Should Clinton have resigned?

[BurtWorm]

Did anyone see the Watergate retrospective with Bob Woodward and a small panel (including Richard Reeves and Charles Taylor of the Nixon Library) that was rerun on CSPAN yesterday afternoon? Toward the end, one of Taylor's cronies stood up in the audience and made a speech praising Nixon for having the "decency" to resign "unlike a certain later president." It was one of those moments when you want to punch the TV screen. Who *really* were the indecent ones during the impeachment? :grr:

But it got me to thinking about what might have happened if Clinton had resigned in 1997, instantly bestowing on Gore the advantage of real incumbency over Bush in 2000. I still don't think Gore was guaranteed an outright victory. Bush's little brother still owned Florida. The Republicans had made themselves into Democrat-eating machines in the 1990s. They very likely would have stolen the White House anyway, with the complicity of the media. There was absolutely no guarantee that the Democrats had the power, resources or will to stop the onslaught.

So, it seems to me, it was just as well that Clinton stayed put and fought the Republicans to a victory for Constitutional process and democratic will. In fact, I'm sorry to say, it was the last time the Democrats in Washington stood fast, fought and won. (Although you have to give them props on the judicial filibustering, though they won't have won on those until the Bushists are out of power.)

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. After the final failure of the Bush boys and Empire

and that is comming

And the end of this country as a super power

And the loss of our standing in the world....

Historians will see the events of the 1990s as an attempted coup, and will not ask that question.

It still remains to be seen if this coutry remains as one country as the end of the day.

[Coastie for Truth]

11. It was an attempted coup

and the Republican goal is not to win elections - but to destroy the two party system and the social compact underlying the "New Deal."

I never thought I would see the day where an American political party had as its goal a quasi-theocratic, quasi fascist state.

And, I never thought I would actually see the grinding down and death of our scientific and biotech infrastructure.

It is like something out of Margaret Atwood's "The Handmaid's Tale" Margaret Atwood with a touch of Joseph Heller's "Catch 22" and Franz Kafka's "The Trial" with some George Orwell's "1984."

Let me define my terms:

1. Quasi-Fascism in the sense of an identity or merging or conflation of corporate and political interests. I will give them the credit for not being blatant racists yet.

2. Quasi-Theocracy in the sense of the "limit setting" of conservative theology, but not the Good Works of Progressive theology. James Dobson and not MLK Jr.

[Bethany Rockafella]

2. Hell no.

He loved his job. All those years he fought to get there, he wasn't going to give it up that easy.

[applegrove]

3. Yeah - to Repukes stealing an election is a good thing - understandable -

if your enemy is the people of your country.

[lancdem]

4. I'm with you

Clinton had the support of more than 60 percent of the public during the whole impeachment charade. They knew his errors didn't rise to the level of impeachable offenses. And if Clinton had resigned, Gore would've carried that scandal as a bigger albatross than it turned out to be. Remember what happened to Ford in 1976.

I'm glad Clinton fought the Repukes' attempted coup. That's what it was.

[lala_rawraw]

5. NO WAY

That would have been allowing himself to be the victim of the Bush Crime Family.

[solinvictus]

6. Clinton..

They hated him because he was an outsider; meaning he didn't come from the Eastern establishment old money. Hell, no, and I'd love it if we could repeal the two term limit under the guise of allowing the Chimperor to run again. If the Big Dawg faced off against Chimpzilla, whom do you believe would win? Despite the hatred in the neocon media, Clinton has lots of support and love among American voters. As a matter of fact, I called in a local Freeper-type talk show last night and offered Big Dawg as the best president of the last twenty years. Of course, the host became livid, but when I offered such accomplishments as a balanced budget, low fuel prices, low unemployment, etc., there wasn't much he could say.

[BurtWorm]

7. It is amazing how divorced from reality Republicanism has become

and baffling how successful they are politically being that way. :wtf:

[WI_DEM]

8. No

but yes, you are correct a President Gore would have had a better chance in the election of 2000.

[PeaceProgProsp]

9. No. But Kerry should have run for president in 2000.

[Jacobin]

10. As the only president in the history of this country to EVER have had

such an assignation, why, certainly, yes, of course, he ....oops, never mind.

[Eagle_Eye]

12. NO. The answer is NO

President Clinton had no reason to resign. Bush on the other hand, has reason to resign.

