Second News Conference
 

You may not agree with all of his policies but is sure does a great job with the news conference.

Hilter gave great speeches too

I didn't think it was so great - Was he unaware of his statements being wrong or was he just giving us happy talk?

http://www.xoutpost.com/lounge/politi...both-ways.html

Some of the media looked downright foolish, and they concentrated much too pointedly on "when did you know this," and other trivial things, letting him skate on much more important large scale things he should be questioned about fiercely.

They let a lot of things slide, like "evidence" that restructuring the charity tax situation would not adversely effect charities.

I think he did a pretty good job considering he didn't use a teleprompter which is his typical MO. The guy is certainly articulate and smart and I think he should be given a fair chance to get some stuff done. Someone once wrote, regardless of how you felt about them personally, when Clinton was in the room (like at a meeting or press conference) he was the smartest guy there, when Bush was in the room, he was the dumbest guy there. I think President Obama at this point falls somewhere in the middle. (Clinton sure would not have had that gaff on the Tonight Show, Bush would have done 100x's worse.)

If Clinton was so smart how come he "didn't have sexual relations with that woman?"

I don't need him to be smart, I need him to be able to manage his administration and the zealots in Congress into getting us somewhere useful. Jimmy Carter was smart too.

Frankly I really didn't and don't give a shit what he did in his private life. The guy who developed PCR changed the course of science forever (in a good way) and he smoked pot and took LSD weekly. It is only with that modality that gene therapy will ever come to success. I don't see people or congress attacking him.

Actually I do need him to be smart. These are complicated issues and deserve to be thoroughly evaluated by someone who didn't graduate with a "D" average from a school he only got into on legacy.

Ah, his twiddling in the Oval office isn't exactly his private life. I am not passing judgement from a moral perspective (although he is just about without any morals for doing this) but he brought shame to the presidency and the office while creating a huge distraction and a massive amount of tax payer money to be spent.

Your example, don't know who that guy was, sounds pretty effective and smart for sure. His contribution was significant sounding.

Was he an elected Federal official, paid by the people?

My point is once you are elected to a Federal office (states probably have similar standards) and taxpayer dollars are used there is a higher standard of ethics and responsibility than in private life.

TITLE 5--ADMINISTRATIVE PERSONNEL

CHAPTER XVI--OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS

PART 2635_STANDARDS OF ETHICAL CONDUCT FOR EMPLOYEES OF THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH--

Subpart A_General Provisions

Sec. 2635.101 Basic obligation of public service.


(a) Public service is a public trust. Each employee has a
responsibility to the United States Government and its citizens to place
loyalty to the Constitution, laws and ethical principles above private
gain. To ensure that every citizen can have complete confidence in the
integrity of the Federal Government, each employee shall respect and
adhere to the principles of ethical conduct set forth in this section,
as well as the implementing standards contained in this part and in
supplemental agency regulations.

Section