|
|
|
|
||
|
 Readers's Views on Clinton's Speech
Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9
I would just like to ask each of the persons pointing their fingers at
President Clinton, Are you so innocent? Do your wives and husbands know all
of your dirty little secrets. Mr. Clinton was elected to do a job, why
don't we let him finish the job. I'm sure that Ken Starr has a few ghost's
in his closet. And I'm sure that it will take less than 40 million to find
dirt on him. Maybe he would like to be terrorized for a while.
Of course he didn't answer the questions.
The fact that a news organization could even
consider that he might have answered anyone's
serious question worries me.
When I attended the US Army Infantry Officer Candidate School in 1970,
our instructors impressed upon us the necessity to adhere to the Schools
Honor Code. Similar to that of West Point, the Code we lived by said that we
"would neither lie, nor cheat, nor tolerate those who do." Absolute honesty
in dealings with each other, and as officers, with our subordinates was
considered a vital characteristic in gaining the willing obedience of
soldiers to orders, often in the face of death. Mr. Clinton has
answered my question of his fitness to lead. He has lied, and we should not
tolerate him.
No! Of course, there was no question in my mind as to his fundamental
dishonesty. Yesterday's speech simply confirmed that. The president is a
liar. What troubles me most however is the willingness of so many Americans
to dismiss this as simply a private matter about sex. This is not about sex.
It is about perjury, subornation of perjury and obstruction of justice. The
question on my mind is why is it that so many people don't realize that as
president, he is sworn to uphold the constitution and
enforce the laws of the land? He is the chief law enforcement officer in
the country. Can this nation afford to let someone with so little regard for
the law enforce the law? Also, if he gets away with this, we will have
defined a class of crimes that the president can commit with impunity.
Besides perjury, subornation of perjury and obstruction of justice, what
other crimes is a president free to commit? These are my questions, and no,
he did not answer them.
Clinton has to be told what to say in every situation. He should run
Harry Thomason and his old lady out of town and resign. Clinton wouldn't
know honor if it came up and gave him oral sex!
Yes, It answered my question regarding his character and ability to
tell the truth. What is not answered is how he could humiliate his wife in
front of the entire world. That is some deep hostility operating there. IT
staggers the mind the contemplate the recklessness of his conduct for
himself, his family and for us, the Americans he represents in the world.
I never asked for an explanation to begin with. His private life is his
own business. It was the vultures in the news media who were salivating for
salacious details. I would have been happy if he had not said anything.
The man is a disgrace and a sham. He has been lying to the American
public since he ran for Attorney General in Arkansas. How he has continued
to con the country I will never, ever, understand.
President Clinton could not have answered my questions. I have too
many - and his speech was far too short. I am saddened by the fact that his
speech was just that - a speech. He would have gone miles, in my opinion,
had he merely spoken from his heart and expressed his sorrow and remorse. He
did not. That decision, whomever made it, was a bad one. If it were
possible for President Clinton to step down and allow Hillary to run our
country - I would be highly in favor of that. She very obviously
deserves the highest award for courage. It is her that I feel for.
As I see it, this had nothing to do with national security, the economy, or
our day to day lives. Get a life people.
I think President Clinton's behavior during this whole process has been
appalling.
I, too, don't want to pry into the man's personal life. But I must question
Mr. Clinton's judgment and credibility.
I question his judgment because of the stupidity of fooling around with an
intern; his credibility because he lied
to the American people about something he just could easily have admitted to
seven months ago and gone on in life.
In answer to the Washington Post question, my answer is no.
No, the speech did little to convince me that Mr. Clinton is hiding something
about his efforts to
persuade the intern to keep the entire affair to herself. My biggest problem
with this whole thing is that Mr. Clinton
somehow believes he's above the law and I feel that's just wrong.
Don't get me wrong. I'm no fan of Kenneth Starr, but why doesn't Clinton just
tell the truth and stop abusing the English language
to hide his wrongdoing
Yes, because I did not have that many. People talk about the morality
of the office of president but there is no true morality at any level of
politics. We have no right to expect politicians to be any different then any
other mortal men. Why don't we deal with the real issue which is bunch of
Republicians & Conservatives who still haven't come to grips with the fact
that they have been evicted from the White House. They speak of smoke screens
from the president, but what have the Republicians really
done since they have held the majority in congress. Nothing productive at
all. All they have done is cry about Clinton being in office. What a sorry
bunch of hypocrites.
His responses in the Paula Jones deposition were not reconciled by what
he said in his speech. His "couldn't remember whether he and Monica were
ever alone" is a baldfaced lie. That statement under oath has to be perjury.
Did he think what he said on television erased what he had said when deposed?
About the only way he can convince the American people his philandering days
are over is to submit to chemical castration (documented, of course).
