, they would have found some other way for the policy to do so was on already in motion. The desire to invade may have also been the driving force behind the delay of addressing the terrorist threat hoping for opportunity to strike.

[The Zanti Regent]

6. Look at Whoreen's track record

Go back and read what this witch writes. She NEVER passes up a chance to piss on the Clintons.

SHe and the rest of the Screw York Times can go to hell

[myopic4141]

7. Six paragraphs on Clinton

If you read those six paragraphs, it is a very good set up piece to attack Shrubby for his actions and how the same observation given to the "why" applies (including being "morally indefensible") equally as well.
These six paragraphs were then followed by 10 paragraphs about Shrubby's exploits along with applying an analysis of the "why". The comparison is far more damning towards Shrubby than it is towards Clinton for it shows the same callousness of aforethought before taking an action. You may not like the usage of Clinton in the article; but, it is apropos here for the final paragraph's conclusion, namely: "But one thing you can say for Bill Clinton: His "Who's gonna stop me?" Oval Office power surge produced a much lower body count." which implies that Shrubby's callousness concerns people dying whereas Clinton's concerns sexual activity.
Clinton did a wrong and the Right continues to remind the Left of it. What Dowd did was take that reminder and put it into perspective with the wrong that Shrubby did. By putting it into perspective, Dowd not only shows the hypocrisy of the Right in their application of moral standards; but, adds to the argument that those on the Left are not afraid face the issue of applying their moral standards to themselves as well as others. An aspect of the Right that they seem to need a constant reminder of.

[Carl Brennan]

3. A guy thing??

Women don't cheat?

[Longhorn]

4. "A guy thing"

doing something just because they could. I think that's the point Dowd's friend was making.

Certainly a generalization but I've seen enough Oprah and Dr. Phil to see women explaining actual reasons (good or bad) for cheating, while men tend to state that "it just happened."

I'll bet if you polled men and women about whether they would cheat if they could be absolutely positive that their spouses would never know about it, more men than women would say yes. Just my biased view on the subject (female, married 28 years.)

[GOPFighter]

5. I respectfully disagree

As a male, my experience is just the opposite (to my suprise!).

[Carl Brennan]

9. So women are just what? more honest?

What you and the original poster are expressing is bigotry.

This a generalization based on Oprah and Phil. That goes to show you what Oprah and Phil are teaching people. :eyes:

[myopic4141]

8. Biased opinion.

The strongest man will always stronger than the strongest women. The most dexterous woman will always be more dexterous than the most dexterous man. Neither will be dumber nor more opportunistic than the other.