Would you be proud to shake the hand of the current President

[bob]

I would. Also all of them that are still alive. Anyone not?

[Edited by bob on 11-02-2000 at 02:15 AM]

[keithr]

NO!

[bob]

Originally posted by keithr
NO!



No to all?

[keithr]

Question:
"Would you be proud to shake the hand of the current president?"

Answer:
"no!"

Keith

[bob]

Originally posted by bob
I would. Also all of them that are still alive. Anyone not?


Any of the ex-presidents?

[clydefo]

<b>"Would you be proud to shake the hand of the current President

I would. Also all of them that are still alive. Anyone not?"</b>


bob,<br>I wish I could shake Bill Clinton's hand. Aside from his stewardship of our economy, his dignity in coping with the assault on his character as a result of the revelations about his personal sex life has been heroic. I would be respectful of any former President but I would not be "proud" to shake hands with Geo. Bush Sr. because he pardoned his Iran-Contra co-conspirators as he left office. Ronald Reagan's Iran-Contra Treason disqualifies him in my eyes. Turning tail and running from the Middle-East after saying he would not be driven out by terrorists was embarrassing. I would be proud to shake Jimmy Carter's hand, a carpenter's hand. I would be loath to shake Jerry Ford's hand. The Pardon of Richard Nixon was the most damnable political act of the Twentieth Century!

[Xayd]

I don't like Clinton's tactics, I liked Reagan's ideas but didn't like him circumventing process of law with the Contra situation, I thought Nixon's paranoia was rather silly, I thought Jimmy Carter in general was rather silly, I think George Bush was too spineless on certain issues....

But despite all my disagreements, the office of the President of the United States demands respect, no matter who sits in the chair at that particular time. Right or wrong, this is the most powerful man in the world, at least militarily. Yes, I'd consider it an honor to shake the hand of any president, no matter what I thought of him as an individual.

Xayd

[M. A. Dockter]

I don't want to go out and find any of them to do it, but if they are near me and offered, I probably would return the gesture and a nod...no smile...smiles are too happy.

[mairving]

I would shake anyone's hand that was offered me out of respect. With Clinton, I would shake his hand, nod politely and immediately go to the restroom and wash my hands. Never can quite tell where those hands have been.

[Kubie]

Would not shake the hand of the current so-called president!

[drisley]

I can't believe Clyde used "Clinton" and "dignity" in the same sentence. Everyone knows he has been the most corrupt President we have ever had, but the spin-meisters like to turn it all around and say the Republicans were "evil partisans" and that Clinton was the victim. What next, should we all apoligize to him as he suggested in Esquire? How childish of a president!!

For the record, I would show respect to any POTUS, regardless of who it is. Most presidents I do respect, except for Nixon(he was nuts) and, of course, Clinton. But, I'd still shake Clinton's hand and treat him with respect. He is still the POTUS. After he gets out of office, that's another story.

[mbossman2]

i may not like the MAN in the office, but the OFFICE itself is worthy of great respect.

[keithr]

Maybe some clarification is in order.......

The question posed was:

"Would you be PROUD to shake the hand of the CURRENT president"

My answer was NO! (I would not be proud)

I do have the utmost respect for the office of the president, and that is my problem with Clinton. I feel he has done more to defame the reverence of that office than any president in my memory (I'm now 50+ years old, so I remember a few).

I firmly believe George W. Bush would restore some of that lost dignity.

Keith

[stylin19]

I WOULD NOT shake Bill Clinton's hand, but I would take a bullet for him.
Would he take a bullet for me ?

I would be humbled and proud to shake the hand of any of the living ex-presidents.

[Edited by stylin19 on 11-03-2000 at 01:05 AM]

[wedor]

I'll add a no. Clinton is like Gore, a well meaning guy with a skewed sense of reality. Perhaps they have been politicians too long and can't tell truth from spin.

[SARGE]

I'd shake it, but not feel proud. I believe the handshake was originally developed as a gesture to another that you were carrying no weapon. I've never considered a handshake other than an introduction or friendly greeting.

Now, I'd go fishing with Slick, just to hear some whoppers, and then hear him tell others about the one that got away.

[bob]

"/I would. Also all of them that are still alive. Anyone not?/"

I really wanted to ask the question above but it may have been unclear.

Restated:

Would you shake the hands of all of the presidents that are still alive? Including Clinton. Will Add Gore and Bush. Which would you not shake hands with. My unclear post.

Question is about respect. I would shake GWBush and Gore too and be proud. For me all presidents - dead or alive I would be proud if I could have had the opportunity.

[Marbell]

Wow, I had no idea many people here in the PCMECH forum were Rebublicans. I would shake hands with Bill Clinton and have the utmost respect for him. As a matter of fact, I would even invite him over for dinner. I like him because he has done much for the black community and has fought hard for our rights in this country. I also admire the way he was able to withstand the attack on his PERSONAL life (get it guys, PERSONAL! That means none of your business). He stands strong for what he believes in, but he is also a commpassionate man.

