In article , Mike Coslo
writes:

(old stuff removed)

What I was trying to say is that if we're going to condemn Willy for being
a
hornydog who couldn't keep his hands (and other things) to himself, and who
couldn't keep the promises he made to his bride, then we should use the
same standards to judge other politicians. Like Newt.

Because he is a Republican, and it is okay then. He's been on Fox news
trying to ressurect himself. Hey may succeed.

Well, Ted Kennedy did....

And of course there is Strom's daughter!

Surreal, huh?

Kinda dumb on Monica's part, don't ya think?

Kinda dumb, on anyone's part, to get caught up in something like that. Fer
cryin' out loud, who *was* the numkoff in that situation? The Prez or the
nitwit that let herself be used like that? I say her.

There's plenty to go around!

But I say the biggest dummy in the pile was WJC himself. Because he *knew*
that
fooling around could easily go public, and would have enormous negative
repercussions. This was obvious from what happened to Gary "Monkey
Business"
Hart (remember him?). Hart did a lot of good things in the various offices
he
held, and might have made a good President or VP. But his indiscretions
pushed
all that aside and destroyed any chance for him. Anybody with *any* sense
would
know that the chances of keeping such stuff secret were slim to none.

People make mistakes, people engage in stupid and illegal things.

Yep. Like Nixon and the whole Watergate mess. He resigned 30 years ago this
month - I still remember where I was when I heard that speech..

People engage in sex outside the sanctity of marriage.

They've been doing that for a long long time...

And we are more concerned about these things that we are about whether
or not they can actually do the job or not.

Some people are, anyway.

One thing Watergate changed was that the media would no longer turn a blind eye
to politicians' personal lives. Remember that politician who turned up drunk in
the reflecting pool with someone named Fannie Fox? A few years earlier, and it
would never have made the news.

We get what we deserve. THere are probably a lot of people who could be
a great President that can't or won't because of irrelevant personal
history.

Possibly. Heck, one of the reasons Ronald Reagan didn't get nominated until
1980 was because he'd been divorced. That used to be political suicide. Now,
nobody seems to care.

Or consider Slick Willy hisself. I think the main reason he got the nomination
back in 1992 was that a lot of the big guns on the Dem side (Sam Nunn, Mario
Cuomo) saw Papa Bush's popularity after Gulf War 1 and figured that running
against him was futile. So they gave it to Bill. Then the economy tanked for a
spell, Ross Perot split the opposition vote, and Clinton gets in on 40% of the
popular vote but a big majority of electoral votes.

--

Here's another item for ya:

One of this election's issues is stem cell research. The Dems are for it, the
Pubs against it. Ron Reagan spoke at the *Dems* convention to support it (he
was not invited to speak at the Pubs' convetion at all, despite the tie-ins
with his dad's recent passing).

Now, the reason the Pubs are against stem cell research is because of the
abortion issue/killing embryos. Which is consistent in a way. But note this:
IVF (in-vitro fertilization) involves exactly the same issue. If someone is
against stem cell research because of the abortion issue, then logic dictates
they must also oppose IVF for exactly the same reason.

73 de Jim, N2EY