Sure, he cheated on his wife therefore he is a pervert. However, his cheating on his wife should have been a personal matter between he and Sen. Clinton.
Now then, do you support the idea of placing homosexuals in such positions, or support the idea just so that you can slam Republicans?
Who someone sleeps with is a personal matter and the Right should lay off of Bush on this one as they should have when Clinton appointed gays.
PS, will you be returning to any of the threads on Lee P. Brown now that it has come out that he was one of the last recipients of Enron money ($250,000) within a month of the financial news breaking? Will you be returning to the Enron threads now that the Dems are getting their hands dirty with ink that just won't wash away?
Enron paid many politicians protection money and none should be free of scrutiny for receiving the money. However, if White House staff or any political operatives sold their stock that would be called insider trading and they broke the law. I don't care if they are Republicans or Democrats, they should do time.
Adultry is not a perversion. It is a violation of the bond of trust between a husband and a wife. It is also a violation of the 10 Commandments for Christians and Jews.
Bill Clinton's perversions include rape and having sex with a woman young enough to be his daughter while he held a position of power over her.
If you consider adultry to be a perversion then you must certainly admit that homosexuality is a perversion.