[oasis]

13. Clinton's defiance struck a blow for our democracy. The voters of the '96

election didn't suffer a retroactive disenfranchisement. It was an illegal impeachment from the start.

Some applauded when that right wing asshole hinted that Nixon had class by steping down while "another" did not. Fuck them.

[gulliver]

14. Yes, as soon as he beat impeachment.

Right after the Senate failed to convict, Clinton should have resigned. If there had never been impeachment proceedings, he still should have resigned. His encounters with Monica were dishonorable, plain and simple. He disgraced himself and dragged his friends and political allies into the muck. He sullied us all. We have yet to recover.

Had Clinton resigned after impeachment failed, he would have won the encounter. He lost by not resigning. Even the victory over impeachment was a loss.

Clinton, a great and gifted President of the United States, disgraced himself and then clung to power. The affect on our culture and on history should not be underestimated. It was seismic. I firmly believe a twisted microscopic little creature like George W. Bush would not occupy the White House today had Clinton handled himself more honorably and accepted "punishment" for his error.

And no, it is not about sex or the "punishment fitting the crime." Clinton knew full well what the result of his being caught would be, and he did it anyway. You and I, as liberals, were back-stabbed by Clinton. Moreover, Clinton's debt was never paid -- just swept under the rug of time.

For his knowing, stupid, reckless, selfish act, Clinton doesn't meet my standards of honor for president. He would be OK as a friend or almost anything else, but not as president -- not any more.

[Blue Wally]

15. Resign in Feb 1999

That way, Al Gore would have been eligible to run in 2000 and again in 2004. With the country seething about the Republicans treatment of Clinton, 2000 would have been a walkaway for an incumbent Al Gore. Not sure how Gore would have handled 9-11 though and whether or not it would have been "gold" for him.

[Cooley Hurd]

80. "Not sure how Gore would have handled 9-11 though"

9-11 wouldn't have happened if Gore was in office. Certainly, most of Clinton's NSC team would've remained in place, including Richard Clarke. When Tenet was scurrying about with "his hair on fire," a Gore NSC and AG would've taken notice. Not to mention that the incoming Gore admin would've cracked open the Hart-Rudman report immediately upon receiving it, and acted on its recommendations.

[Mandate My Ass]

17. Get over the blowjob

or better yet, get one.....if you're lucky it'll be seismic.

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[donheld]

62. NO he should not have resigned.

that's plain crazy.

[tabasco]

73. Spend 50 million investigating anybody...

and none of them will meet your saintly standards.

The criminal perverts that insisted on character assassination as the Nation's number 1 priority are the ones that should have resigned.

[Catamount]

74. No he shouldn't have resigned!

Clinton was a saint in comparison to other residents in the WH. He should never have been asked those questions in the first place, considering how uptight some people are about sex. Until the Clinton era, most presidents'sex lives were given a modicom of privacy. Right from the beginning the right wing thugs were out to get him in any way they could. And the whole impeachment was simply a distraction for the masses so the Pugs could plot and begin to carry out their fiendish plans. Oh that's enough.

[ieoeja]

90. I'd like to see the logic behind that one.

"And no, it is not about sex or the 'punishment fitting the crime.' Clinton knew full well what the result of his being caught would be, and he did it anyway."

So Clinton should have resigned, not because of the sex, but because he should have known that Republicans would impeach him for because of the sex. There must be some really torturous logic behind that thought.

Clinton will be remembered, like Andrew Johnson before him, for facing down an impeachment that was complete bullshit.

[SoCalDem]

16. Didn't matter.. Republicans are patient

They knew they "had him", and whether or not he resigned, they had him captured.. They tied up congress for YEARS.. they stalled every decent piece of legislation they could, they sank health care... They pressured him into supporting welfare reform, Nafta,FCC "reform" and a bunch of other questionable things.

If he had resigned, they would have just turned their sights to Gore earlier, and by the time he ran for "re-election", they would have been more than ready for him,...

Poppy & his cartel did not sit on their hands in Houston for 8 long years.. They were busy plotting the complete takeover of government. In a way they "needed" Clinton's 8 years to allow them the time to get all the ducks lined up..

[ultraist]

18. No, he should not have resigned

I don't see any good reason for him to have resigned and validated the Repuke smear campaign that had been waged against him and all Democrats. They were out trash the Democratic party and had he resigned, it would have looked as though he was resigning himself to the fact that he and all Democrats were despicable.

