Because people have become convinced by the popular media that nobody in the public spotlight deserves a private life.

Because it leads to the moral deterioration of America and is a poor example for young and old.

You're missing the point of what the whole impeachment trial was about. It had nothing to do with him cheating on Hilary. Had Bill fessed up at the get go nothing would have ever become of it. The reason they went after him was the fact he lied about it while under oath. It wasn't the fact that he lied about getting some head in the oval office that was an issue. It was the fact that he lied period while under oath. Those who went after him figured if he lied about getting a blowjob in the oval office what else was he lying about that was more important such as issues having to do with our national security. Personally I could give a rats ass if the President of the United States is the biggest manwhore on the face of the earth. However when the President lies under oath about something minor like cheating on his wife it makes people wonder whether or not he can be trusted on matters that are very important to the citizens of this country.

It is our problem if it happened in the oval office while he was working. Anywhere else and I could care less.

Since he's out of office and a charity-drive champion, I would say it's not a problem. This question might have been better asked ten years ago. However, since you brought it up, I'll tell you exactly what I thought back then, and what I think now. At the time, my problem with Bill Clinton was that if he couldn't be faithful to his wife, how could I trust him to lead a nation full of people he didn't know? If he couldn't tell the truth to his wife, how could I trust him to be honest with the millions of strangers he governed? It's not like he snuck her off to a motel to have his tryst; he did it in the Oval Office. I'd like to think my tax dollars had better purposes than scrubbing semen out of the White House carpets. His wife is SUPPOSED to be his 'life partner,' his 'soul mate,' and the person he 'puts ahead of all others.' Considering how poorly he treated her (and apparently it wasn't the first time), how I could place any faith in him to do the right things for the rest of us? How I feel now is that Hillary only stayed with him to advance her own political ambitions. When I consider how proud, independent, and self-assured she is, I can't see that she would have any tolerance for infidelity unless 'turning a blind eye' to it would help her accomplish her political goals. So my belief is that their marriage is a sham, it's a false front, it's a political agreement rather than a union of love. I trust her about as much as I trust him. In a sick and ironic way, they deserve each other, but America deserves better than them.

Because this particular special prosecutor found a way to chase it. No man in his right mind would have made an admission that would have publicly embarrassed two of the women in his life. Even the two women didn't want him to admit it. His lie was a Gentleman's lie. Clinton grew up in the South. A gentleman doesn't brag in the locker room and he doesnt admit (it) to investigators. He also finds a way to do what he wants, and has tragic defects... (ever had one?) "This brave man went down so Ken could be a Star." ...but still, with an intern? what was he thinking?... (I have daughters)

Because he took an oath to represent the people of the United states. What he does is a reflection of the American way of life. That was very disappointing, but we all make mistakes.

Everyone has a libido, and just because he made decisions for the country doesnt mean he should have his every personal exploit chastised by a nation.

The fact that he was the president at the time was the reason. Of course, that reason isn't a very good one. Dynamite news, though.

On it's own as a singular event you probably have a point. The Lewinsky affair was not a singular event. It became tied up in a legal matter due to the suit filed by Paula Jones. It's not nearly so simple as you make it out to be. When the lying under oath began, and the use of influence to try to help Monica get a job to keep her quiet is when it got really nasty. Read this and you will understand better. http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/resources/lewinsky/timeline/

It wasn't any of my business then, and still isn't today. I still wouldn't call a little probing with a cigar consensual sex. It wasn't the smartest thing to do while in office, I admit that. But Rudy Giuliani did basically the same thing to his wife while he was mayor of NYC. Is he any better or worse than Bill Clinton?

I voted for Bill Clinton for president not for sainthood. Monica Lewinsky was a consenting adult and unlike a bunch of mealy-mouthed hypocrites, it's none of my business what two consenting adults do in private. President Clinton was a good president, with remarkable qualities of intellect, energy and leadership.

Normally, that wouldn't be an issue. What happens in someone's personal life is their own business. However, basically, Clinton got busted for doing it on the job, then lying about it. I don't really think its a big deal, but looking at some of the Q/A around AB, I see that I am not the only one that is fed up with presidents lying to the country.

Because he lied while he was under oath. Not to mention obstruction of justice.

Clinton was an embarrasment to any moral person who expected the representative of the US to act with dignity and not use his position to solicit 'consenual sex'.

Because he made it our problem by bringing it up on national TV and then lying about it then. If he wasn't going to be faithful to his own wife, how were we expected to believe he would be faithful to his country, something he swore to do when taking his oath of office?