Sadaam, you clearly stated Clinton was a centrist.
Yes.
Laws governing sexual conduct in the workplace are set by PLOTICIANS (spelling error purposeful).
Yes.
Therefore, the behavior has everything to do with political ideology.
No, that doesn't follow at all. You might as well say that laws governing taxes are set by politicians, and therefore filing my tax return indicates my political ideology. Or that laws governing traffic and the rules of the road are set by politicians, and therefore driving my car indicates my political ideology. Or any other number of absurd conclusions, really.
It was the act of a domineering totalitarian, certainly not a centrist.
I'm all for judging politicians based on their character and the lives they've lived, but you can't just take it for granted that their ethical flaws and misdeeds directly translate into their political ideology. Someone who constantly speeds can't therefore be assumed to be opposed to speed limits on an ideological level. Someone who cheats on their taxes can't therefore be assumed to be opposed to taxation on an ideological level. And someone who pursues an inappropriate relationship with an intern half their age who can't reasonably say no to them can't therefore be assumed to domineering or totalitarian on an ideological level. It's just not how these things work, and there are plenty of examples from history bearing this out. George W. Bush by all accounts is a loving husband and father, but his decision to launch a destructive war under false pretenses that cost countless lives so that he could advance his own political agenda and enrich his cronies in the private sector reeks of a deeply callous cruelty. Lyndon B. Johnson was an outspoken racist as a younger man, but he devoted his presidency to passing critical legislation protecting civil rights that probably wouldn't be able to be passed today. These things don't perfectly correlate into political ideology like that.
Recent Posts
