"Bob" > wrote in
:

>> Considering his peccadilloes are nobody's business but his own, I
>> would say that lying about that is a misdemeanour at best.
>> Basically he was telling Ken Starr: **** you, and the elephant
>> you rode in on.
>
> Here's an analogous situation: A youth gets caught shoplifting. He
> pulls out a gun and shoots the shopkeeper. By your logic, the
> murder would be a misdemeanor "at best", because it was only
> covering up a shoplifting offense.

It's not analogous at all. Murder is a capital offense. Lying to a
nosy busybody of a Republican toady is not a capital offense (if
anything it's a public service). *If* the questions asked of Clinton
had had any bearing on national security or his ability to hold the
office of President, and he lied about it (like Nixon lied about his
involvement in Watergate), then he should have been held accountable,
But what he was being asked to do was to expose his personal life to
public scrutiny for no reason other than the overweening titillation
of Lucianne Goldberg and Ken Starr who can't abide by the idea that
Democrats can get themselves laid.

The secret masturbators tied up the work of government for two years
with their innuendo and persiflage. Nothing was accomplished, the
point of the exercise was invisible to most people and it seemed
there was no end to the muckraking they were willing to entertain
simply to express their overweening and bilious hatred of Clinton.

This investigation was the real crime and those who pushed it through
the real criminals. They should have been horsewhipped if you people
had had any common sense. The fact that they haven't been
horsewhipped or castigated in any fashion by their own kind speaks
volumes for the quality of political discourse that too often reeks
out of the right wing of the US Capitalist Partei.

--

German to Picasso in front of Guernica: Did you do this?
Picasso to German in front of Guernica: No, it was you.