What was despicable, was spending millions of dollars on a bj. I'm proud our Democrats fought against that impeachment and stood their ground all of the way through.

I do think Clinton did cash in on the party though in some sense but this has nothing to do with his affair with Monica. He compromised on core Democratic values by signing DOMA, implementing welfare reform the way it was written (yes, reforms were needed but some were too severe), and moving to the center in general. This has cost the Democrats and we are essentially paying for his centrism.

[Padraig18]

19. Not just 'No' but 'Hell no!'. n/t

[sidwill]

20. Absolutely YES!

Clinton should have resigned for one simple reason:
He went on national TV and lied to us.

All the other stuff meant nothing, but when he went on TV an lied about his relationship with Lewinsky he broke a sacred trust. For that and that alone I feel he should have resigned.

[BurtWorm]

21. A "sacred trust?"

I don't think so. Most Americans were very forgiving of both the adultery and the lie.

[jdj]

24. So are you similarly calling for Bush's resignation?

Bush High Crimes:

-outing of CIA noc Valerie Plame
-showing Iraq war plans to Bandar bin Sultan
-moving $70 million dollars of Afghanistan money to Iraq war without approval from Congress.

and that's just off the top of my head.

stack that up against a blow-job and it's well, limp.

[gollygee]

31. A sacred trust?

He lied about his personal sex life. We have no "sacred trust" in regard to his personal sex life.

[Tactical Progressive]

53. Should Dwight D have resigned after Gary Francis?

Your arguments are simplistic and wrong.

[in_cog_ni_to]

63. Sacred Trust?

Puhleeze. Anyone in his shoes would have lied about a personal affair. Now, had he illegally, preemptively attacked another sovereign country, lied about WMD, killed 100,000 Iraqi citizens and killed 1,600 U.S. soldiers then, yes, he should have resigned. :eyes: PERSPECTIVE! It's important.

[Lindacooks]

70. Oh really??

And how do you feel about the THOUSANDS of lies that Bush* and his camp have told? Lies that have killed hundreds of thousands of people?? That ok with you????

[shadowknows69]

84. I agree

If our elected leaders are deceitful to us in any way they need to be shown the door. It's time we demand a higher standard from the people we (presumably) put in office. Bush and his entire cartel should resign for the same reasons.

[Withywindle]

22. No freakin' WAY.

His approval ratings actually went UP as the impeachment dragged on. Most Americans either sympathized with him or didn't give a damn, and I think most people realized it was ridiculous that the actual government of the country was being held up over this crap, and I think lots of people also realized that many of the people persecuting him had done much the same thing at some time in their lives.

I forgive him for the lie completely. Why? Because why the hell was he having to testify in the first place about something that was legal, consensual, and none of anyone else's goddamn business? If I'd never told a lie about sex in my life I might feel entitled to cast a stone, but....ahem.

[sidwill]

23. Thats not the point.

I don't care about him lying to the grand jury.
I don't care about him thwarting the witch hunters who were set against him from the start.

But when he went on TV and lied to the nation, as piddly and uninportant a lie as it was, it was still a lie. Thats it, end of story somebody looks me in the eye and lies to me and i have a problem with it.

Bush comes on TV and lies, those lies cost lives, we all know this, we all know that he has consistently broken that trust and if there was true justice he would be answering for those lies.

I'm simply holding Clinton to the same standard. I don't like being lied to by my leaders wether they are Pukes or Democrats.

[jdj]

26. should your kids make you resign for lying about Santa Claus?

would you terminate parental rights over that?

the subject matter of the lie should come in play somewhere when you are talking about such a drastic move as a presidential resignation.

[sidwill]

27. Oh well

I guess one could rationalize any number of instances where a lie might be viewed as justified.

But as far as I'm concerned that particular lie was one of the most damaging acts of any modern president, consider for a moment this scenario:

BC goes on TV and instead of saying "I never had sexual......" he instead says "I would like to apologize to all for my indiscretion, especially my wife yadda, yadda......."

I truly belive that not only would this have been the truth but it would have absolutely gutted the Republican attack machine, guaranteed that Al Gore would have been elected in 2000 and we may have avoided all sorts of hardship directly attributed to the right wing leadership of our country.

A simple honest admission would have ended the whole sorry saga, even embarassing the House witch hunters out of the game, instead a stupid simple lie gave them momentum and credibilty.

