It was known about from his time as a Governor, but I'm not sure many people really looked at the information out there enough to know. Though I tend to vote Republican, I am still not sure why it was considered significant enough an issue to go after him for. I don't think the womanizing had anything to do with his ability to act in the office. I think it was an excuse to go after him period. The lying under oath is something I thing was significant, but not the reason for him to be under oath to begin with.
When it comes to US politics, I usually figure that trust isn't something I'm ever going to find in a president or any office, except maybe some of the ones before my time. I tend to vote for the one I think will mess things up the least. It seems to be more what shade of gray is most acceptable, not who is black or white on an issue.
Are British politics more black and white, or is it just politics in general that is messed up?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2006-01-06 08:17 pm (UTC)When it comes to US politics, I usually figure that trust isn't something I'm ever going to find in a president or any office, except maybe some of the ones before my time. I tend to vote for the one I think will mess things up the least. It seems to be more what shade of gray is most acceptable, not who is black or white on an issue.
Are British politics more black and white, or is it just politics in general that is messed up?
-ken-