Now, as far as the other presidents...I would not be proud to shake the hands of Ronald Reagan, or George Bush Sr. Trickle down economics, YOU MUST BE KIDDING ME!!! Both of those guys were morons. Jimmy Carter really didn't do anything worth mentioning while in office, so I have a feeling of indifference towards him.

[stylin19]

um....you mean the person who said this?

"African-Americans watch the same news at night that ordinary Americans do."
-- President Clinton on Black Entertainment Television, November 2, 1994

" the purpose of government is to reign in the rights of the people"
-- Bill Clinton during an interview on MTV in 1993

"You know the one thing that's wrong with this country? Everyone gets a chance to have their fair say."
- Bill Clinton, May 29, 1993, The White House

"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans . . . ."
-- William J. Clinton, USA Today, March 11, 1993

you mean THAT Bill Clinton ?

[bob]

stylin19, I would shake your hand too.

[stylin19]

bob, i would be proud to shake your hand. courage of your convictions, in spite of tremendous odds against you in here, is admirable. you have taken no personal shots at anyone posting in here, that i have read. sir, i salute you !

[Kubie]

marbell, anything that goes on in the oval office is public business. Face it. Clinton always has been and always will be a sleaze ball.

[StunGunz]

I would gladly shake the hand of any president past or present. All politics aside, they sit in a position of great responsibility , and weather the ridicule from all angles of opposition of the moment, year in and year out. With that said though, I'd wash my hands rather quickly after shaking Clintons hand. I mean theres no telling where they've been. And after seeing Monica on T.V., I don't feel this precaution would be unwarranted.

[Carl Price]

Originally posted by Carlgif
marbell, anything that goes on in the oval office is public business. Face it. Clinton always has been and always will be a sleaze ball.

<b>Agreed</b>, there is no right of privacy to anything happening at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. with the possible exception of husband and wife time in the private apartments. All occupants tacitly agree to this when they ask for the job. There can be no private business in a public building.

[Edited by Carl Price on 11-03-2000 at 11:43 AM]

[troysvihl]

I wouldn't even shake Clinton's hand at all, yet alone be honored to have shaken his hand.

I saw a video of commencement at the U of Michigan a year back where Clinton was the guest speaker. About 30 students refused to shake his hand as they picked up their diploma crossing the stage. They completely snubbed him and walked right by his outstretched hand. It was the greatest showing of character I had seen in a while, IMHO. Maybe if more of us refused to associate with people of Clinton- lk, there would be less scumbags.



>>I believe the handshake was originally developed as a gesture to another that you were carrying no weapon.<<

The History channel said that the handshake was invented by George Washington. Washington was meeting with the kings and rulers of other countries and he didn't want to bow to them. So instead he shook their hand.

[Marbell]

As far as washing your hands after shaking Clinton's, I would hope that you would wash your hands after shaking anybody's hand. We all do the dirty deed, and just because he did it with someone who wasn't his wife doesn't make it that much dirtier than normal. Come on people, it's been a long time since that incident happened. Get the hatred for him out of your heart and just let it go.

Now for the privacy issue: Since when is the president's private parts anybody's business. I don't care what his job is, there are some places that the public should not be allowed to snoop. While I do agree that as president more of your life is up for scrutiny than normal, Bill Clinton's sexual organs have NOTHING to do with his job at hand as long as he is doing a good job being president. Which he is.

[mairving]

I personally have no hatred for Bill Clinton. I feel sorry for him as a person because he is looking in all the wrong places for happiness. He has done more to sully the office of the president than any other. Not only has he cheated on his wife, lied to the grand jury & the American people, he expects us to apologize to him because of all the trouble we put him through. The trouble was started by him and no one else can be held accountable for his actions. Certainly it was politicized but still he messed up. It reminds me of a cartoon that I saw a while back. Ken Starr & Clinton were little boys in the classroom. The teacher says "Bill, you've been bad again? Ken, go get in the corner". So it is in our society, if someone scratches my back and helps me out, then I don't care what he does. Eventually you have to care.

[bob]

stylin19, Thank you. I try my best but I have slapped back at least once. I beleive that insults can be redirected to the issue and they are just as fun - no harm done. I get happy when attacked because it means I am winning the debate.

[Kubie]

Too bad your side won't win the election.
"happy when attacked"? You ok ,bob? :D

[bob]

Flinch at a fly - not me.

[SARGE]

The Oval Office is his place of employment; we are the employers, although that little fact gets ignored. If you were found doing what he was, in your bosses office or anyplace at work, there could be consequences. Now, once he goes upstairs to his "home", that's different. That becomes personal.

[Marbell]

Point taken, but was it really neccessary to spend millions of dollars in search of some "dirt" on the president. I will concede that it was an act of weakness on his part, but he is only human. Also, many of our past president's have done the exact same thing, however we do not judge them based on who they slept with. For example, we all know that JFK was a pimp president, yet he is not really remembered for being that. But because Ken Starr spent all of this time and money trying to find out the dirt on old Bill, his other great accomplishments will be overshadowed by something that quite frankly isn't that big of a deal!

[bob]

Marbell, The cover of the December Esquire issue is a clear invitation to Clinton’s critics.

[SARGE]

Ken Starr was appointed to uncover the facts, and his time produced how many indictments? Many. He was made the bad guy. Also, Slick got into trouble for lying, not entertaining Monica. Imagine getting serviced by her while your wife and daughter are upstairs getting dressed for church. This is what he'll be remembered for. Also, with all due respect, JFK will be remembered for the assasination. I can't recall anything he did, other than beginning the raid on the Social Security money, and the subsequent IOU's.

[Kubie]

Sarge, I have a rendering of Clinton's monument planned for Washington D.C.. Problem is, if I put it on the forum, It would be deleted.

[clydefo]

Carlgif,<br>Just as the national airport named for George Washington was renamed for Ronald Reagan, I hear that there is a move afoot to rename the Washington Monument for Bill Clinton. :-)

[Kubie]

Not according to the picture I have. :D

[clydefo]

SARGE,<br>Prosecutors can get all the indictments they want. The question is how many convictions? Zero for the Clintons. Clinton made misleading statements that don't even rise to the level of perjury (according to Greta) about his sex life in a civil case. Who wouldn't?<p>Dwelling on the detail of the actual physical sex acts during anyone's adultery reveals a voyeuristic mind. I'd bet that Kenneth Starr's own personal copy of his report is heavily dog-eared and stained.<p>JFK raiding the Social Security money? How’s that, and what did they do with the money before he took office?

[drisley]

Clyde, grow up. Ken Starr was appointed to investigate the President. And, if you've read ANYTHING written by a lawyer, it is always in the utmost detail.

There's no point in arguing about it anymore. Starr was the victim of the Clinton spin machine, just as anyone else whoever said anything bad about him has become. Clyde, even you should have noticed the pattern. EVERYONE who came up with dirt on the Clinton or challenged him or Hillary was either personally ruined or, yes, killed. I can't think of one who wasn't. And there are many, believe me.

[clydefo]

drisley,<br>There is indeed a point to arguing the matter as long as there is so much ignorance of the truth out there.<p>The public reviles Starr because his over-zealousness was so obvious. As part of his attack on the President, he produced a work of pornography which he knew would become public. In spite of claims that he was reluctant to take on the Monica Lewinsky affair, he misrepresented the situation to the Attorney General so as to get the case. He was secretly working with the Paula Jones lawyers. Anybody that watches TV or reads newspapers knows all of this.<p> What dirt on the Clintons? Old girlfriends? The Special Prosecutors office has cleared them in all of the other matters. Who has been ruined? Killed? Paula Jones is rolling in dough with a whole new exciting career ahead of her. That hurt look in Juanita Broadrricks' eyes is not because of anything that Clinton did, but what Starr did to her in coercing her to lie about the rape charge or face financial ruin in defending herself against the false charges Starr would bring against her. Ten minutes of research into the Kathleen Willey matter will reveal why she so desperately needs to turn an alleged pat on the ass into a half-million dollar payday. Linda Tripp’s own grotesque treachery and betrayal of a friend is the cause of her personal Hell.

[stylin19]

clydefo

are u goofy ?

Full Transcript of NBC Dateline report on Juanita Broaddrick (http://www.capitolhillblue.com/Feb1999/022599/datelinetranscript022599.htm)

ps...the sealed evidence ? Clinton came back and raped her a second time.

[Jenni]

No, I would not shake Bill Clinton's hand. He is a lowlife. All his life he has used his position, whatever it may be, to get laid. What he did with Monica is public business. He was on the phone to a Congressman for crying out loud!
How would you feel if a 50 year old college professor had sex with your 19 year old daughter? Basically that is the situation here. Yes, I know, she came on to him. BUT, flirting is a natural thing that doesn't necessarily mean you want to hop in the sack. What you have is a man in a position of power sleeping with women who are subordinate to that power. Even if Monica came right out and said she wanted him, he should have been man enought to say "NO". Instead we have a pattern of abuse that is evident throughout his life.
BTW, the physical acts that they did are illegal in and of themselves in many states!

[Marbell]

none of this crap has anything to do with how he runs the country. He is a better president than our past 3-4, so what do you care if he gets a "hook up". I repeat, NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS!!!

[Jenni]

How well he does (or does not) run the country was not the question. The question was, "would you be proud to shake his hand." I gave my answer, as well as the reasons why. If you don't like that answer, that's your problem, not mine.

[Carl Price]

Originally posted by Jenni
BTW, the physical acts that they did are illegal in and of themselves in many states!

That point is not going to win any arguments. It just goes to show how f**ked up laws are in many states.

[Kubie]

Jenni, I'm on your side. We have to keep making the presidents business our business all the time. Could you imagine what our country would be like if the presidents were allowed to do anything they want without repercussions? Especially the liberal ones? I hope they keep digging into Clinton's dealings so much that he goes back into hole he came out of.

[SARGE]

And the preacher said, "AMEN".

[Jenni]

Carl Price

I didn't say I agreed with the laws, I simply stated a fact. Personally, I believe that whatever you do in the privacy of your own home (NOT in your office!), with your spouse (NOT an intern that works for you and is approximately the same age as your daughter!), is your business and no one elses, certainly not the government's. If they could enforce all that stuff, I'd be in jail so long I'd never get out! ;)