[jdj]

65. don't believe so, believe it was the sex, not the lie.

people know politicians lie.

If Clinton had done all the b.s. you wanted him to, he would have been lying as well, at least at the time. So you would rather him have told the right lie for the moment.

[Withywindle]

48. But has there ever been a President who DIDN'T lie? Ever?

I doubt it.

Which is why I weight the importance of the lies and who they affected.

[bunkerbuster1]

83. Have we forgotten about the mid terms?

sheesh, people--Americans had a chance to weigh in on this and turned out the reThugs.

And what's this crap about Nixon doing the "decent" thing by resigning? He was out of options. He was going to be convicted, and he walked before they made him run.

[DelawareValleyDem]

25. If Nixon had decency

he wouldn't be in a position where people were calling for him to resign. Fact is, he had to be dragged from office, and members of his party who wanted resignation did so for pratical as much as moral reasons

[B Calm]

28. Thank GOD President Clinton was a brave man that stood up

and stared right into the faces of the hypocritical political smear mongers that tried and failed to undermine democracy. If anything the house impeachment vote will go down in history as an honor to a brave man!

[sidwill]

29. Guess this proves

We are just as fanatical and closeminded about our politicians as the righties are about theirs.

[B Calm]

30. WHAT the hell are you saying!

[sidwill]

32. I'm saying that

I doubt very much we applaud a Repuke who did the exact same thing that Clinton did.

A lie is a lie. A lie that ultimately costs us the Presidency and gives power to the nut jobs who currently hold it is a freakin disaster.

[B Calm]

34. A lie is a lie is a bunch of crap and you know it! Clinton tried to hide

the fact he got a blow job from a bunch of snoopy political smear mongers. Bush LIED about the reasons to take this country into WAR!

[sidwill]

38. Agreed

And Bush would be impeached if we were living in a nation ruled by reason.

But Bush's heinous offenses in no way exonerate BC for going on TV looking YOU in the face and lying to YOU. I don't accept Bush's lies why would I accept BC's lies just because we both have a "D" printed on our voters card?

[DrWeird]

43. Because Clinton lied about a blowjob.

Bush lied about WMDs and it's gotten hundreds of thousands of human beings murdered.

One would have to be fanatical and close-minded not to know the obvious difference.

[B Calm]

44. There was no damn reason for President Clinton to be put on

the spot about a private consensual matter. If you want to point your finger, point it at the hypocritical accusers!

[Hippo_Tron]

67. And that's EXACTLY where the shit hits the fan

There is NO reason for a justice department special prosecutor to be investigating a blowjob. Clinton probably shouldn't have lied but they had no business asking him that question anyway.

[Stirk]

72. Bullshit- the question itself was the shameful part.

I couldn't care less what Clinton- or Bush Jr. for that matter- has done with their dick. It's none of my business. It's none of your business.

[BurtWorm]

41. But some lies are impeachable offenses and others aren't.

Oddly enough, lying about a blow job is impeachable and lying us into war isn't! :wtf:

[sidwill]

45. You are confusing the issue

The thread is entitled "Should Clinton have RESIGNED"

I don't believe Clinton did ANYTHING that would rise to the level of impeachment.

Its a fine line but the difference is between having personal accountabilty and committing a crime.

Clinton did not commit a crime, but he should have held his own personal accountability to a higher standard.

[BurtWorm]

50. No kidding.

Shouldn't we all hold our standards higher?

[BurtWorm]

33. The whole point of defending Clinton was to counter fanaticism.

A lot of us who defended Clinton then did so, not out of any great admiration for the man, but out of a sense of outrage over the transparent hypocrisy of his accusers.

[sidwill]

36. Defending his record was one thing

But his public lie, on National TV was indefensible and worse it helped create an environment where Repuke lies were accepted as fact. We have to speak honestly of Clinton's overall negative effect of the Democratic cause since this lie.

In the end the lie served to justify the witchhunters attacks.

[AZCat]

37. Lies were a part of the "environment" long before WJC n/t

[B Calm]

39. I'll tell you what the lie was and it was under oath too! It was when

Henry Hyde, Helen Chenowerth, Newt Gingrich, Bob Livingston, and Dan Burton said their marriage vows to GOD!

[sidwill]

40. Agreed

It doesn't justify BCs liebut it does expose the utter hypocrisy of the Right.

