Their defense consists of "Bill Clinton was worse". And The Donald says that he'll make an issue of Bill Clinton's infidelities.
Point one: Bill Clinton isn't running for anything. That this has to even be pointed out shows the depth of the Right's infection by Clinton Derangement Syndrome.
Point two: Trump has no ground to stand on. He has cheated on all of his wives. He cheated on wife #1, Ivana, with Marla Maples. He then divorced Ivana, married Marla, and then cheated on her with Melania Knauss. He then married Melania and has since cheated on her.
And who are Trump's advisors: Newt Gingrich, who has been married three times and cheated on his second wife with the woman who he later married. Rudy Giuliani has, like Trump and Gingrich, been married three times and cheated on his second with with the woman who became Mrs. Giuliani the Third.
Maybe you can detect a pattern.
When it comes to the moral highground of marriage and fidelity, Trump, Giuliani and Gingrich are yelling from the lowest sub-basement that there is.
But none of this matters to the poor sufferers of Clinton Derangement Syndrome.
Cat Pawtector!
3 hours ago
11 comments:
How do you go from Serial Cheater to "Sexual Predator"?
Pretty big jump.
I mean, William Jefferson was a serial cheater. But he wasn't a predator either.
Christian values, family values, fiscal responsibility, transparency in government, accountability; these are all just words to politicians. If they say them enough, perhaps they'll get elected and then that's where the REAL money begins rolling in. To quote Ms Fit, we are so fracked!
Dale
If it was 'just sex' in 1996, it's 'just sex' now. We didn't make the rules, you all did.
Bill Clinton had consensual sex.
Trump is gloating about assaulting women by grabbing their genitals and kissing them without consent. The "tic tac" thing he mentioned was apparently a move he used on multiple women, as detailed here:
CNN Panel gets tired of Trump surrogate defending Trump by Throwing Bill Clinton Under the bus
Sorry, guys. You don't get to spend decades blasting Bill Clinton for his peccadilloes and then nominate a guy who's worse. You're just demonstrating that Republicans believe in situational morality: Bad when a Democrat does it, OK when a Republican does far worse.
But that's nothing new. When the Republicans are not in power, they scream about deficit spending. Ronnie spent months screaming about a trillion-dollar national debt and then tripled it by the time he left office. The only Republican president to do something about the deficit was Bush 41 and Bush 43 undid that almost immediately.
"The party of morals and family values"?
Horseshit.
I voted for W. J. Clinton and Obama (well, his second run).
Drumpf is a POS, but he is very open- his thoughts run straight to his mouth, and there isn't any hidden depth to him. He won the Republican nomination (before my state even voted) by being himself, openly going after people, running his mouth.
H. R. Clinton, at least in part, won her party's nomination by using the backroom machinery to suppress her main opponent.
Hilary is much more able to accomplish goals I strongly disagree with (firearms, for instance). Trump is likely to be a bull in a china shop, but I count on wiser and obstructionist heads to rein him in.
I'm still voting Giant Douche over Turd Sandwich.
I'm just amazed it took this long for this to come out. Had the GOP done any vetting of their candidates back in 2015? Or was it more like a cattle call for 'Who Wants To Be A President?' I know from the last 40 years there has been a lowering of the bar for office, but to assume the ability to fog a mirror is good enough credentialing is astounding. Hillary has been investigated for decades, and aside from the stink those investigations have created, there has been little fire to all the smoke which was fanned into the media. Had Trump even had a really good background check, I don't think we'd be having this mess at this time.
One thing overlooked in the comparisons to Bill Clinton: The House impeached him for consensual sex. Trump is advocating sexual assault. By the same "logic" House Republicans applied in the 1990s, Trump should be impeached immediately upon being sworn in.
Or, maybe, we just don't elect him in the first place...
3383:
Trump is likely to be a bull in a china shop, but I count on wiser and obstructionist heads to rein him in.
Ayup. And that was the same argument that people made in Germany in the early `30s. Didn't work out so well for them, or about 40 million other people.
In your argument, you're counting on Trump to follow the rule of law. I submit that, based on his lengthy track-record, that is a dangerously foolish hope.
Marc, who would do the vetting? Your likely Trump voter believes nothing that doesn't come from Fox News or Oxy-Boy.
B, I suspect that we're in the early stages of a Cosby-like affair: Expect more shit to come out.
Anon 8:54, not exactly. The House impeached him for lying about it, under oath. It was still a bullshit political hitjob, scripted by a man who was and remains thoroughly dishonorable, himself and egged on by two men, one a sexual predator in his own right and the otehr a drug-abuser. But hey, bill lied, right?
Svd1949, you've convinced me. You really have. Bill Clinton is a sexual predator who is not worthy of my vote. So I won't vote for him this November.
What?
- Badtux the Snarky Penguin
Post a Comment