Matt Glavin has been in the news for the past two weeks, and I wonder why no one has stepped up to the plate and mentioned his story.

"For the past few years, Matt and his pals at Southeastern Legal have been passionately preoccupied with getting Bill Clinton disbarred in Arkansas. Why? Don't ask stupid questions, you know why! Go up to the blackboard and write a thousand times: Because he lied about a blow job!

Matt's fascination with other people's genitalia is not merely limited to Willie's wiener. No, Matt's horizons have been expanded to include gays and lesbians, too. He's made a career of berating them and recently filed a brief with the Supreme Court on behalf of the Boy Scouts regarding their policy on gay troop leaders. So given this background, you'd be justified in making the logical conclusion that Matt's own member must be clean, pristine, and never seen."

Well, after two weeks, Matt finally won the Creep of the Week Award.

Am I the only one who finds this humorous?

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), October 10, 2000

Answers

Uh, no you aren't, Anita. I just can't stop laughing long enough to type anything of substance here. Then again, does anything more need to be added to this?!?!?! ROTF....

-- Patricia (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), October 10, 2000.

Anita:

This wouldn't be the first prude and public [had to change this from pubic; a natural mistake; good thing I edit] conservative to turn out this way. The list is long.

Then Bush is a different story. Here is another collection of quotes. He admits he was one [a small business that is] and considers himself first lady. I was one

Dan may have had the same problem but at least he was funny.

Best wishes,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 10, 2000.

Of course it would be unfair to ignore Cheney :^)

America Needs Dick

Now I feel more fair.

Best wishes,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 10, 2000.

Anita, thanks. Matt's thing was really funny...Wait, no -- I mean the STORY was funny. Yep -- the STORY. Ahem.

But Z, the Bush quotes got me ROTFLMAO! Wait a minute. I'm sorry, that's ROTFLMBO! Whoa, I've gotta watch my language. I usually don't start using "A"'s unless I've had a few.

-- eve (eve_rebekah@yahoo.com), October 10, 2000.

Patricia and Anita, poor, poor Mr. Glavin. ;-)

I always did say that those I met in the church were far more frightening to me than the folks I met on the outside, who were much more honest about themselves and their lives.

I'll be waiting for the blessed gathering mentioned in the Cheney link. I wonder if Newt "a BJ isn't cheating" Gingrich will be joining the men for a prayer session and other activities...

-- Not Surprised (pppatrol@weallknow.com), October 10, 2000.

I'm disapointed in your reaction, guys. Nothing noteworthy to learn from that article. C'mon, get a grip.

Well ok, I did learn something new. "Fudge packing". That's a new one for me.

-- (smarty@wannabe.one), October 10, 2000.

No, it does not surprise me in the slightest.

Anyone here from Ft. Lauderdale? I used to live there, it was a cool place to live albeit a bit rowdy and raunchy during the spring break. Then came a guy named Doug Danzinger. Doug was a real law and order kinda guy, a holy rollin moralist who ran for city council on a platform of bringing morals back to Ft Lauderdale. And bring 'em back he did. The guy was a one man steamroller of purity. All tittie bars were banned from the city limits. Likewise the porn shops and other adult oriented businesses. Colleges were sent letters saying in essence "You are no longer welcome here."

And the city was clean, hallelujah!!

But there came a day, a day that saw the sudden resignation of ol' Doug for "personal" reasons. The city was in shock! Ol' Doug resigning? Why? He was destined for greatness! What could cause ol' Doug to slink away?

This just in..... In a related news item, Kathy Willits was arrested for prostitution. She claimed to have a book containing names of the rich and powerful who enjoyed her services. Film at 11.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), October 10, 2000.

Hey, Unk, that story was featured in an episode of City Confidential on A&E (I think). I remember seeing it about a month or so ago.

Oh the irony :-)

-- Patricia (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), October 10, 2000.

Yeah Patricia, I saw that. I moved before ol Doogie had his way with that wonderful town, but my former partyhound buds kept me current. Oh how I used to enjoy the "Cheetah III" and the "Islander" clubs as a horny red blooded youte. Gone now, like the sands of an hourglass.

Anyone worried about where someone else's "Mr Winky" is ending up is just jealous, IMHO.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), October 10, 2000.

LOL, good work Anita! I love seeing these repub creeps exposed for the hypocrits they are. How dumb can they get? The ones that do the most shouting about the opposition are the same ones we find out are the real creeps! Kenneth Starr always struck me as the kind of old pervert who goes down to the bus stop in a trench coat and flashes his little weiner at little old ladies. LOL

-- (rightwing@pervo.repubs), October 10, 2000.

The closet does funny things to people. It really aint funny but it sure is funny to watch.

-- Carlos (riffraff1@cybertime.net), October 10, 2000.

From: Fairness, ` la Carte by Dancr (pic), near Monterey, California

Seen on a bumper sticker last week:

Lick Bush & Dick in 2000

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage), October 11, 2000.

Just finished licking Bush and stuffing the Beaver.

Dr. Dick Handy - Gynecologist/Gardener/Taxidermist, at your service

-- June Cleaver's new Handyman (sent.Ward.on@the.big.vacation), October 11, 2000.

Well Anita, I guess you're not the only one who finds this humorous. I don't think it's funny at all.

I read the book "All Too Human", where George S. says that he's disappointed and disgusted by Bill's behavior. He knew that Bill was lying only because he knows Bill. He's seen Bill lie many times before. He knows the man who would "risk his presidency" over a BJ. He thought that it was a big risk to take and thought the prez was extremely stupid for taking that risk. George, a man who sat by the prez for over four years, a very liberal democrap, thought the prez should be impeached if the charges were found true. The charges were true; he lied under oath. Starr couldn't prove obstruction of justice, but I think the man, who knows his enemies well, could very easily obstruct justice.

