It isn't going away and is likely to be a much bigger liability if Senator Clinton wins the presidency. A reader explains:
One of the issues which was decisive for me in deciding early on that I couldn't support Senator Clinton in 2008 was the fact that it meant Bill Clinton would be occupying the White House again - only this time with a lot more free time on his hands. I say this as someone who voted twice for him, thought the Starr investigation would have been better termed an inquisition, and thought the impeachment was a ridiculous political response to a personal indiscretion with no bearing on the country's well-being. Lying about sex is usually a good thing and especially in this case. My concern now is that Bill's possible new address in 2008 is not fully realized, imagined, or thought through by Democratic primary voters. Assuming Senator Clinton wins, the Republicans will (and should) make that distasteful image clear enough, and will thereby close the deal for many independents and help lower Democratic turn-out. Revisiting not only Lewinsky but Willey, et al. will be enough to sicken and disgust even many liberal voters, like me, who think it's time to turn the page on not just the Bush dynasty but the Clinton's as well.
For many independents and/or traditionally moral people his reclaiming of the White House 2nd floor will be a desecration of sacred national ground. The fact is that Bill Clinton as president was an accomplished multi-tasker with a smart, personally conservative, and supportive spouse. Hillary Clinton as president will be rooming with a loose cannon who, while supportive of her career, has proven tendencies toward high-risk self destructive behavior - and all while actually in the White House to boot. HELLO! At best, Hillary Clinton will likely be distracted from her presidential duties by the worry of what Bill might be doing, and at worst black-mail or another national spectacle are not hard to imagine. The similarly disturbing result of her possible election will be the specter of an ex-president (even if he was personally fastidious) living in the White House, appearing at functions, possibly involving himself in staff, cabinet, and diplomatic meetings, and the possible confusion about who is really in charge. The country does not need this now, or any time for that matter, and it's time, early-on before we Democrats select our candidate, that this issue be vetted.
There is no other candidate besides Rudy who comes with this much baggage. It is the elephant in our room and the other candidates are too polite to bring it up, can't figure a polite way to bring it up, or are not desperate enough to bring it up yet. We lost in 2000 because of Bill Clinton's bad behavior, and you can indirectly place 2004 at his feet as well. We Democrats are nuts, idiots, fools - you name it and it fits - if we let another 4 to 8 years of the presidency go down the tubes because of misplaced and unearned loyalty to Bill Clinton.