From: eyc@acpub.duke.edu (EMIL CHUCK)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.politics.clinton,alt.rush-limbaugh
Subject: Character issues DO matter (sometimes)
Date: 21 Jul 92 14:38:02 GMT
Followup-To: talk.politics.misc
Distribution: usa
Organization: Duke University; Durham, N.C.

burke@tss.com (Jim Burke) writes:
#crisp@netcom.com (Richard Crisp) writes:
#|> As a previous poster pointed out, whether or not Clinton inhaled, he
#|> did engage in the practice of smoking pot. The real issue is what was
#|> his motivation for asserting that he didn't inhale? 
#Has anyone considered the possibility that he was motivated to say it
#because it was true?  If it was the truth, and that is how he thinks of
#the event, and he didn't sanitize the way it would sound when he said it
#in the way he did, then his biggest sin is not considering how it would
#sound.  But nobody is willing to accept that perhaps it was true.  Neither
#you, nor anyone else, knows what was in his mind when he said it or what
#motivated him to choose the words he chose.  If you can find evidence (like
#witnesses) who say he did inhale, then he can be proven a liar.  Without
#evidence, I repeat that it is pretty tough stuff to accuse a person of
#being a liar.
	Huh? I can agree that it is quite serious to accuse someone of
being a liar (or utilizing other euphemisms e.g., to paint George Bush).
But I can't believe that someone makes an issue on his MOTIVATION for
asserting that he didn't inhale. We've rejected Douglas Ginsberg because
he smoked marijuana in his youthful days. Why isn't there such a similar
uproar against Clinton since it is now thought that Clinton engaged in
the practice of smoking marijuana? The way he made it sound to me was
that it was "something fun" or not that big of a deal, a joke. I know he
had to tell this because of the difficulty of the political trail
because it would be stupid to let the opposition bring it up and nail
him for a character flaw.

#|> Did he actually
#|> think that somehow that would make him absolved of his culpability
#|> of engaging in an illegal activity? The man is a fool if he thinks
#|> it did. 
#Perhaps he said it to reflect the fact that he didn't care much for
#marijuana.  
#Bottom line here is that I'm sure Bill Clinton had considered whether he
#would disclose the fact that he had smoked pot.  He decided at some point
#that when asked, he would admit it.  It is obvious from his answer, however,
#that he didn't prepare the specific text of the answer.  If he had reviewed
#those words with anyone on his staff, they would have told him how silly
#it would sound to most people.  I think he answered based on how he actually
#thinks back on those events.  I think he thought he was being candid.
#It came off poorly.  If this is the worst thing that can be pinned on
#Bill Clinton, he'll make a great president.  Why don't we focus on some
#issues of substance instead?
	But character IS an issue of substance. HR Perot shows us that.
What does it indicate if Clinton puts a joint in his mouth and doesn't
inhale? Well, we could interpret it as his method of decision-making.
Look at the times under which he grew up when smoking pot was a popular
thing to do. He went ahead and publicly did what others expected him or
wanted him to do, but he didn't do it. He created an illusion in order
to affirm to others that he was "one of the boys" but did something
completely different. I don't criticize him for "not inhaling" but if he
really wasn't going to smoke grass, he could've taken a more courageous
stance by -- shall I say it -- just saying no.
-- 
Emil Thomas Chuck		DUKE BLUE DEVILS: 1992 ACC CHAMPIONS!
Biomedical Engineer 1993	1992 EAST REGIONAL CHAMPIONS!!
Duke University, Durham, NC	AND 1992 NCAA NATIONAL CHAMPIONS!!!
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,alt.folklore.urban