Michael, just for the record, I thought Clinton was an interesting candidate in 1992, because he seemed smart and charismatic. However, after listening to him speak and comparing him to the other Democratic candidates, he would not have been my choice. My feelings solidified during the New Hampshire primary, when all the dirt about the draft, Gennifer Flowers and smoking marijuana came out. I could tell that he was a liar, and the 60 Minutes performance with Hillary made me sick to my stomach.
I never voted for him, not once!! And the San Francisco Chronicle came out very insistently early on asking him to really level with the American people. Their coverage has been quite a bit less than favorable. The San Francisco Examiner has a conservative editorial policy, and has been even more anti-Clinton. I really don't understand why you think otherwise. Part of being an ethical liberal is telling the truth--being straight with people. So at this point Clinton is supported only by a few diehards who are really pathetic. Even our extremely liberal Democratic senator, Dianne Feinstein, who lives in San Francisco, has come out very negatively against him. |
