Hail to The Chief

sorabji.com: Sex: Hail to The Chief

Sarah on Thursday, August 20, 1998 - 06:20 pm:

    by nature i am not a political person.

    but i just have to say one thing. so the president fucked some intern and thereby cheated on his wife. big fucking deal. he's a human being who makes mistakes, just like all of us. let the man do his job. as long as he's going to work every day, i don't give a shit what he does with his cock. the only people who should be concerned about this is hillary, bill, and monica. end of story.

By Nate on Thursday, August 20, 1998 - 08:04 pm:

    it's the lying part, not the part about fucking his intern.


    how can we trust him?

By Sorabji on Thursday, August 20, 1998 - 08:41 pm:

    until his speech this afternoon about bombing sudan, it never occured to me that i was supposed to trust our president or think much of anything about it all.

    but that's just me.

    i was watching his eyes this time. he was looking to his left.

By Sarah on Thursday, August 20, 1998 - 09:37 pm:

    the last president we could trust was Jimmy Carter. those days are gone. now we must assume that they are all liars. it's part of the job description, innit?

By -oDDBALL oDD- on Thursday, August 20, 1998 - 10:10 pm:

    It is on the "Application for Republican or Democrat Politicians". Multiple choice question...

    1.) Are you a liar?

    We must assume that they are all liars if they are Democrats or Republicans. There are alternatives.


By Just one persons view on Friday, August 21, 1998 - 12:06 am:

    Honestly, I dont think it is anyone's business who clinton fucks, I mean, he doesn't go around asking or being nosey about all of our sexual experiances, now does he??? No,I think not, so therefore I dont believe we should make it ours!!
    If I were to go out and screw around on my husband then I wouldn't want it to be anyone's else's business but our's, and sure as hell wouldn't want it posted on the nitely news!!!(NOT LIKE IT IS LIKELY TO HAPPEN)
    But just in a thought, It would be totally wrong and I think NON-AMERICAN!!!!


By Antigone on Friday, August 21, 1998 - 12:40 am:

    I really don't see the logic in the "how can we trust him now" argument. Anyone who doesn't trust him now because he lied about SEX, of all things, probably didn't trust him much to begin with.

    I know I'm way out on the bell curve on this, but I don't care who he's been fucking, if he lied about it, or even if he asked anyone else to lie about it. If he lied about anything else I'd probably be pissed, but this is consentual sex. (And if you don't think it was consentual given Monica's age and status, you'd probably reconsider if you had the president's dick in your hand. That's true power, baby!)

By Self-described sexual libertine. on Friday, August 21, 1998 - 01:27 pm:

    It is not important who Bill Clinton fucks. I am happy to have a president with a libido.

    That being said, I do not like the man. I do not respect the man. But not because he was fucking someone. Obviously his wife is smart enough to understand that a guy like him, in his position, is going to have opportunities. He may take advantage of these opportunities...SO WHAT? If she is bright enough not to be an emotional wreck about it, who gets hurt? Us? (not me.)

    I thought of something earlier today. If Ms. Lewinsky, at 21, is too young to understand the complexities of the consequences of her actions,
    how about an 18 year old, draft-dodging Bill Clinton.

    I dislike the president strongly...but for good reasons. Not for political hoo-ha!

By Blindswine on Friday, August 21, 1998 - 03:16 pm:

    it's ridiculous. all of it. the outpouring of outrage. the $40 million dollar investigation. the proposition that any of this shit really matters.

    "sexgate" does nothing for me except prove that the beltway is totally detached from any issue of substance that exists in america. yesterday, during a conversation about this whole mess, i made the comment that "it is obvious that washington has totally lost all perspective."
    the reality is that washington's perspective doesn't reach past the boundaries of its own power game.

    the whole political process is nothing but a game played by power brokers-- the campaign in which candidates are re-invented in the image of the public's collective fantasy, the legislative process in which multi-national conglomerates essentially "buy america" through lobbying practices, the partisan bickering in which psuedo-events/soundbites/character assassination is used to make snake "a" look more morally appealing than snake "b"... it's all bullshit... and obviously so.

    politicians have a long history of bending over the public and fucking them to the point where generations of people are still getting reamed long after the politician has wiped the spunk off his johnson and put it back in his pants.
    politicians are people with agendas that generally have little to do with the public good.

    i can't help but see anybody who trusts politicians as anything but a sucker.

