Sue Hartigan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hi Doc:
To be absolutely honest even if I were qualified, or even over qualified
to be President, and had nothing in my background that could hurt me in
the least, I wouldn't run. Especially right now.
And that is where we are going to lose good people. Because even if
they don't have anything in their backgrounds that is that horrible,
they are going to be afraid that things will be made up. IMO
You are right the WH has survived scandals before, such as Nixon. But
most of the information that came out of the WH came out after the
President left office. Or it just wasn't made a big deal of until he
left office.
I hope that I am wrong on this one. I really do. I guess we will be
finding out soon by seeing who runs. We might just end up with one
person in the running though, Quayle. :(
Sue
> I can't imagine anyone so simon pure as to have nothing in his/her background
> that the scandal mongers could use against him/her. That being the case, I
> think your first PP is right on. Would you want to run, if everything you
> ever did, said, didn't do, didn't say, etc., was up for grabs? Add to that
> everything that could be said about you -- perhaps on tape -- between your
> "friends" and I think my answer would be a resounding no.
>
> I hope you're wrong about the office itself, though only time will tell.
> History does have a few parellels -- presidents accused of scandalous conduct
> -- and the office has survived.
>
> Doc
--
Two rules in life:
1. Don't tell people everything you know.
2.
Subscribe/Unsubscribe, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In the body of the message enter: subscribe/unsubscribe law-issues