No, it did not. The President said his answers to questions in the
deposition were "legally accurate." Does that mean he had "inappropriate
conduct" but truly does not know whether he and she were alone, or whether
others were present each time they had a sexual encounter?
I'm am not willing to give Clinton the benefit of the doubt. What he
did is unacceptable for a President and I do not consider his actions as
private or personal. When he quits riding in Air Force 1, he can claim
that his actions are private. He is not like us. He is the President.
Any CEO, General, or for that matter Senator, would be fired for such
actions. Just ask ed.
Yes, I now know for sure that the President had some kind of sex with a
21 year old girl. Next week I suppose that he will apologize for dropping
his pants in front of Paula Jones. The following week he might even
apologize to Kathleen Willey about groping her in the Oval Office. We can
all look forward to his nationwide address apologizing for allowing US
Companies to send missile technology to China. A man is certainly entitled
to his privacy but not at the expense of America. I applaud Ken Sta
rr for starting the avalanche of projected apologies yet to come.
No, the President is a man of horrible character. If this was a work
place and he was a married boss having sex with a 21 intern then he would be
fired. Then the shifting of blame to Kenneth Starr, had nothing to gain from
this, a man who was nearly a Supreme Court Justice, made me angry. President
Clinton proved in the speach that he is a man of no moral values, and that
type of man shouldn't be in office. The worst part is that the American
people seem to not care, or still support him. How could a
woman still support him after what he admitted to? I guess the real question
to ask here is this: If the election was today between Clinton and Gore who
would you vote for? I would vote for Gore. Impeach him.
Bill Clinton is finally in a fight that isn't
an election... and this time he's going to lose.
No! He assumed little blame for his actions and then, as he is famous
for, accused Ken Starr for his problems. Judge Starr did not cause Mr.
Clinton to do the acts that he did nor did he cause him to lie in the Jones
case. Everyone keeps saying that all presidents have lied, and that is true,
but what is left out of news reports is that none of them, except Mr.
Clinton, was sworn by oath to tell the truth in a court of law. Makes a big
difference. What bothers me the most about the President's spee
ch is that almost every one who heard it and now reports about it, states
that the President apologized for his actions to the people. I have read and
reread his statement, there is no apology, not even a hint of one. Someone
is sure doing a bad job of reporting.
I think he was, and is, perfectly justified
in being angry. And there's no conflict between
saying "I take full responsibility for what I
did" and being angry at Ken Starr for dragging
into the public arena. So many people have said,
"Why was he on the offensive in his speech?"
I didn't see a man on the offensive, but a man
on the DEfensive--a man saying, "OK, I've said
it. Now get the HELL away from my private life
and my family!" I found myself respecting Clinton
more in that moment of emotional candor, than
the whole time I've been watching. He was real,
he was beaten down and angry, and he was fiercely
defending his family.
No. He skated. Taking responsibility means accepting consequences,
but he seems unwilling. Otherwise, this would have been over long, long ago.
He's had seven months worth of press conferences, interviews, and photo ops
where he flatly denied the allegations. I think he has simply painted
himself into a corner. In this case, that corner is the Oval Office. Ken
Starr has a duty to complete what he began. I think he will do that. Warts
and all.
No (he told us what we already "knew.") On the contrary, his speech has
raised more questions. When someone does something "sexually inappropriate"
in his office, how to draw the line between official and private? Already the
President's admission have disappointed, humiliated, and hurt most of the
American public, can such an extend of impact be considered a solely private
matter, none of others' business? When a president costs so much tax payers'
money for misleading his own people, can we say his
private life has nothing to do with the public? As the economy is good, many
think the President is doing a good job, thus his private conduct is
inmaterial. But, being a president is not just a matter of bringing in good
life. In time of crisis such as a war, or in the much touted campaign of
"human rights," can the president exercise the needed moral authority? Can
Americans speak against corruption and totalitarianism in Asia while having
a president whose integrity is being questioned? I guess Amer
icans will be in this dilemma for a long time: ignore the President's
scandals and continue to enjoy good times; deal with the scandals squarely
and worry about the economy.
No. He is now and always will be a liar who says only as much as he
thinks he needs to and only after his polling is done to find the right words
to use. Truthtellers don't need to parse their words. Go home, Clintons!
You could tell in the first minute of Bill Clinton's speech that he
was forced to make it, it wasn't from the bottom of his heart. He had to make
the speech because he hung his family, friends and supports out to dry by
lying all these years. After the second minute or so you could tell all he
wanted to do is blame someone else for all the wrong things he has done in
the past. He never said he was sorry, now this is probably the truth. The
only reason he apologized to the world is because he got ca
ught with his hand in the cookie jar.
