To: Neocon who wrote (12359 ) 5/12/1999 3:40:00 AM From: Bob Lao-Tse Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 13994
You should have seen the earlier drafts that I didn't post! I mean... Bill Clinton lying under oath as some sort of existential protest against the unfairness of rules of evidence that he himself had signed? A protest that failed because of "extra-judicial" interference, but had it succeeded it would have had no effect? Puh-leazze! I gotta admit I do feel kind of bad for the Democrats though. I can sort of see why the boomers in particular would want to try anything to defend Clinton. Imagine -- they've been waiting since Kennedy to elect one of their own and finally, 30 years later, they get their chance and he turns out to be a scumbag. That's gotta suck. I just think there's got to be a time for the Democrats to cut their losses and admit what is obviously true -- that Bill Clinton is, for many and varied reasons, unfit to hold the office of PotUS. So they screwed up and voted a creep into the White House, that's okay. The Republicans did it themselves with Nixon, but they mostly got over it. (It's at least curious if probably insignificant that Nixon's one great accomplishment was establishing relations with China, and Clinton first perverted then destroyed that relationship. But I digress...) I guess that the need to deny or rationalize Clinton's crimes still runs deep, at least in some people. And I suspect that there's no way to get through to anyone who is still that deep in denial. At least it hasn't seemed to accomplish anything other than frustrate me when I've tried. If I really were centered, I wouldn't be compelled to post here. I could just sit and contemplate and the world would come to me. But until then... -BLT