What's this about Norm Retiring.

[Dave Hinz]

^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^^

^^^^^^^ ^^^^ ^^ ^^^

Close. More of "people who should have kept him aware of the situation did not" rather than "he did", but yes. Note the distinction between the two?

Can you give details of when this claim was made? I recall no such weaselage.

You're confusing "this behavior is something I consider inconsistant with his proclaimed philosophy" with "this person said that a specific event which had occured, had not (under oath)."

OK, so maybe Clinton isn't a pathological liar, but a habitual one. Does it matter?

Indeed. Anyone capable of getting themselves elected to that office shouldn't be trusted to actually do the job. However, some more so than others.

How the hell did we get here (this topic) anyway?

[Charlie Self]

Dave Hinz responds:

No, it doesn't. But, in fact, Clinton was not convicted. Nor were these who weren't indicted. So it's time to let it all go, place its weary head on a pillow and let it drop off. But, of course, no one will and neoconservatives (does that explain neocon--and yes, it is an insult, right up there with "liberal" which I am and am proud of being) will be yanking on Clinton's pecker for years to come.

Charlie Self "Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy." Ernest Benn