By Infernalmachine on Saturday, August 22, 1998 - 11:53 am:

    Um I think fucking is fairly trivial unless the love thing comes into it.
    Maybe there should be an official group of sucky fucky politico groupies built into the constitution as its there in most walks of life.
    You couldn't trust a president who could fall in love though because thats too much like vulnerability.
    I was thinking about bbs stalking antigone because I liked her (I presume) name.
    Thats a silly thing to do.
    I'll wait until I'm president and then she can feel empowered when I let her blow me off.
    Girls just love that power flavoured smeg I guess.

By Infernalmachine on Saturday, August 22, 1998 - 11:58 am:

    In the meantime I think I'd like to make friends with "self described libertine" whose name I also find strangely attractive.

By Quidam on Saturday, August 22, 1998 - 08:22 pm:

    Right on, Blindswine.


    Anyone who thinks that this story has an inerita of it's own is a nitwit. This is nothing other than politics as usual, it's story "designed" to be important. Ever notice how whenever they do a "man on the street" piece and ask Joe Schmoe about this the typical reply is "so what, I don't care anymore"?

    Yellow journalism, muck-raking, call it whatever, just don't call it news.

By Antigoine on Saturday, August 22, 1998 - 09:24 pm:

    Well, at least 25% of the public is providing some inertia to the story. I think if it didn't have any inertia, it wouldn't have been a story for 7 months. Now, you might argue that the 25% of the nation are nitwits, but it's still a hefty chunk of the population. It's also, not coincidentally, the same percentage that consistently wants Clinton to be impeached. Go fig.

    Blindswine, if you despise politics so much, maybe you should do something about it. Become one, even. Although I'm afraid just posting to this website would disqualify most of us from holding public office. And I so much wanted to be the next representative for east Dallas...

    And, Infernal Machine, if you'll check my mailto tag you'll see that it's decidedly unfeminine. Try to be observant. And what the heck is bbs stalking?

By Sorabji on Saturday, August 22, 1998 - 09:39 pm:

    i'll tell you about bbs stalking.

    oh, no i won't.

    this whole thing is a story for the same reason bill gates is the enemy.

    things are going too well.

    we don't have anything else to do.

    i know i don't.

By PetRock on Sunday, August 23, 1998 - 02:16 am:

    poor bill....he sends missiles into sudan and afghanistan and now people think it's wag the dog all over again -- trying to divert attention from miss monica by creating a fake war.

    and shit - here come the repubs (any of them up for re-election this fall?) appearing on talk shows saying this appears to be nothing more than a diversionary tactic by the president.

    any wonder now why he tried to get the paula "trailer trash" jones civil trial delayed until AFTER he left office? arguing that he wouldn't be able to effectively govern the country if he was distracted by a trial that could have waited?

    see what happens? damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

    i don't give a rats ass who he screws, fucks, sucks, blows or gets blown by....that is between him, his wife and the other party. it's not my business and i don't want it to be my business.

    as has been said many times before, we hired this man to do one thing - run the country. and the last time i checked, things seemed to be pretty much in order....

    employment is up? check

    the deficit is down? check

    how's inflation? low? check

    *oh, and to the person who called him a draft dodger -- any person who had enough brains to use any all means possible to avoid going to vietnam should be applauded. know what i mean shithead?

By Quidam on Sunday, August 23, 1998 - 02:22 am:

    Antigone -

    Maybe you're right, I dunno. But it seems to me that this whole deal would go away if it weren't for "leaked" tidbits of gossip from the whole investigation.

    If the Washington really had a "moral" bone in its body, Ken Starr would have a permanent job. I love how members of Congress and the Senate act like what Clinton did is "morally reprehensible" and not appropriate of the President. Maybe it is, maybe not. It just makes me laugh when I see some crusty republican politician on tv condeming Clinton for what he did, when you know, you *just know*, as soon as the day's over, he retreats to his own Teenage Sex Farm (tm).

    This is about sound bytes and sensationlism. Period. "Oral sex" "Semen Stain".

    My question is this? Do they think they are fooling anyone? Does anyone really think that by using some secret Slick Willy magic power we, the American Public (also tm), were duped into electing a moral reprobate?