[Hippo_Tron]

68. LMAO, THATS GREAT!

So true

[BurtWorm]

42. No, Clinton's lie did not set up the environment in which Republican lies

became acceptable. I would recommend looking back into that era, if you can stomach it. It seems you're giving the Republicans a pass on their architecture of the present degraded state of American politics.

[sidwill]

46. I agree to a point

But to say that Clinton's lie didn't throw gas on the fire would be denying the obvious.

[B Calm]

47. It wasn't President Clinton throwing gas on the fire!

[BurtWorm]

51. Clinton's sneezing the wrong way would have thrown gas on the fire.

Bob Barr had drawn up articles of impeachment before anyone but Bill Clinton and Linda Tripp had heard the name Monica Lewinsky. They were looking for something to get Clinton on. Granted, he shouldn't have been screwing around on his wife--and I use the term "screwing" lightly. That did open him up to get walloped. But the Republicans--the Scaife-Republicans in particular--had set out to nail Clinton. They went into the gutter waiting for him to fall into it. They were lucky that he did.

[B Calm]

52. Yes they went into the gutter, and they found a lot of their own

down there!

[AZCat]

35. Perhaps the Taylor cronie was referring to Saint Ronnie...

...who was certainly complicit in more heinous crimes than Bill C.

[Fescue4u]

49. In Retrospect proably yes.

But only after he had beaten the charges.

Althought I didn feel that way at the time.

Clinton was pretty much ineffective the impeachment.

If he had resigned and Gore took over as president, Gore would have handily won in 2000.

[Piperay]

55. I agree

things might be way different (much better) now if he had turned his office over to Gore.

[B Calm]

56. Hows that? They would have went after Al Gore too..

[Orsino]

85. I didn't feel this way at the time, either...

...being too concerned with Rs "winning." In retrospect, Clinton compromised himself not by the affair, but with the appearance that he had assisted Lewinsky in her career because of the affair. He probably should have resigned; while this would have made life difficult, in a way, for President Gore, it would have set a precedent by which more people would now be calling for * to step down.

Clinton compromised himself, also, with a too-cozy relationship with business. His offenses in this respect pale next to *any* single senior member of the Bush administration, though.

[dansolo]

58. No, and he shouldn't have been impeached either

Clinton deserved a censure at most. It is not at all comparable to Nixon. Nixon resigned because if he hadn't, he would have been impeached and convicted.

[trumad]

60. Actually, Ken Starr should have resigned

wow..how easy some forget or even worse, how ignorant of some who call themselves Democrats. I'm not responding to you dansolo, just some of the trolls up above without the profile gif.

[journalist3072]

59. Those idiots are amazing

Here it is 2005, and they are still fighting the Clinton impeachment wars. Goodness. Does Clinton come to them in their dreams at night and haunt them? There are obsessed with him!

They still don't get what an overwhelming majority of American people understood---lying about an extramarital affair is not an impeachable offense. It is NOT a high crime or misdemeanor.

[American Tragedy]

61. Yes, and I'll tell you why.

He should have endured the impeachment proceedings, however humiliating and unfair they may have been. In stark contrast to Nixon, Clinton could tell the country that he had honored the Constitutional process.

Afterwards, he should have resigned, not necessarily to indicate professional wrongdoing. He would simply state that he was leaving office because he needed to devote his time and priorities to repairing his family relations. That may sound crazy, especially after being acquitted, but his term was almost over anyway. He would have had a far better public image for it, as someone who apparently regretted his actions and chose to accept the gravest consequences for it. Even his most virulent foes would concede a grudging respect for that, particularly Newt Gingrich.

Then, he passes on the reins to Al Gore, who enters the 2000 race as an incumbent President.

It would have been painful, and ugly, and many would initially scream in protest, but in the end the Democrats would have been in a far stronger position right now. I suspect we would be living in a different world.

[in_cog_ni_to]

64. HELL NO!

He knew the repukes were out to get him for beating daddy Bush in the election. He absolutely should not have resigned. He had a personal sexual affair. When he lied, no one died.

[Hippo_Tron]

66. Bush would've won by a landslide if he had

Lewinsky-gate was bullshit and the American public saw through the bullshit quite well. There's a reason that in the 1998 midterms Democrats GAINED seats and Newt Gingrich wound up looking like a fool. People were tired of the bullshit and they wanted their President to actually be able to GOVERN.

