On the evening of August 17th, 1998 millions of Americans sat in front of their television sets to watch the President of the United States of America address his affair with former White House aide Monica Lewinsky. Unknown to the public at the time there were two copies of the speech which President Clinton so uncomfortably read. The speech, which Clinton proceeded to read (speech A), contained no apology to his supporters, or to his staff, or to Monica, or to the country. However, the supplementary speech (speech B) did take blame and did make apologies to many people. In my opinion, the auxiliary speech (speech B) would have been the more ethical and moral speech to deliver to the American People on that evening.
To begin with, speech A takes no certain blame for his actions, while on the other hand, speech B does. Although speech A does takes responsibility for Clinton's actions, it also says that his answers were legally accurate, when in fact he did lie to many people. In fact, Clinton even says that this matter was a private incident and he tries to blame it on the news media. "Even presidents have private lives. It is time to stop the pursuit of personal destruction and the prying into private lives and get on with our national life." In speech B Clinton comes right out and says what I believe should have been included in the speech which he read that night: "I never should have had any sexual act with Monica Lewinsky, but I did." This excerpt from the backup speech states the issue and takes the blame for it unlike speech A, which only takes responsibility.
Next, speech A seems to beet around the bush. To me the speech seems padded with diversions to distract the listeners at hand and to make them almost feel sorry for Clinton. In this speech, there is mention that the matter was between the two people he loved the most, his wife and daughter, and God. This piece here depicts that our president is a religious man and very much so family oriented.
The ethics of this controversy has been in political hot seat for an interim. ... In 1983, Webster vs. ... In 1991, Supreme Court upholds Title X gag rule (restriction on mentioning abortion in federally funded clinics) in Rust vs. ... In 1993, Newly inaugurated President Clinton reverses several anti-choice policies of Reagan & Bush administrations including gag rule. ... We cannot forget that Roe (a court case Roe vs. ...
It discusses human interaction where ethics, emotions and law come together. ... By the 1970s, abortion had been legalized in most European countries and Japan; in the United States, under a 1973 Supreme Court ruling Roe vs. ... In Roe vs. ... Politics is a branch of ethics. ... The object theory of ethics and politics is the root against antiabortion. ...
To insure that all patients have rights, President Bill Clinton passed a bill in September 1996. ... One example of this is the case of US vs. ... Clearly, in the case of US vs. ... Mark Munetz, author of The Ethics of Mandatory Community Treatment, states in his book, "[...] mandatory community treatment can be an ethical intervention for individuals with severe mental disorders". ...
Our sense of environmental ethics has not expanded to include the countries which we intrude upon carelessly. This is why it is vitally important to press political leaders to realize their moral obligations, not just to constituents or their own citizens, but also as statesmen to the world and future generations.[1] Environmentalism vs. ...
Research The Family Medical & Leave Act When President Clinton signed the Family Medical & Leave Act in 1993, he created a brand new avenue for American workers to manage their work-life balance. ... In February 2000, President Clinton said that he would like to expand the act to include twelve week paid vacations for new parents. ... The career track VS. the parent track. ... After taking a look at the differences between what a woman thinks is a good team player vs. what a man thinks the reason for this becomes obvious. ...