    Fuck no! You can't even get into politics at that level without doing some bastard thing. If they actually impeach Clinton for this any member of Congress with a shred of self-respect would call it quits and walk out with him.

    And before I get slammed for claiming that all politicians are greedy slimeballs, I will say that I think the "good guys" get eaten alive or boxed in before they can do anything worthwhile. The system just doesn't cater to anything besides selfish motives.

    Maybe I'm wrong, but somehow I don't think so.

By The Moops on Sunday, August 23, 1998 - 08:14 am:


    <<I thought of something earlier today. If Ms. Lewinsky, at 21, is too young to understand the complexities of the consequences of her
    actions, how about an 18 year old, draft-dodging Bill Clinton. >>

    I could give a fuck less if Bill Clinton dodged the draft or no. My point was, the same people who like to defend Lewinsky for her immaturity at age 21 are the same ones who condemn Clinton for dodging the draft at 18. Double standard - men at 18 are mature and should be punished for what they do...women at 21 are just "maidens".

    This whole thing is abominable.
    The reason it goes on is that there are too many stupid people. No more natural selection among humans breeds chimps. Need Proof? Watch COPS!
    Watch Springer!

    Need I say more?

By PetRock on Sunday, August 23, 1998 - 11:43 am:

    Nope...was that you before (Sexual Libertine)?

    I agree though that any self-respecting male of a certain age during the 60's & 70's would have been crazy to actually want to go to war. That thing seemed like a horrible mess. (I like asking people I work with who were of draft age back then what they did to avoid going over. One guy said he was advised to admit to homosexual tendencies [never mind that he is one] to get that automatic 4F or whatever failing grade they give to us gays....)

    But I would be curious as to why you dislike him so much....but I don't want to drag the rest of the board into a political free-for-all. And besides, living inside of the beltway, I am sick and tired of the whole issue. Does anyone outside the beltway really feel this matter is THAT important? Important enough to spend 40+ million on?

    Anyway, I apologize for calling you shithead.

By Infernalmachine on Sunday, August 23, 1998 - 11:54 am:

    Just the latest trivia at the tip of the iceberg.
    (Something that Huxley said about distraction...)
    Anyway in a roundabout way it's me thats responsible because I've never voted.
    I've had my chances to change the destiny of the world and I just couldn't be bothered to get off my butt.
    It's all my fault!

By Nate on Sunday, August 23, 1998 - 01:35 pm:


    "i don't give a rats ass who he screws, fucks, sucks, blows or gets
    blown by..."

    how about who he blows up?

    If a Muslem country put a dozen missles into the US because some rich American possibly funded some destructive act do you think we'd go for it? Do you think we would threaten to retaliate? Do you think we would carry out our threats?

    If a rich Israeli Jew was alleged to have been responsible for funding the bombing of a couple mosques in syria, and syria responded by tossing a few missles into israel, do you think we'd side with syria? or israel?

    We have supported acts of terrorism against Moslem people for 50 years. Why do you think they're pissed at us? A giant country across the ocean ignoring the rights of their peoples. They're staging small revolutions as best they can against a force so much larger than Britian of the 1700s.

    We've forgotten our roots. We've forgotten our ideals. We've never known how to play fair with the other children.

    Yes, the economy is great. Inflation is low to non-existant. People are content and obviously this gives free license fo the goverment to do as it wishes behind closed doors. Clinton has no honor. Nobody does.

    We're heading for Viet Nam II. Israel is the France of the 90's.

    Redemption can be found in an apology from the US to the Muslem people. Followed by the end to our financial support of Israel. Followed by our bringing the attempt by Israel to use nuclear weapons against Iraq in the gulf war to trial by the UN. The trial would then have to result in sanctions against Israel until the UN can verify that their nuclear programs have been dismantled.

    From there we would need to issue a further apology specifically to Iraq. Just because we regretted giving them certain chemical and biological weapons to fight Iran was no reason for us to send Iraq into Kuwait so that we could justify war with them and remove said weapons from their possession. Our apology should include financial support to rebuild the infrastructure of Iraq.

    Obviously none of this will happen. So welcome to WWIII. The Muslem revolutions will increase intensity. Israel will get nervous and put a nuke into syria or iraq or wherever. Russia and China will freak out, but we will have to continue backing israel. bingo. enter apocalypse.

