I am doing a speech for college on Bush vs. Clinton and want to see what you folks here think.

Does Bush lying justify Clinton lying and vice versa.

Also do you think we as citizens enable the backslide of political ethics by doing this tit for tat justification?

Wouldn't an ideal situation be a Republican or Democrat just admitting their candidate was ethically challenged or at the least displaying a one time lack of judgment?

Short answer: No.

However no one has proven that Bush lied about anything. Having an opinion you dont agree with doesnt = a lie.

__________________
My Political Blog (Most recent update Oct 3rd) - Which Flame Warrior are you?

My teacher taught me that Bill Clinton cannot tell a lie, father.

If Bush vs. Clinton is too small because some believe one or both men do not lie then how about Democrat vs. Republican?

Anyone who says there has never been a democrat or Republican who lies just isn't serious.

So question reposed.

If a Democrat or Republican lies does it negate a lie on the other side?

Why do people counter the bad ethics of a person in their party with the bad ethics of a person in the other party?

Aren't we as citizens responsible for the ethical dilemma in politics right now because we lower the bar by those types of arguments?

Keeping score. Example: Clinton lies + Bush lies = 1-1 tie (so far). But, as for keeping score, we might find out how many of 18 Republican presidents and 15 Democratic presidents lied.