The question here is; what business was it of anyone but Hillary, his wife? Why was the "Special Prosecutor hounding this President over a sexual encounter with an adult woman? Sure she was a White House Intern, but she was over 21. This didn't impede the President in his daily work of being President, except for the ever grinding mechanizations of the "Special Prosecutor's" office". Still a lie was a lie, and a President can't lie. Bill Clinton was impeached because he had lied to the people. His name forevermore would be connected to those impeachment proceedings, slandering what, up until then, had been one of the most successful Presidency's in our nation's history.
Almost seven years later, George answers a reporter's question. "NO, I'm not going to remove Donald Rumsfeld from office. Don has been and continues to do an excellent job and I have no intention of replacing him". A few days later, the election that takes place in the middle of George W. Bush's second term, shows that the nation is highly displeased with him. It is considered a referendum on his leadership. We are in an immoral war in Iraq that has taken almost 3000 American soldier's lives', and "The Contract With America" has been shown to be a media trick by the GOP as a pedophilic Congressman is caught chasing underage male pages, and The Speaker of The House is thought to have covered it up. The war that was waged on assertions that the President made that they (the Iraqi's) had WMD's had proved to be "lie's" or just "bad guesses", and the President was under fire for not bringing in enough troops to secure the country and disbanding the Iraqi Army and the Police Forces and leaving bunkers of military ordinance where the Iraqi resistor's could get at them with a pair of bolt cutters and make the IED's that were claiming so many American soldiers because of Tommy Frank's rush to Baghdad to get some "Good Press".
It turns out after the election, that George W. Bush, the symbolic leader of the Christian Right and the "Decider" (the name he gave himself), did in fact lie to that reporter during that aforementioned news conference. The reporter, asked him why he had lied to him, and the President, not wishing to lie again so soon, told him that the election was so close, that he didn't want to stir things up, at that moment. Everyone seemed fine with this, in fact hardly any of the usually unforgiving media types brought it up. I guess it's not such a big deal that the President lied to that reporter, and because it was televised he actually lied to the whole nation. One person who got a little hot under the collar was Jon Stewart, host of Comedy Central's "Daily Show". He wondered why the media didn't pick up on Bush's lie.
This President has a habit of lying. He has been lying even before he got to the White House by claiming he was a "Compassionate Conservative". He has no compassion. He has passion, but no compassion. His passion is lining corporate pockets with money. No matter which way you slice it or dice it, the only one's that benefited from this war in Iraq has been the government contractor's who have sucked billions out of contracts that in the most part, were never completed. When you are talking billions of dollars, that's a lot of money; we have spent over $375 billion and he now wants a billion more.
So whose lie was worse? Bill Clinton's lie that he didn't have sex with another consenting adult, or President Bush's lie that he was not going to fire the Secretary of Defense, and did so just a few days later, and then admitted he lied? Is it OK to lie and then "'fess up"? What about the lies about Iraq? We have had many intelligence people tell us he "cherry picked" intelligence reports for damaging news on Iraq that was even then "questionable"? Why can one President tell a lie and another is vilified for it? Why did the MSM (mainstream media) back off making it an issue? Are they afraid of losing their jobs? If that is the case, then they shouldn't be in the job that they are in. If Bill Clinton had lied about that, he would have been crucified for it. Why are there two standards, one for Democrats and another for Republicans?
I believe that George W. Bush should be impeached for lying to the American people, wiretapping American citizen's without going through due process, for the "Rendition" of innocent people, for pushing the Military Commissions Act of 2006 that has effectively eliminated Habeas Corpus and for a multitude of other sins against the people. I expect the Democratic House and Senate to make full a full inquiry on these things that I have mentioned. We cannot let this President usurp power by using the "unitary power of the executive branch" and making "signing statements" on any law that he does not intend to follow. This President has made a travesty of The Presidency and has damaged the integrity of The United States of America. This cannot stand.