By Antigone on Sunday, August 23, 1998 - 11:16 pm:

    Sounds pretty plausible, Nate. I can see that happening. But, you seem convinced. Why don't you jump off a bridge now to avoid being vaporized in the blast?

    But, if you and I can see that happening, you know the folks at the war college have at least considered it. All we can hope is that someone is listening to them.

    Personally, I'm more worried about some terrorist organization using a nuclear (or chemical, or biological) device than Israel. Sure, the Israelies are rather paranoid and militant, but terrorists are much more militant, and worse they're *randomly* militant. And then there's that pesky jihad thing.

    Sure, alot of the current situation is our own Frankenstein, the monster of alot of 20th century western fucking with middle eastern and african peoples. But, what should we do? Let them bomb us? Let them come into the US and spread random havok? No. We've got to handle the current threat, then use about 50 years of diplomacy and proper peace making (which should include some of what you suggest) to repair the situation.

    Then again, maybe it'll take another nuke or two going off in the world to bring us all to our senses, if it doesn't kill us all in the process. It sure helped to end WWII...

By Antigone on Sunday, August 23, 1998 - 11:32 pm:

    On slightly lighter subjects...

    Quidam -

    Yes, alot of people do think Slick Willie duped alot of people into electing him. In fact, some extremely naive people actually DO feel duped. But most of us who voted for him knew the was a sheepfucker when they punched his space on the card. Moreover, we thought he was a smart, capable sheepfucker. I think that's what the right is so up in arms about. It's all part of the "moral decay" of America.

By PetRock on Monday, August 24, 1998 - 06:58 am:


    oh lord, I don't know how to even begin to respond to your message....

    no, I do not agree with the policy of funding Israel and then turning a blind eye while they go about their business of denying the basic liberties to Palestine.

    Should we apologize to the muslims for sending some missiles into Afghanistan and Sudan? Maybe.

    Probably. But then that would be a sign of weakness on our part and *sarcastic comment ahead* we can't have that, now can we?

    But yes, I admit that I am one of the apathetic millions who voted for Clinton (being who and what I am, I am more afraid of the repubs anyway....). I never really took an interest in politics, (so naturally I moved to the DC area) so I can't respond to much of what you said, other than to agree with Antigone that it does indeed seem plausible. But I also agree with him when he says that he is more afraid of the random terrorism perpetrated by the muslims and/or the holy jihad-ers than of Israel sending a nuke our way. (But I have to say, I *love* the idea that they attack our embassies, our people, because we *support* Israel. Why don't they go straight to the source then? Go after Israel?)

    Eh.....I don't know anymore....can't we get back to talking bout the Beasties or some such shit?

By MoonUnit on Monday, August 24, 1998 - 06:49 pm:

    All I know is not to go walking down the street where the American embassy is based in my country. Man this shit freaks me out.

    and what the hell is bbs stalking?? somebody please tell me...

By The Moops on Monday, August 24, 1998 - 09:29 pm:


    <<But I would be curious as to why you dislike him so much...>>

    I have no more or less disdain for Mr. Clinton than I do for ANY of them. Politicians (especially American ones) are the scum of the earth. Do not be confused...I do not label myself liberal nor conservative (not, at least, with the current definitions), so I have a very simple agenda. I work to see the end of the Federal Bureaucracy. I hope to have a hand in returning to states rights.

    We are having these problems internationally because our government refuses to allow sovereign nations to behave as they see fit. Every chance we get we foist ourselves upon people of other countries. Not to accomplish anything, but rather to make our politicians look like saints and to justify our massive wasteful military spending.

    Imagine this scenario...Iraq discovers that the United States govenment is manufacturing and stockpiling chemical weapons (which we are).
    Iraq decides to enter our country and force us to jump through hoops to prove to them that we are not producing chemical weapons.

    Neither should they! Neither should any country have to justify their behavior to us.

    I suppose we are the only people civilized enough and responsible enough to handle weapons of mass destruction.

    In any case, we replay this idiocy throughout the world every day...then we act surprised when entire populations get pissed at us.

By Mule on Friday, August 28, 1998 - 10:46 pm:

    Petrock, Nate, Antigone, et al.

    What are you people, fucked in the head?

    First off, Nate, I want specific instances of U.S. sponsored terrorism against Muslim peoples, including verifiable facts and sources.

