<<Having been a professional musician between 1966 and 1982, I was able to knock off more trim than the average mammal. >>
No doubt about that I am sure...money for nothing, chicks for free, right?
Let's put it this way...after 25 years of deficit spending, high interest rates, and fears of continued inflation, it was nice to see those problems turn around in the '90s.
I know morals are so important to you. But funny how when Jimmy Carter was President, with impeccable morals, none on your side(or even my side) seemed to think that was an excellent quality. Back then, it was Carter's inability to deal with inflation, rising interest rates, a sluggish economy, hostages in Iran, etc. etc. that made voters angry. No one cared one bit that Carter was a good man, a decent man, a morality role model. His devout practice of Christianity wasn't even a mitigating factor when Reagan asked us: "Are you better off today than you were four years ago?"
Funny, not one member of the Grand Old Party asked that question in 2000. I wonder why? In the year 2000, morality was so much more important. Poor Jimmy, he always had a problem with timing.
I guess too I am a moral heathen for not placing an emphasis on the sex lives of our Presidents...except one.
In 1962, when JFK was controlling the nuclear "button", he was probably THE biggest womanizer the Presidency had seen up to that point. By 1962, Richard Nixon and his wife were not even sleeping together.
Now, during the 1962 Missile Crisis in Cuba, which one of those two would you have wanted to have their finger on the nuclear trigger?
Let's just say I was glad to have Kennedy in office during that time.
As far as lying about sex, yeah, that is a major problem...something has to be done in that. Maybe the Executioner can get Delay and Lott to make adultery a Federal capital offense. Of course, old Bob Barr, Newt, Livingston, and a lot of others would have to receive immunity. And maybe old Scalia and Thomas can get some buddies to join him and rule that the prohibition of ex post facto laws doesn't apply to heinous crimes like adultery. Just think, they can then prosecute Clinton for all those affairs he had in the past, as well as his future ones.
TG |