Did the President's speech answer my questions? I really didn't have
very many questions? It did verify that he did have an affair with Monica,
he did lie about it, and that he has no moral character. It did reinforce in
my mind the belief that President Clinton is a lier and should step down or
be impeached. I do agree that how he and his family deal with his
unfaithfulness is their business but that doesn't in any way change the fact
that he lied under oath and he must be held responsible for the
se actions.
No I do not. The President is the only one
lying (excuse me misleading) the Nation.
The President is responsible for the mess that
we are now witnessing. If he truly wants to
but this behind him, he will have to perform
the unnatural act of telling the truth. If
the truth were known there would be no need for
a Grand Jury to be in session. Unfortunately
our President does no have the courage or
morality to bring this to a close by himself.
President Clinton failed to provide an adequate answer for his wrong
doing. In fact, as he attempted to explain his reasons for misleading the
people of this nation, he placed the blame on others. That is not repentance!
My kids will be affected by this shameful scandal. Isn't that a shame?
Whatever a man that shall he also reap!
I think Mr. Clinton did answer the essential question about having a sexual
relationship with Monica Lewinsky. I think everyone knows he did. I believe
the initial probe into his sex life in the Paula Jones case was
inappropriate
to begin with. When dealing with sex lies, especially being the major public
figure that he is, I understand the embarrassment he must have felt and sex
lies
are different than lies about more serious matters such as Iran Contra,
Watergate
or situations where a major coverup was taking place. Unfortunately, most of
our leaders
have or will lie to the public on a variety of issues that concern real
problems in
our country. I think that if the President goes under the scrutiny of sexual
matters,
there will be a backlash wereby many other political figures in both parties
will
go under investigation by other investigators. Perhaps revealing more than we
need to know.
I did not have a question in the first place, because I can not see why
what he does in his private life and time has any thing to do with me. My
having a question for it means that I am saying it is ok for some one to have
a say in my private life. Maybe it is time we create royalty and start
grooming our future presidents because if we have to get our presidents from
amongst us then we should allow who ever it is the privacy we all want for
our selves. I can see how watergate affects my life, I can
see how Iran Contra Affects my life but I don't see how having sex with a
willing partner affects my life. Those of you looking up to an elected
official to instill moral discipline to your children are to me parental
failures looking for an excuse.
In classic Clinton-speek, the president tried to
tell us that he lied to us, but didn't lie to the
Paula Jones grand jury. And, we should blame Ken Starr.
So, yes he answered my question
of whether he finally matured to the point where
he has gained enough character to lead this
nation. The answer is a resounding NO!
yes, the President did okay. As a matter of fact nobody has the right to
ask him questions about his sexual desires and relationships. I wonder what
you or me would say, if we were to answer all these unlucky questions by
people who want to harm a man, who has been most probably the best American
President since JFK. He has to be judged by his work and not by his sexual
affairs.
Some fundamental questions remain unanswered.
Did the President lie about not remembering his
intimate encounters with Lewinsky? How can he
attempt to shift blame on the grand jury
investigation when he, in fact, has misled and
stonewalled the investigation for the past seven
months? Why should we believe anything he now
tells us?
No. I expected him to apologize to the voters/taxpayers for weakening the
presidency, and for wasting so much policy-making time on this irresponsible
stupidity. Note that I am a committed backer of Clinton's public policies,
however much I despise his childish behavior.
No, I still have questions about whether he committed perjury or encouraged
others to lie. He cannot be trusted, having admitted lying on Lewinsky case
what about all the other times he has lied?
The President is a coward and a disgrace to this Country. He had the
perfect opportunity to state his case to the american public and he choose to
blame everyone else along with himself. He didn't even have the guts to
apologize to the people he has deceived for oh so long. If I had to go in
front of the cameras or grand jury on his behalf prior to his confession I
would be extremely angry
No. He dodged the main issue again by hiding behind a bunch of
legalese and shifting the blame to Ken Starr. As for forgiveness, sure, we
can forgive Clinton, but we MUST not let him simply get away without any
disciplinary action. To do so would be absolutely disgraceful and a shame to
our morals and conscience.
Although I heard the President say that he regretted his actions, but, I never
did hear him apologize. He should have at least told Hillary that he was
sorry.
I was very disappointed that Mr. Clinton tried to push the blame off on Mr.
Starr. I thought that he was willing to accept the "full responsibility" for
his actions? Apparently not.
Indeed, this investigation has taken a long time and has cost millions --
much of which has directly to do with the President's delaying tactics. How
much does a closed circuit video testimony cost anyway? Does anyone really
believe that Mr. Clinton would have testified (or spoke to the nation about
his testimony, for that matter) on his own accord? I don't.
Lastly, Mr. Clinton clearly fails to recognize his position as a role model
for the rest of the country, particularly for our children.