    Second, do you see Saddam Hussein as a great leader, the "Saracen of the 20th Century" as he likes to bill himself? You want to talk about terrorism, go visit some Kurds in northern Iraq sometime.

    Antigone-want to know why the Israeli's are paranoid? National paranoia is what has kept them alive as a country. The Palestinian question now is the same as the Israeli question in the '40's. The day after Israel was formed, every Islamic country within arms reach declared war on them, and there hasn't been much let-up since then. Israel is worried about their national identity getting wiped off the face of the planet. Do the Islamic countries have the same worry?

    I doubt that any "westerner" can understand true jihad, a holy war called by the highest Islamic leaders. Understand this, though: religion is the worst possible reason for war, will drive a true believer of that religion farther and harder than any economic or patriotic concerns, and most of the middle Islamic countries have religious faith that you can't fathom.

    Sit down and read the Koran sometime. It doesn't translate well into English since it was written as poetry in Arabic, but you'll get a lesson out of it.

    Then think about the meaning of honor, and what it takes to stuff a bomb into the trunk of a car and blow up truly innocent non-combatants who could care less about jihad or any other such bullshit. Any one who does such a thing deserves to be hunted down like the dog they are. Period.

    Most Islamic terrorists who proclaim jihad don't truly understand their own faith. There's a line in a chapter of the Koran called "The Tables" that says "Believers, Jews, Sabaeans and Christians - whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does what is right - shall have nothing to fear or to regret." From "The 'Imrans": "Some there are among the People of the Book (Christians) who truly believe in God, and in what has been revealed to you and what has been revealed to them. They humble themselves before God and do not sell God's revelations for a trifling price. These shall be rewarded by their Lord. Swift is God's reckoning." They can't see that their blind faith and proclaimed jihad is ignoring their own religion's teachings.

    Fanatics like this understand one thing-brute force. Peace through superior firepower.

By Nate on Saturday, August 29, 1998 - 12:36 am:


    The US supports israel to the tune of about $30 billion a year. this is fairly common knowledge, on public record, and fairly easily verifiable.

    your knowledge of Islam is shaky. No jihad has been declared. No jihad has been declared for a while. this is a common myth about muslems, that they go jihad over everything that insults them. this isn't true.

    the koran is the root of jihad. it says that if Islam is being oppressed then mulsems need to take arms against the opressor. it is their duty. if jihad was declared, israel would cease to exist.

    your koran quotes support the action of muslem revolutionaries. "whoever believes in God and the Last Day and does what is right - shall have nothing to fear or to regret." given the content in the koran concerning the duty of the muslem against the oppressors of Islam, this quote clearly supports the actions of muslem revolutionaries. they are doing "what is right," so their justified actions are supported by the koran and condoned by god.

    "Some there are among the People of the Book (Christians) who truly believe in God" This line is talking about so few people on earth today. Claiming to be christain and fitting into that statement are two different things. 99% of all people who claim to be christian aren't. the muslems realize this.

By Mule on Saturday, August 29, 1998 - 01:59 pm:


    I half agree and half disagree with your last post, I guess.

    To most Islamic fanatics, it doesn't really matter whether a true jihad has been called or not. Osama bin Laden just last week stated that an "undeclared jihad" existed between the United States and the people of Islam. You don't think his followers are going to grip onto that one?

    If you're accusing Israel of state sponsored terrorism (and therefore accusing the U.S. of it, basically "terrorism by proxy"), I have a tough time with that one. Israeli car bombs are few and far between. And as far as a true jihad being able to wipe out Israel, I'd have to disagree there too, on two points-- 1) if that were true, the Islamic world would have done it long ago (if you think most Arab leaders wouldn't use jihad as a political move, guess again), and 2) you're not giving the Israeli military their due.

    Part of the point I tried to make (and failed) is that terrorism over religion is ridiculous, especially among religions that share so much in common as Christianity and Islam do. This is why I say to read the Koran. It shares much with the Christian Bible: Moses is figured in it repeatedly, King David, Abraham, Job, Adam -- it's a long list. The Koran calls for Muslims to read the Old Testament. The two beliefs share faith in one true God. Most terrorists ignore this when they profess following a holy cause based on the Koran.

