Ok!... so he lied and he lied under oath. Is that really what all this "impeachment" is about?

Or is it about partisan politics and winning the political game?

The fact that most Republicans favor impeachment and most Democrats oppose it speaks volumes.

Let us not kid ourselves. If Bill Clinton were a Republican, most Democrats would want to impeach him and most Republicans would oppose it.

That both parties will jump on a President of the opposing party and try to draw blood while the President's own party will try to defend him is an unfortunate fact of American political life which has been true throughout all of American history; but, the situation today is made worse by the total hatred with which many people, almost all Republicans, seem to have for Bill Clinton the man.

I am not quite sure why they hate the man so. I suspect that it might have something to do with the fact that he is so much a child of the sixties, an era which still gives conservatives, most of them Republicans, nightmares and then some.

Frankly, I was not that crazy about the sixties myself. It was a time of excesses, most of them on the left of the social and political spectrum. I do not think, however, that the excesses of that time justify the excesses of our own time, most of which are on the right of the social and political spectrum.

One of these excesses has been the right wing effort to "get" Clinton in any way possible. These people have been digging and probing since before Clinton became President.

"Seek and ye shall find."

Keep looking for dirt and eventually you will find some; and, what do you know? They found some! It wasn't "whitewater." It wasn't "filegate." It wasn't any of those other incidents of the type which happen during almost any President's tenure of office; but, which in Bill Clinton's case, the right wing has tried to turn into

It was an overactive, and reckless libido. It was also the President's, in my opinion, not so curious definition of sex and what constitutes an affair. His definition comes from an intermingling of of rural Southern and sixties values; and, considering his background, isn't that to be expected?

Isn't it possible that he refuses to admit lying because he really doesn't think that he has lied?

And so, he "just doesn't get it." Well, Jesse Helms, Strom Thurmond, Phil Gramm, among others, just don't get some things which are of much greater importance to the nation; but, no one seems to be impeaching them.

And if Clinton did admit to lying, does anyone seriously think that, given the extreme partisan nature of this whole thing, it would stop an effort at impeachment?

I will admit I never really believed that he was telling the truth about his relationship with Miss Monica as well as a number of other women. Where there is so much smoke there had to be at least some fire; but, people lie about sex. That is just a fact.

And frankly, it is my opinion that we have that right. A person's private sex life is no one's business other than his and that of his "significant other." This includes both Ken Starr and any grand jury.

Ask a dishonest question and you will get a dishonest answer!

The question that I would like to ask, it is suspect that I have any right to ask it; but, I am curious. I couldn't care less what or how; but, I would like to know why.

What could have been possibly been going on in his mind?

Surely he knew that long gone are the days of John Kennedy when bikini clad starlets could wander around the White House and not a word appear in the news media. Surely he knew that there were people out there just waiting to pounce on any misstep.

Sometimes you just get so tired of dodging the bullet you just let it hit you. Is that what happened?