Since we live in a democracy, rather than a monarchy or a theocracy, I
don't look to the presidency for moral or spiritual leadership. I don't CARE
about President Clinton's personal life, I consider Kenneth Starr to be
totally out of control, I am horrified at the amount of money that has been
wasted on this issue, and I think Starr has seriously eroded the legal
status of the institution of the presidency. My question is: How do we pull
the plug on Kenneth Starr?
The President's speech was insincere; even arrogant. He never said he
was truly sorry. His whining about lack of privacy is pathetic. By attacking
Mr. Starr, Mr. Clinton is not looking in the mirror. What about Kathleen
Wiley, Paula Jones, Gennifer Flowers, et al?. I really believe our President
needs professional counseling, but not from his Attorneys...
Absolutely not!!! The real tragedy is finding out how depraved our
nation really is. I am convinced that so many people have a hard time
condemning him for adultery because they lack the integrity necessary to
remain faithful themselves. I find that a person's response to this issue is
as much a reflection of their own personal morals (or lack of), as it is
their feelings on the economy. Integrity can't be relegated to a set of
"important" character traits. You either have integrity IN ALL AREAS, or y
ou lack integrity. Why would anyone trust someone with such an obvious lack
of integrity to lead our country, command our young men & women in the
military, control our nukes? We should treat this with the utmost of urgency,
contact our Congressmen, and DEMAND IMPEACHMENT!
President Clinton's speech was PERFECT under the circumstances. Anyone
who has followed his presidency knows that the entire 6 years the republicans
have been out to get him. I hope they enjoyed their champagne last night.
Orrin Hatch, the republican choirboy, represents all that is bad in our
country today. He will have his way, or find a way to get you and hide his
hand. We will all REAP WHAT WE SOW.
1) There is no such thing as consensual sex between a 22 year old
intern and the president of the United States. 2) President Clinton has a
history of solving his lady problems with the taxpayers money - Jennifer
Flowers was given a state job in Arkansas; Kathleen Wiley was given a full
time job and later represented the US on foreign missions. 3) Can we afford
to trust him now?
Mr. Clinton did not say whether he discussed
with Lewinsky the testimony to be given at the
Paula Jones deposition or Lewinsky's affidavit.
He did not say whether he knew of Lewinsky's
affidavit before he testified at the deposition.
He did not say whether he was "forthcoming" when
his deposition answer to the question of whether
he had been alone with Lewinsky was that he did
not recall. He did not apologize for allowing
his staff, friends and spokespeople to state
publicly both directly and indirectly that
Lewinsky was a liar and, therefore, incredible.
Since when does having sex with a young employee
in the office constitute a private matter. Don't
these people work for us? Have we no say in the
conduct in the workplace that we ultimately own?
Where is the apology to Monica's parents? What
about Paula Jones' right to her day in court?
Can the president deny you of your rights because
the facts are too embarrassing to admit? He could
have settled the Jones lawsuit and not subjected
all of us to this embarrassment. He is so arrogant
that he thought he could get away with it. Abuse
of power? Hillary could not be a worse example
young women who look up to her. I hope Chelsea can
break the cycle of emotional abuse that has been
the example in her homelife.
Clinton's speech included not one "I apologize" or "I'm sorry." He denied
having "sexual relations" with Lewinsky in January but admitted only to an
"inappropriate relationship" in his speech. I for one was insulted. I saw
no contrition what-so-ever. He regrets the incident. Yea, and I regret
not winning the lottery but that clearly is not the same as being sorry in
the sense that I did something wrong.
For the record, what goes on in the residence section of the White House is
your private business. What goes on in the rest of the White House is the
public s business Mr. President.
No. My question was does he have a shred of dignity
, decency or honor? If he had he would have announced
his resignation last night. Instead he played
word games such as "legally accurate" then
attacked his own justice dept, attempting to
shift the focus from the consequences of his
own actions, as usual.
Words are cheap; actions are not. This President has to work hard to regain
any respect and I suspect that he will not, in fact, cannot.
His speech was a ragged compodium of roughly related ideas from various
people. Will the real Clinton stand up?
Tom Campbell
The president seemed typically angry at "the system" which would hold
him accountable for atrociously bad behavior. His responses reminded me a
person who is condescending and abusive, especially to women. The best and
most graceful thing he could do for the country is to resign.
Not really!!He used this speech to blame on Ken
W. Starr which is wrong. To my opinion, President
Clinton publicly denied this allegation in the Paula
Jones's case. Therefore, it is not Ken W. Starr who is
intruding into President Clinton's private life.
The one should be blamed is Mr. Clinton himself.
No he did not. He has a right to privacy,
but not in the people's office, and not to
marshall the resources of that office to
cover his now admitted lies.
I think the president told us more than we need to know. His private life is
of no concern to me.
as long as he has been president the republicans
have been trying to get something on him.Maybe the first lady was right when
she said they were out to get him
© Copyright 1998 The Washington Post Company |
||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||
 |
||