    I admit that my knowledge of Islam is limited to reading the Koran and what I've learned on the side. However, after 10 years in the Marine Corps and pulling both embassy CT duty and standing on another counter-terror team, I've learned some about the terrorist mentality. It is a warped sense of belief and fanaticism. Terrorism is a whacked sense of politicism based on religion, and it is partly media driven--bin Laden couldn't give a shit about blowing up 200 people unless 200,000,000 others hear about it. He's trying to get a message out, and it's a political, not religious one; he just wants to do it in the most violent way possible.

    I support our support of Israel because, the Palestinian question aside, Israel is in the right. I believe that 100%. The issue of Palestine is a seperate one from Israel's right to exist, and that's the fight they've been fighting since the '40's.

    My thoughts on how to solve all this? We grab bin Laden. Do a "snatch & haul" and drag the bastard back here to the U.S. The ultimate would be if we could get him tried in accordance with Muslim law, maybe in Saudi Arabia, but I don't see that happening. Also, neither Clinton nor the American people have the balls for a real "war on terrorism", because that one's going to get ugly and there WOULD be non-combatant casualties on both sides, and we all know what happens when the media gets ahold of something like that.

    In parting, I regret my "fucked in the head" comment I started my last post with, it was way harsh and uncalled for, and I apologize to all those I pointed it to.

By -oDDBALL oDD- on Saturday, August 29, 1998 - 07:53 pm:

    It's time that ALL OTHER COUNTRIES take care of defending themselves instead of relying on my deep pockets. Japan, Germany, Israel, all well-to-do countries...fuck'em, let them defend themselves.

    When we intervene in another sovereign nations politics, whether by infiltrating with missionaries or with Pepsico,OR by "stabilizing" the local population to make a safe haven for our industries to avail themselves of the cheap labor force... WE ARE ASKING FOR IT.

    When we begin to understand that the whole world is not ours for the taking, and begin to treat other cultures with respect (instead of forcing our GOD and our RULES and our REFINED BEHAVIOR on them)we will see a turn around in other peoples attitudes toward us.

    Until then, the fanatic fringe will always have a following.

    Isn't this Ben Ladin guy a billionaire? Seen photos of him? He don't look like no billionaire.
    Who are those people gonna believe? Some WASP in a $1000.00 suit? Get real.

By Antigone on Sunday, August 30, 1998 - 07:15 pm:

    I don't recall ever being fucked in the head, Mule. But, obviously, you've had the experience.

    Can you tell me what it's like? :-)

By DARRIN on Wednesday, September 2, 1998 - 01:38 am:

    Being JEWISH, I must commend BILL CLINTON for finally having splendid taste in women!heh Contrary to popular belief, not all JEWISH AMERICAN PRINCESSES are FRIGID!heh There are many, including MONICA LEWINSKY, who have no qualms about 'PUTTING OUT'. heh Speaking from a MALE perspective, I have dated many ethnicities and creeds, but I always find myself coming back to a JAP!heh So, BRAVO to BILL for having received his first 21-Gum-Salute from a NON-GOYIM!heheheheehehh

By K.T. on Wednesday, September 2, 1998 - 02:57 am:

    I'm new to this board so sorry if I offend anyone.

    Concerning the whole Clinton deal. If he can't be trusted to do something simple like stay faithful to his own wife, how can anyone expect him to have the best intrests in mind for an entire faceless country? What happens when he really fucks up? Does everyone have to wait 7 months for him to admit he pushed the button?

By Me on Wednesday, September 2, 1998 - 03:16 am:


    There are self help sites out there. Maybe you should spend your time on them.

By Me II on Wednesday, September 2, 1998 - 07:41 am:

    Millions of websites in the naked city...
    DORK-O chooses to fuck up sorabji.

    For the trillionth time... Please go away, Darrin?

By Carrie Ann on Wednesday, September 2, 1998 - 12:41 pm:

    Do my eyes deceive me or is that our little DARRIN returning to us? *faint and fall over* Heh. I thought I saw a post from him the other day, but it was the weirdest thing. I went to click on it when it popped up, but had a little error problem (not common at all with this board. *grins @ mark*) and when I reloaded..... it was gone. *twilight zone theme music* They're out there. Trust no one.

By Antigone on Tuesday, September 8, 1998 - 12:11 am:

    Alright, K.T., I'll bite.

