Bottom line: the "apolitical" Salon editors (and I do support them in
the decision to run, but not with this logic:)
It will be argued that Hyde's
30-year-old affair cannot be
compared to Clinton's, because Hyde's
sexual intrigue was not
carried out in Washington and because
he did not lie under oath.
Clinton is not being investigated
because he had an affair, those
who argue this insist, but because he
lied about it. This is, we
submit, either absurdly naive or
disingenuous: Lying and having
an affair can't be separated. To have
an affair is by definition to
lie about it -- an affair is a lie.
Consequently, the notion that
Clinton's lies about the nature of his
relationship with Lewinsky
could constitute an impeachable
offense is blatant politics, hiding
under a legal fig leaf.
FWIW, the husband, who is pushing the story, had moved out on her and
the three kids because she "drank and stayed out", and then she saw Hank
while separated. Doesn't forgive Hank, though... Kept woman, the
apartment, the clothes, all of it.
"My mother originally didn't want me to say anything to the
press," said her daughter. "But she's
just so fed up with [Hyde],
with how two-faced he is. She knows
she wasn't his first
[mistress] and she wasn't his last.
She hates his anti-abortion
stuff, and all the family values
stuff. She thinks he's bad for the
country, he's too powerful and he's
Rohit Khare -- UC Irvine -- 4K Associates -- +1-(626) 806-7574 http://www.ics.uci.edu/~rohit -- http://xent.ics.uci.edu/~FoRK