Hi Janice,
It's nice discuss something other than our language with you. I'll back off a bit on my somewhat pretentious and seemingly sexist assertion that men are less easily conned than women. I submit, however, that women (in general, not you) are more easily conned than men by men of Mr. Clinton's type. He may not have scored big with the girls in high school, but he was preparing the way for bigger and better and more scores later in life.
Now, I'll also state that those of us with the Y-chromosome are also more easily conned by a certain type of woman than another woman might be.
RE: "the Whitewater allegations
are pretty small cheese
I'm afraid I'll have to stand my ground against you on this one. I'm no conspiracy nut, but I think we haven't even scratched the surface of this man's misdemeanors. I am particularly disturbed by his connections with foreign supporters (Indonesia, for example) and the egregious privacy invasion by summoning and keeping 1000 or so Republican secret FBI files in the White House for a year. (Yes, I have heard that "nobody looked at those files" while they were there, and when his spinmeisters say things like that, I feel that my intelligence is being insulted.) I even wonder (shame on me!) if the dirt gleaned from these files may not be what has kept our president from any serious congressional challenges to date.
In principle, I must agree with you that his sexual activities are none of our business, but if that is the only thing the public can understand or care about, and if that is what it takes to bring the rest of his malevolence to light, then I'll take what I can get. If that is mean-spirited, I guess I'll accept that designation too.
Jack |