    I'm not offended. How could I be offended by such vapid logic? Can you read the mind of Hillary Clinton? Do you know that she even CARES if he stays faithful? What if she doesn't? Does that change the situation? What if she said, "Sure, Bill, you can fuck Lewinsky...as long as I get to watch!"

    So, K.T., when was the last time you lied about something? Was every statement you made after that a lie? Will you be forever tainted by that slip? Jeez! How can you ever be trusted after a deception like that? What right do you have to a normal life after what you've done? You are an immoral, untrustworthy person! You scumbag!

    How does it feel?

By Sarah on Wednesday, September 16, 1998 - 08:51 pm:

    Close, but just cigar.... poor Clinton. i'm not upset he lied. i mean, i called in sick to work the other day even though i wasn't really sick. that doesn't mean that i am a liar or that i can't be trusted to do my job and do it well.

    i hope Starr gets reincarnated as a libertarian.

By K.T. on Thursday, September 24, 1998 - 05:15 am:

    Doesn't bother me one bit. I'm not in charge of an entire country. I don't have millions of people relying on me to make the right decision.

    I never ran for or got elected the president.

    No, I don't know Hilary Clinton from a hole in the fucking ground. Not my point.

    He made his bed. Now he's trying to lie in it.

    Oh, and yep, I've lied. Everyone has lied at one point or another. Thing is, no one I know has lied to an entire country.

By BitterRain on Thursday, September 24, 1998 - 09:56 pm:

    I'm just amazed that Clinton had phonesex...and there I was the whole time wasting my phone abilities on those lame wankers on aol... <sigh>. heh.

By Antigone on Thursday, September 24, 1998 - 11:06 pm:

    K.T. sayeth, "Thing is, no one I know has lied to
    an entire country."

    Then, K.T., I guess you don't know George Bush (read my lips), Ollie North (under oath), Newt Gingrich (It's just a college class!), Dan Burton (affair in office), Henry Hyde (affair in office), Helen Chenoweth (affair in office). That's just off the top of my head.

    So, please, unless you have huge right wing horse blinders on, you must see that many of Clinton's detractors have lied to the nation.

    Sure, he lied. Under oath, even. So how can I trust him now? I'll never ask him, "Bill, who are ya fuckin'?" It's just that easy.

By Antigone on Friday, September 25, 1998 - 06:14 pm:

By K.T. on Friday, October 2, 1998 - 06:53 am:

    You know what Antigone?

    After what I've seen, heard and been through these past few days, Clinton just isn't important anymore.

By Antigone on Friday, October 2, 1998 - 06:04 pm:

    Well, then, tell your local congressman to stop worrying about Clinton and start worrying about truely important things. Go to http://www.moveon.org/ and sign a petition. I'm glad you've joined the rest of us who think it's not important. :-)

By K.T. on Saturday, October 10, 1998 - 04:29 am:

    My local congressman has nothing to do with the way I think. I just didn't want to argue anymore. I've had more important things to think about lately.

    But since you don't want to drop it, fine. Worry not, I won't be signing any petition. I still feel the same way as I did when I first posted. Take it or leave it. I don't care. I said what I thought, just like you. If you want to keep debating, what the hell, let's keep debating. Loser buys the beer.

By Antigone on Monday, October 12, 1998 - 11:40 pm:

    Shit, I'll buy the beer. Do you like Guinness? Any thick rich cream stout will do for me.

    Ya, we do seem to be the polar opposites bumping heads here. And, I just can't drop it. The reason I can't drop it isn't because I think Clinton's a saint, or anything like that. He's my kind of scumbag, really. It's just that Ken Starr is not my kind of scumbag. Sure, Clinton lied about Monica. I get lied to by politicians all the time. Big deal. Sure he lied about Monica in the Paula Jones case. But, do you really think that the Jones case, backed by millions of conservative dollars (and linked to a partner in Ken Starr's Chicago law firm) is the battle of an innocent victim for her day in court? Heck no! It's a politically motivated ploy to entrap or embarrass the prez. Sure, Clinton was being really stupid when he made the mistake of lying and thinking it wouldn't come out, but in a way I'm glad he did it. If the political right wants him out of office badly enough they're going to have to go all the way. They're going to have to rip the heart out of America to get what they want. If they want to send our whole nation into turmoil because they can't stand one man, I think that speaks for itself.

