Says Share, still trying desperately to annoy me even though Doc has clearly
indicated he has no desire to dump on either of the Clintons:
> I still don't understand how Clinton could have been so well, dumb. Was she
> really that attractive?! Ok,
> maybe he cracked under the pressure of the job. But really, so much about it
> is unfathomable. Must be
> karma (-:
But you keep right on going, Share. The entertainment value here is very high.
Come on, tell us more about Bill and Hill's karma. We just can't wait to hear.
Doc wrote:
Who knows the truth of it? I kinda agree with Judy on this one, about the
public view of private lives, up to a point. For example, that former head of
the IMF, who turned out to be a rapist, should be publicly castrated, imo. As
far as Bill and Hillary, though, and all of their drama, all I can muster, is a
shrug. Wouldn't affect my vote at all.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Doc, it's not just because of what was exposed. It was how she reacted to what
was exposed. And that she was an enabler, allowing it to happen over and over
during all those previous years and doing seemingly little to take a stand
against it.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Fair enough - your opinions, and your vote, are certainly your own, but to
cast Hillary as some sort of victim, and an enabler, simply because of what was
exposed, I think is short-sighted.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
I agree that no one knows what goes on in a marriage. However, when one
willingly becomes a public figure, then one has to accept that one's private
life is also going to come under scrutiny. My opinion is based on the
observable behaviors not on what I imagine anyone was thinking or feeling.
On Friday, November 1, 2013 3:54 PM, "authfriend@..." <authfriend@...> wrote:
What we should all recognize (but only some of us have the smarts to
understand) is that NOBODY KNOWS what goes on inside a marriage but the two
people in it. (Unless they choose to tell us; Bill and Hillary chose not to
tell us what went on between them with regard to the Monica affair. And good
for them; it's none of our damn business.)
We cannot know what contingencies, agreements, understandings, conditions,
promises, etc., etc., are operative in a given marriage (ESPECIALLY when it's
one we see only from a distance through the media).
It is the absolute height of arrogant stupidity to declare that he or she or
they should have done this, that, or the other thing in connection with a
marital problem.
It's fine to say, "If I were Hillary, I would have done thus-and-so."
(Although obviously you don't really know what you would have done given that
you don't know what it's like to be married to Bill.)
But for all we know, it could have been Bill who was the doormat in this
situation. Think about it. If you don't see how that might have been the case,
you have a very limited imagination, not to mention knowledge of human beings.
(Caveat for the brainlessly literal-minded: I'm not saying I think that WAS
the case, just that it could have been. It could have been a lot of other
things too. We simply do not know enough to have an opinion.)
Share spewed:
> MJ, IMO, that's where Hillary should have drawn the line with regards to his
> womanizing. I mean, that affair
> occurred on the world stage! And the woman was so young! I've read that
> Hillary really loves Bill. Even
> more reason she should have stopped enabling him. Long overdue IMO.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <fairfieldlife@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Why would Hillary divorce him over that? He had already had numerous affairs
after he became governor in Arkansas - you don't understand the motivation of
such a person - its better to have a philandering husband who is President than
a faithful one who is a nobody.