Look, I personally don't care where Bill puts his wee wee. His wife should. I personally don't care where Newt or any other man puts his wee wee. That's not the issue and it never was. The American people forgave Bill for his indiscretions, his "bimbo eruptions" as George S puts it. His wife accepted his behavior; she admitted it "was her choice" in a recent debate with Lazio. I could care less that he lied about a BJ. Politicians lie (or spin) all the time. What I find really disgusting is that he lied under oath. He put himself above the LAW. Even George S thinks that this is unacceptable. This isn't a partisan thing; it's criminal behavior.

Side issue: I find it ironic that women still like Clinton. A womanizer is sexist in every sense of the word. I knew someone who liked to chase women. I told him one day that I thought he hated women. He became extremely upset with me and told me that him places women on a pedestal. LOL, he adores women only because of the personal sexual gratification he gets from them, not any other reason. A womanizer has a real problem in seeking dominance over women, taking a conquest to extremes, and Clinton epitomizes this. But the American people accepted this when they elected him, twice. But I digress.

I can see the responses on this thread don't care Bill lied about something (anything, it doesn't matter) UNDER OATH. Sad.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), October 11, 2000.

Maria, I'll tell you exactly why I wasn't upset with Bill Clinton for "lying under oath."

If it had been over a subject that affected national security, I would have felt completely differently. Put in the same position, I'm not sure that most here would have not chosen to do the same thing, to avoid embarrassment to their families.

It's frankly none of my business what Bill Clinton chooses to do with another consenting adult. Considering the fact that those across the aisle have been just as busy with *their* youthful indiscretions, the thought that any of our most private interactions are fodder for an endless "investigation" ought to freeze the blood of those who scream that their freedoms are being infringed upon.

I didn't read Stephanopoulous' book. I believe that those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw rocks.

-- Just another feminist (getoverit@democratwhitehouse2000.com), October 11, 2000.

Maria argues that what is important is that Clinton lied under oath. I agree with that. Far more important is the fact that the judge in the Paula Jones case, Judge Susan Weber Wright, agrees with that. She slapped Clinton down good and hard after the trial for his perjury.

(Incidentally, I was not for impeachment because I did not think that what he did sank to the level of an impeachable offense. Censure was what I wanted.)

-- Peter Errington (petere@ricochet.net), October 11, 2000.

Feminist,

I have never lied under oath even though at times I felt very uncomfortable saying certain things. I was furious at opposing council for going into my personal life when it had no bearing on the issue at hand. But hey, that's the way the system works. Lawyers get to go down any path to represent their clients' best interests.

Clinton didn't have to like what was going on (and neither do you) but he has (as we all do) an obligation to speak the truth under oath.

Thanks, Peter I guess there's one other on this thread.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), October 11, 2000.

Maria, lawyers are first and foremost OFFICERS OF THE COURT, and should never be put in any such position, regardless of their client's supposed best interests. I know that there are a lot of grey areas sometimes, but this is should never be open to compromise.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 11, 2000.

Maria, my husband and I were involved in a lawsuit several years ago. The defendant was an unscrupulous local businessman who was eventually relieved of any ability to do business in the state we reside in. I didn't lie under oath, either, even though the questioning during our depositions quickly veered off the subject at hand, and went into areas of our private life that were nobody's business but ours in an attempt to intimidate us.

While I appreciate the fact that lying under oath is a punishable offense, after our experience, I fully understand why Bill Clinton did it. I could never condemn someone else for attempting to keep their private life private.

Was anyone else besides me staggered by the information recently that Paula Jones, so desperately worried about her "reputation," has announced her plans to pose nude for Penthouse magazine?

-- Just another feminist (democrats@whitehouse.com), October 13, 2000.

While I appreciate the fact that lying under oath is a punishable offense, after our experience, I fully understand why Bill Clinton did it. I could never condemn someone else for attempting to keep their private life private.

I understand why he did it. It must have been a very painful experience. Well, you're in good company... Geraldo found this very funny too. I don't think exposing personal lives is very funny at all and the prez is not above the law. But as you state lying under oath is a punishable offense.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), October 17, 2000.

Maria--

As usual, your observations are keen. It truly is ironic that "feminists" are so eager to defend the compulsive philandering of Clinton. Monica was certainly no innocent, but Clinton, a married man, a generation older and President of the United States was having "consenting sex" with an adult? C'mon, the BJ in the Oval Office was sexual harrassment plain and simple. Feminists fought to the end to defeat the nomination of Clarence Thomas. Yet, they have nothing critical to say about the female-abuse of Clinton? LOL.

What is going on here, on both sides, is politics-as-usual. So-called Feminists are not for females so much as for Liberal/Leftists. They will support a male with the "correct" politics over a female with "incorrec"t politics. They will support a male sexual-harrasser IF he has the correct politics. They will oppose a woman in favor of a man if she has incorrect politics. I believe that Gloria Steinem or one her clones referred to Kay Baily Hutchinson as a "female pretender" (or words to that effect) when Hutchinson made her successful campaign for Senator from Texas.

Many so-called feminists are nothing more than the female auxiallary of the Dem/Liberal party.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 17, 2000.

Lars, you hit it.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), October 18, 2000.

Maria--

Thank you for your comment. We must form a mutual admiration society. I will be president.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 18, 2000.