[.blog]

---

I'm apparently only using this blog now for saving insightful slashdot comments.

"Clinton didn't perjure. He asked for a court definition of "sex", was given one that specified mutual genital contact, and truthfully denied he had "sex". He gets a lot of heat for the (equally legit) "depends on what the definition of 'is' is", but really he did not perjure because it did depend on what the definition of "sex" was.

His blowjob wasn't "morally reprehensible". Lying to cover up a blowjob isn't "morally reprehensible". It's a little immoral.

But compared with lying us into war, it's not very immoral at all.

If you think Clinton's lie was so reprehensible it merited impeachment, don't you think that Bush's lie makes impeachment an obvious necessity?"

by Doc Ruby (173196) on Thursday November 08, @12:22AM
http://politics.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=353581&cid=21277451

Labels: bush clinton politics slashdot impeachment

---