More importantly, had Clinton resigned, he and the party would've lost the battle. Gore, who had been part of the administration, would've
been tagged as being very involved in an administration whose leader had to resign in the face of "certain impeachment". By being fighting and then being acquitted, Clinton won the battle and showed that the charges against him were bullshit and restored credability to his administration and the Democratic party.

Oh yea, BTW, if history teaches us anything, Gore wouldn't have won. Gerald Ford was an outsider and had NOTHING to do with Watergate, but he still lost to Carter in '76.

[GetTheRightVote]

69. NO, he was attacked unjustly, & look at * now, far far worst then Bill

and at least Bill did not steal our election or money from us.

:kick:

[Liberal In Texas]

71. NO. And HELL NO!

What a stupid thing to even post.

Are you really a Democrat?

[ISUGRADIA]

75. As to Nixon's "decency" to resign, the moron who said that

failed to mention that after the "smoking gun" tapes were released Nixon's Republican support collapsed. Goldwater and others went to him and told him he'd be impeached and be lucky to get TEN votes against conviction in the Senate. He was through and the resignation made sure a pardon was possible.

Clinton's impeachment was never, ever bipartisan.

[Dookus]

76. No

I haven't read the thread, but I'll weigh in.

Fuck no. NOTHING he did was worthy of an investigation, much less resignation. The right-wing hoped they could make him do so, but in usual Clinton style, he whooped their asses. They tried to make him resign, but instead Gingrich and Livingston resigned He kicked their asses.

[KG]

77. yes.

but then, so should bush have done so after failing to proect the US 0n 9/11/01.

[B Calm]

79. Trying to hide the fact you got a BJ from a fat chick from a bunch

of foaming at the mouth mad dog political smear mongering hypocrites is not the same thing as failing to protect this country from the 9-11 terrorists!

[No Exit]

78. No! Gore would have ended up like Ford.

Gore wouldn't have been able to take over w/o at least getting some of the "mud" splattered on him. After all, he and Clinton were friends. So Gore would've finished out Clinton's term, and would then have been defeated.

I think Clinton handled it the best he could.

[Charon]

81. Resignation

I do not think that President Clinton should have resigned. He was cleared of all charges by the U.S. Senate.

[twenty2strings]

82. Clinton. The best republican president we ever had. N/T

[mzmolly]

86. Excellent food for thought BW.

;) If it would have given Gore a better shot at the Presidency, I'd say for the sake of his country he should have. After he fought the impeachment.

[Carson]

87. To quote the late, great Hunter S. Thompson...

Excerpt from an interview. http://fargonebooks.com/hunter.html


Question: Looking back.....do you feel Richard Nixon was really the enemy to our generation?

Hunter Thompson: Yeah. He personified the enemy. He stood for everything that was wrong and rotten. We were lucky to get it all rolled up into one person. It was Nixon who drove a very serious spike into the American dream. Nixon was the first president to be so massively and publicly exposed as an evil bastard. A lot of people knew US Grant was a monster, or Harding -- but a lot of people in those days was 200 or 500. Now, with even a rumor --- 44,000 people know it the next morning. I think the Watergate stuff shocked people.

Bookpgsara: What do you think about Clinton? Where does he come in in the hieracrchy of bad presidents?

Hunter Thompson: Well, we still have a few years ago. Clinton already stands accused formally of worse things than Nixon would have been impeached for. I think Clinton is every bit as. . . he's not as crude as Nixon. But maybe he is. I mean: Paula Jones? "Come over here, little girl, I've got something for you" !? It's almost embarrassing to talk about Clinton as if he were important.
I'd almost prefer Nixon. I'd say Clinton is every bit as corrupt as Nixon, but a lot smoother.

In my humble opinion, he should've resigned.

[sidwill]

88. I don't agree with Thompson's take

on Clinton vs. Nixon.

Nixon sought to cover up criminal activity that was done on his behalf (politically) Clinton sought to cover up personal shame.

Nixon was far worse (though I'd wade across an ocean of Shit to trade Bush for him)

Clinton's mistake was lying to the nation on national TV about a trivial matter. It was a stupid act and he got caught.

If he would have simply fessed up that he was boning Lewinsky he would have cut the Repukes off at the knees.

Instead he lied and for that he should have resigned.

[B Calm]

91. Never ever resign to the republicans, they'll eat you alive!

[BurtWorm]

89. Thompson betrayed his ignorance with those comments.

But a willingness to spew it nevertheless. :thumbsup: