Should a spouse's history of past 'indiscretions' be fair game in a political contest?

CPO Andy Carrillo, MS — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 18:28:25 -0500

Classic Bill answer...

http://www.weeklystandard.com/article/2000408/

Bill Clinton Flustered When Asked Whether Past Is Fair Game

An ABC News reporter asked Bill Clinton whether his past is fair game in the 2016 presidential election. Clinton appeared flustered and unsure what to say:.@ABC Exclusive: Bill Clinton responds to Trump's claim that his past is fair game in interview with @CeciliaVegaABC https://t.co/4ARzemKcRY— ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) January 4, 2016

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jan 4 at 2016 6:30 PM

PO1 John Miller — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 18:30:32 -0500

Why not? Dems tried to slander Laura Bush when GW was running for office, based on her killing a pedestrian when she was drunk driving as a teenager!

Response by MAJ Terry Clark made Jan 4 at 2016 6:41 PM

MAJ Terry Clark — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 18:41:28 -0500

Vetting for political office is brutal - everything is fair game - better it be known in the preliminary stages than become an embarrassment in office.

Response by SSgt Terry P. made Jan 4 at 2016 6:44 PM

SSgt Terry P. — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 18:44:20 -0500

CPO Andy Carrillo, MS Doesn't matter if it is used or not,if the crap already known isn't enough.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2016 7:00 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 19:00:54 -0500

There is an old saying:

"Great people talk about ideas.
Average people talk about things.
Small people talk about other people. "

I'm still hopeful that Clinton will not get the Democratic nomination, if she does I will not be voting Democrat. That said, if a Republican candidate is foolish enough to focus on personal attacks... he will lose.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2016 7:03 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 19:03:29 -0500

It will be used, but it won't matter. Notably, when republican politicians get caught having an affair or using a prostitute, the line of defense is that part of their religion is forgiveness. That's how people like Sanford in SC can have an affair while Gov, dump his wife, and then still get elected to congress. Or Vitter in LA getting reelected despite admitting to using an escort service in DC after campaigning on family values. In those cases it is cited as being human, and humans make mistakes and deserve second chances. And that's with the politicians themselves, not the spouses.

And yet those same understanding, forgiving republicans will insist that because Bill, not Hillary cheated, that somehow that is disqualifying for Hillary. All the stuff about compassion and people make mistakes and deserve second chances will suddenly disappear from the conversation.

But in the end none of it will matter. No republican will ever vote for the democratic candidate or vice versa anyway. Those types of considerations go out the window when push comes to shove. The same way certain christian pastors who declared that mormonism was a cult and a candidates religion was very important to their decision still opted for the "cult follower" Romney over the christian Obama because suddenly being a liberal christian was a bigger sin than being a conservative cult member.

Response by SGM David W. Carr LOM, DMSM MP SGT made Jan 4 at 2016 7:12 PM

SGM David W. Carr LOM, DMSM MP SGT — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 19:12:52 -0500

I think they lend to the decision making of the spouse in being complicit in his criminal actions. Not to mention her own lies and badgering of victims

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2016 7:23 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 19:23:23 -0500

I think it depends on how she handles the indiscretions, in Hiliray's case she in denial. If she could she'd probably lie and say it never happened. (God I hate liars).

Response by CW2 Ernest Krutzsch made Jan 4 at 2016 7:36 PM

CW2 Ernest Krutzsch — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 19:36:44 -0500

In this case if her platform is women's rights and she states that rape victims should be heard and believed, then she has to answer as to why her husbands "victims" were not heard or believed and why she demonized them. Her lame answer that the evidence proved otherwise is disingenuous in that he settled in court for $850,000 in one case, if I'm innocent, I am not paying anyone that amount! This is why her trustworthy numbers are so low.

Response by SFC Pete Kain made Jan 4 at 2016 7:53 PM

SFC Pete Kain — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 19:53:58 -0500

Billary is a freaking joke, the only support she has are the welfare gimmies and the delusional die hard leftists, sad that she may yet win. Can't wait to see what happens.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Jan 4 at 2016 8:00 PM

CPT Jack Durish — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 20:00:41 -0500

Actually, Hillary is suffering for her own actions. She was complicit in Bill's coverups. She apparently (and probably rightfully) feared that his bad behavior would reflect on her own reputation and interfere with her political ambitions. Thus, she attacked Bill's accusers and for that she is revealed as a poor choice for high office.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2016 8:32 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 20:32:14 -0500

Under normal circumstances i would be inclined to say "leave the family out of it" but the Clintons aren't normal circumstances. Billy boy opened that can of worms by being a politician. Period, end of statement.

Response by PO3 Brad Phlipot made Jan 4 at 2016 8:33 PM

PO3 Brad Phlipot — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 20:33:24 -0500

UNLESS! He gives back the tie and gives up the Cigar.

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Jan 4 at 2016 8:57 PM

COL Jon Thompson — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 20:57:08 -0500

If Hillary is going to say the Republicans are waging a war against women, it is fine to call Democrats out for their hypocrisy.

Response by SSG Michael Hartsfield made Jan 4 at 2016 9:39 PM

SSG Michael Hartsfield — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 21:39:30 -0500

No. It shows that the opponent doesn't have any substance, no position, and can do nothing more than highlight someone's past failures to hide his current ones.

Response by SMSgt Tony Barnes made Jan 4 at 2016 10:55 PM

SMSgt Tony Barnes — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 22:55:33 -0500

Yes especially when she calls Trump a sexist.

Response by TSgt Kenneth Ellis made Jan 5 at 2016 12:31 AM

TSgt Kenneth Ellis — Tue, 05 Jan 2016 00:31:13 -0500

Yes when he is politicking for her. He got sweetheart deals to deliver speaches to dictators because of her. And she destroyed anyone or woman who came forward and complained about being raped.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Jan 5 at 2016 1:31 AM

Capt Seid Waddell — Tue, 05 Jan 2016 01:31:34 -0500

Yes, especially if the person was responsible for running the cover-up.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 5 at 2016 7:30 AM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 05 Jan 2016 07:30:10 -0500

in politic .... even your pet is on the table :)

Response by Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth made Jan 5 at 2016 9:15 AM

Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth — Tue, 05 Jan 2016 09:15:05 -0500

I would say that in most cases no. But in this case yes because his past actions and indiscretions were while he was governor of Arkansas and ultimately POTUS and she looked the other way and "stood by her man" when he was lying and lied with him even during h is elections. If she allowed that then, what else is she going to cover up in the name of politics and getting elected.

Response by SGT Jeremiah B. made Jan 5 at 2016 6:23 PM

SGT Jeremiah B. — Tue, 05 Jan 2016 18:23:07 -0500

Up until the mid-80s, personal lives were completely off limits. I'm not entirely sure this recent concern with "personal character" has gotten us anywhere. I mean, let's face it, a vast majority of great people in history were pretty crappy individuals with nearly insufferable character flaws.

Response by CPO Andy Carrillo, MS made Jan 7 at 2016 6:49 PM

CPO Andy Carrillo, MS — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 18:49:37 -0500

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/robby-mook-im-worried-im-annoyed/

ROBBY MOOK: ‘I’m worried … I’m annoyed’

&qout;Hope and change,&qout; Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign is not. In the latest panicked email from Hillary for America, Campaign Manager Robby Mook says he is &qout;worried&qout; and &qout;annoyed.&qout; News just broke that Bernie Sanders is outspending us on TV in Iowa and New Hampshire by hundreds of thousands of dollars…

Response by CPO Andy Carrillo, MS made Jan 7 at 2016 6:57 PM

CPO Andy Carrillo, MS — Thu, 07 Jan 2016 18:57:35 -0500

The 'gift' that keeps on giving...
Report: A public high school in Maine was caught red-handed trying to recruit students to work on Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign as a “community service opportunity” – without the knowledge or consent of parents. Could you imagine the national media firestorm had the school been recruiting for Donald Trump’s campaign. Students at Marshwood High School in South Berwick received an email from the Clinton campaign – urging them to sign up for positions as unpaid “fellows”. “Hillary for New Hampshire is looking for smart, energetic winter fellows who are committed to winning the New Hampshire primary for Hillary Clinton,” read the email from a campaign staffer. “Everyone working on the campaign now started off as a fellow at some point so it is a great way of getting a different skill set whilst helping an important cause.”
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016/01/07/public-school-recruits-students-to-work-for-hillary-clinton-campaign.html?intcmp=hpbt2

Public school recruits students to work for Hillary Clinton campaign | Fox News

A public school in Maine was caught trying to recruit students to work on Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign without the knowledge or consent of parents.

Response by MSgt Darren VanDerwilt made Jan 8 at 2016 10:34 AM

MSgt Darren VanDerwilt — Fri, 08 Jan 2016 10:34:16 -0500

This has nothing to do with B.J.'s tryst's and everything to do with Hillary's covering up "alleged" rapes that her husband has yet had to answer for. Hillary, and Democrats at large, like to claim Republicans are waging a war on women, when the overwhelming evidence demonstrates that Hillary was the one actively and vindictively discrediting her husbands victims.

Response by CW3 Jim Norris made Jan 12 at 2016 10:33 AM

CW3 Jim Norris — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 10:33:46 -0500

Yep, you want to run for public office, you're life is a glass house....and expect rocks.