    However, I don't think impeachment proceedings will reach the Senate because the Republicans don't want Ken Starr's actions to be scrutinized too closely. Read this for a little more food for thought.

By K.T. on Friday, October 16, 1998 - 05:43 am:

    Hey! Antigone!

    We agree on something!

    No way in hell was Lewinsky just an innocent pawn in the whole thing. If she was, why'd she save the dress? Seems pre-meditated to me.

    But, Clinton fell for it. He used the wrong head. Not something one should do in the position he's in.

    Think about it. You're the president. Someone has offered you a blowjob. Wouldn't you think that maybe the offer is on the table because of what you represent and not because of who you are?

    And if you took up on the offer, wouldn't you be stupid? You would have just let an outsider in. An outsider that had the goods on you. To do what she pleased with it.

    Granted, the Kennith Starr nonsense is just that: Nonsense. (So is empeachment). But what brought the whole nonsense on?


    He's not a victim either. He got his jollies. He so much as admitted that. Had he told the truth the first time, I would have at least some respect for him.

    And here's another point of view, had it been 25 years ago, Monica Lewinsky may have just died of a mysterious overdose before she could say anything.

    And, I prefer lite beer. But I have freinds that swear by a good hearty stout, so who'mi to argue?

By Slacker on Tuesday, October 27, 1998 - 04:41 am:

    chapaquidick anyone?

By Antigone on Tuesday, October 27, 1998 - 11:13 pm:

    Sounds like Monica chapped Clinton's quidick.

    Fer sure...

    And, ya, K.T., it is a damn shame that Clinton is so smart and so stupid at the same time. But, you can't lay it all on his shoulders. If this had been a Republican congress with a Republican president the whole situation would have never happened. (Or Dems controlling both branches.) Clinton is both victim and perpetrator, as is Ken Starr and his ilk. It just matters which you think they're more of.

    Personally I feel more pity for Clinton than anything else. He's not the attacker in this fiasco. Sure, he has retaliated to stay afloat. To not do so would be to commit political suicide. But, he is the one under seige here.

    Lite beer? What is that? A glass of water with a hopp at the bottom? Beer that's looking for it's mommy? Puh-leeese! :-)

By Slacker on Wednesday, October 28, 1998 - 12:09 am:

    not if it's light canadian beer dude

By Neil Steinhoff on Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - 03:25 am:

    Test the baby of Mary Beth Copekney. It will be positive for Ted Kennedy'd DNA.

By Antigone on Wednesday, June 30, 2004 - 11:24 am:

    Oh, puhlease. This thread is dead, and so is the modern sex scandal. The governor of California participated in an orgy and no one cared, fer chrissakes.

    The odd thing is that Jack Ryan got booted from his senate race because of a sex fiasco. I think that was internal Republican party politics, though.


The Stalking Post: General goddam chit-chat Every 3 seconds: Sex . Can men and women just be friends? . Dreamland . Insomnia . Are you stoned? . What are you eating? I need advice: Can you help? . Reasons to be cheerful . Days and nights . Words . Are there any news? Wishful thinking: Have you ever... . I wish you were... . Why I oughta... Is it art?: This question seems to come up quite often around here. Weeds: Things that, if erased from our cultural memory forever, would be no great loss Surfwatch: Where did you go on the 'net today? What are you listening to?: Worst music you've ever heard . What song or tune is going through your head right now? . Obscure composers . Obscure Jazz, 1890-1950 . Whatever, whenever General Questions: Do you have any regrets? . Who are you? . Where are you? . What are you doing here? . What have you done? . Why did you do it? . What have you failed to do? . What are you wearing? . What do you want? . How do you do? . What do you want to do today? . Are you stupid? Specific Questions: What is the cruelest thing you ever did? . Have you ever been lonely? . Have you ever gone hungry? . Are you pissed off? . When is the last time you had sex? . What does it look like where you are? . What are you afraid of? . Do you love me? . What is your definition of Heaven? . What is your definition of Hell? Movies: Last movie you saw . Worst movie you ever saw . Best movie you ever saw Reading: Best book you've ever read . Worst book you've ever read . Last book you read Drunken ramblings: uiphgy8 hxbjf.bklf ghw789- bncgjkvhnqwb=8[ . Payphones: Payphone Project BBS

sorabji.com . torturechamber . px.sorabji.com . receipts . contact