Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The difference between Bush and Clinton on Sex

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
johncoby2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 11:27 AM
Original message
The difference between Bush and Clinton on Sex
is very clear:

Clinton screwed Monica.
Bush screwed us!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
La Lioness Priyanka Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
1. and monica wanted to be screwed
Edited on Sun May-16-04 11:36 AM by lionesspriyanka
we did not
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johncoby2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Good point!
LOL.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
3. Except Clinton did NOT screw Monica.
He told us that. He said he did not have SEXUAL RELATIONS with that woman, Monica Lewinski.
The only person who got screwed in that scandal was Clinton by Ken Starr.

Clinton got screwed by neo-cons.
We're getting screwed by neo-cons.

I wish they would just go have sex and quit screwing the American people and the rest of the world as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phiddle Donating Member (749 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
4. And
Clinton is a "hands on" executive, while
Georgie looks at pics of someone else doing it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bacchant Donating Member (747 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
5. Thankfully, Bush already shot his wad (heh, sorry)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
haele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 11:52 AM
Response to Original message
6. The sex is the * administration
was not done by * himself, it was done by those under his "chain of command", was far more widespread, and at least 7/8 of the acts were not consentual between willing adults. There is no admissions of sex as love in the * administration - sex is nasty, tawdry and happens to those who are no better than they should be. It is also apparent that coersive, purient, violent sex that can be used as a tool that is condoned by the administration.

The sex in the Clinton administration was consentual sex between willing adults. According to the Starr report, potential participants apparently could say no without fear or reprocussions. (Note to all naysayers - Broderick was not on the Starr report and there is still no evidence that Clinton and she got together other than hearsay and "conservitive shock pundits"). By all indications, non-consentual sex was not condoned by the Clinton administration. Consentual sex may have been not "admitted freely to" - because ultimatly, it's the concern of no one other than those parties involved, but it wasn't considered sick and immoral and it was scandalous only to those who wanted to make it a scandal.

The attitude towards sex is totally different in the respective administratons.
Haele
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Virginian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun May-16-04 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. So what you are saying is ...?
So what you are saying is, Bush considers sex dirty and has his underlings do it for him?

He seems like one of those "Madonna and the Whore" syndrom guys.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BonjourUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 06:05 AM
Response to Original message
8. Sexually, Clinton is alive and Bush is died (or He wants us to believe it)
Edited on Mon May-17-04 06:10 AM by BonjourUSA
Nothing is simplier like that.

In another country in France for instance, Clinton should have justified only his political competence, nothing else.

Chirac is a fuck-machine in all the Elysée corners and anywhere else now and before, perhaps a little less now because his age, that's very known and good health clue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pepperbelly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 06:07 AM
Response to Original message
9. anally and without lube ... we call it "Bush style"! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 06:18 AM
Response to Original message
10. Bushco considers sex bad, violence good
Once the new torture pics came out, all we heard was the sex in them....
Also, the privacy of those soldiers is suddenly more important than Clinton's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BonjourUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 11:29 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Because Clinton didn't torture Monica
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnOneillsMemory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-17-04 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
12. What is this, a Letterman Top 10 joke question. ok, I'll play...
Clinton favored consensual sex.
Bush* favors prisoner rape.

(My) Governor of California is a known sexual predator.
Much of politics is about the power politics of SEX.

Linguist George Lakoff ties the psychology of family experience to our expectations of the parental style of government and employment.

Read him and understand everything about politics.

How Conservatives Use Language
http://www.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2003/10/27_lakoff.shtml
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 02nd 2024, 08:09 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC