Scoundrels, Knaves, and Fools

• The London Times kicked off 1996 with an overview of the American presidential election which tabbed Slick Willie as a clear favorite to win re-election no matter who is his Republican opponent. Times Washington bureau writer Martin Fletcher wrote that in retrospect, Newt Gingrich's rise has been Slick's salvation. Gingrich, he wrote, "has not only proved to be an unlovable figure, but appears to have overestimated the mandate he and his fellow Republican revolutionaries received last year. This let Mr. Clinton back into the game." Surveying the deeply uninspiring field of Republican candidates, Fletcher concluded that "The Republicans have made themselves the underdogs." He noted Clinton's tactic of "moving sharply toward the right" to co-opt popular parts of the Republican program. "Lacking a strong record," Fletcher wrote, "Mr. Clinton will have to run against Republican 'extremism'." The Times also noted the obvious: Slick's weak spots, "character and leadership." (January 10, 1996)

• Why the ruckus when New York Times columnist William Safire called Slick Hillie a liar? She is a liar. Why do so many of us shrink from calling a thing what it is? (January 16, 1996)

• Slick Willie said he wanted to punch Safire in the nose for telling the truth. It's a pleasure, after all these years and all that draft-dodging, to see Slick Willie willing to fight.

How Come Dan Rather, Peter Jennings, Bernie Kalb, Michael Kinsley And The Other Big Media Guys 'n' Gals Didn't Report On This?

• “On her recent Asian tour, first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton told New Zealand television that she had been named for the famed mountaineer Sir Edmund Hillary. Her parents apparently had unusual foresight. In 1947, the year of her birth, Sir Edmund was an obscure beekeeper. He didn't conquer Mount Everest, and achieve worldwide fame, until 1953.” --The American Spectator, February, 1996 edition.

Best Headline I Saw In January

• "Moderates Are Running--For The Door" proclaimed over a USA Today story (January 16) about the record number of members of Congress who've announced they'll not seek re-election in 1996: 12 senators and 35 House members so far. "Moderates in both parties are calling it quits," wrote Richard Wolf, citing the by now mantralike litany of agonies the members suffer: long hours, expensive campaigns and negative campaigning, and adding some relatively new ones: voter anger and hostility, and an increasingly partisan atmosphere in Congress. Wolf's contention was that the moderates--obviously the good guys--are bitterly unhappy in such an atmosphere and their departures are leaving only the hardcore fanatics behind. He quoted Democratic Representative Pete Peterson of Florida, who's going home in disgust. "I came here to do substantive work and have been a bridge-builder. The two sides have moved so far apart that the bridges won't reach from one side to the other." A scant few of the Democratic bailees admitted it was just no fun being in the minority after 40 years of Democrat rule. "It's going to be more acrimonious," said former Republican Senator John Danforth (Missouri), who retired in 1994. "Look who's quitting and look who isn't," said Religious Left liberal Rep. Patricia Schroeder of Colorado. Here's one great big cheer for things getting more acrimonious in Congress and a thumb-o'-the-nose to the "moderates" who are leaving in a pout. I don't want any more bridges built to the liberals who've had it their way for four decades in Wonderland. There ought to be hostility in Congress. For there ought to be and is a war underway over the direction our country should go. It's long past time to recognize it and draw a line in the dust. (January 16, 1996)

Turn Over A Rock at State And You'll Find Another 60's Radical Leftie Department

• Nick Burns, a State Department spokesman, commenting to eager reporters on a savage three-day air and land assault by Russian troops on a village held by Chechen rebels, said the Clinton administration was uneasy with the Russian action, but felt the hostage-taking, which precipitated the fracas, was "uncivilized" and "reprehensible." Burns then completely dropped his mask when he said, "This business of destroying a village to save it--we have our own experience in Vietnam." Sorry, but the Russians weren't bombing Pervomayskaya to save it, they were bombing it to destroy it. (January 24, 1996)

But Not Once In Over 200 Years Has There Been A President Quite Like This One. . .

• So. Slick Willie's been subpoenaed to testify in the conspiracy and fraud trial of his former Whitewater partners, James and Susan McDougal. There's less reason for cheer than we think. I see it playing out this way. Slick argues that he can't be compelled to testify in person at the trial, because it would interfere with his presidential duties. A friendly judge agrees, says Slick may give a deposition if he wishes. The McDougals' attorney files for dismissal of all charges, arguing his clients cannot receive a fair trial because the chief witness on their behalf cannot be summoned to court. A friendly judge agrees, throws out the case. The McDougals walk. Slick smirks. Justice weeps. Just a hunch. . . (February 2, 1996) (Footnotes: On February 27 a federal judge in Little Rock rejected a plan for Slick Willie to testify by videotape in the McDougal trial. Defense attorneys immediately demanded that Slick testify in person. Judge George Howard Jr. said he would not transport attorneys and court officials to Wonderland, D.C., to collect Slick's testimony. Presidential handler Mark Fabiani was quoted saying, "Not once. . .in more than 200 years of American history has a president been compelled to testify in person.")

• Despite all the flat tax campaign talk, Congress will likely do nothing about changing the federal tax system. The bleeders will win the propaganda and class envy battle, the vested interests will get down to work, and our elected officials will be simply overjoyed to let the matter die.

• Steve Forbes has to be one of the most painfully awkward people ever to step onto the national stage. He is also every candidate's nightmare. Like Ross Perot, his personal wealth makes him impervious to the snares that capture mortal politicians. He can't be bought, therefore can't be pressured and coerced. And you can be sure that without Forbes in the race, numerous issues would never have seen the light of day in the so-called public debate. Gotta love 'im!

Friedrich Must Have Known Slick

• “Men believe in the truth of all that is seen to be strongly believed. In all great deceivers, a remarkable process is as work to which they owe their power. In the very act of deception, with all its preparations--the dreadful voice, the expression, the gestures--they are overcome by their belief in themselves, and it is this belief which then speaks so persuasively, so miracle-like to the audience. Not only does he communicate that to the audience but the audience returns it to him and strengthens his belief."--Friedrich Nietzsche

Down The Rabbit Hole With Slick

• A hallmark of the sociopathic personality is that persons so afflicted utter the most outrageous preposterosities in an unshakable expectation that their words and acts will never be challenged. They "believe their own stuff," no matter how at variance with facts or reality. They fully expect the listener to believe it as well. Something on this order is at work in the Slick Administration, which Thursday (February 8) floated the latest chapter for a salivating press and an inattentive public it believes eager to swallow anything.
  
  Mike McCurry, sometimes identified as a "spokesman" and sometimes as White House Press Secretary, told eager reporters that the Slicks were facing enormous legal bills defending Slick himself in the Paula Jones sexual harassment suit. Others, identified only as "aides," stated that renowned celebrity attorney William Bennett had been paid $891,880.42 last December by two liability "umbrella" insurance policies owned by the Clintons.
  
  The Associated Press account of this busy day in Washington noted that Slick, who recently bemoaned his mounting legal fees, had not mentioned the big insurance policy payoff even though he knew of it. The payments came to light a month later when the troublemaking Wall Street Journal unearthed the information.
  
  Even the Slicks' legal defense fund, launched a year or so ago to raise money from private contributors and which now bulges with close to $1 million in tribute, won't be enough to satiate the legal beagles. The Slicks' annual defense fees, said McCurry, are running close to $2 million and the Clintons are "facing the possibility of a very dire financial picture, financial insolvency."
  
  McCurry and other presidential handlers told reporters this week that the liability insurance represented "old insurance policies he (Slick) bought in Arkansas and then forgot about." The AP noted that one policy was purchased in February 1991 and the other in September 1994. The handlers stressed that the Slicks' Whitewater legal bills are not covered by the umbrella policies. Bennett himself, obviously concerned about being paid, was quoted by AP saying, "There is a tremendous need for additional monies for the (Clinton) defense fund." Bennett explained that an Arkansas insurance man who did business with the Clintons told the president's lawyers about the policies, but that "neither the president nor the first lady were aware of the existence of these old policies. . ."
  
  This is just the latest in a seemingly endless procession of Clintons, Clintonistas, and their aides, handlers, assistants, friends, former business partners, secretaries, appointees, lawyers, cronies, acolytes, shills, courtiers, hangers-on, toadies, patrons and co-conspirators mysteriously afflicted with amnesia, who don't recall or can't remember or have no memory of whatever crime, sleaze, or indiscretion looms in the current spotlight.
  
  Never mind the contradicting testimony of eyewitnesses or the rather different interpretation apparent in subpoenaed and leaked documents.
  
  Never mind the obvious: that if the Slicks weren't the Snopesian connivers, con artists, and ethically marginal graspers that they are, they wouldn't need a nickel in a legal defense fund.
  
  The Niagara of sleaze and sewage following these people around isn't made up, isn't our imagination, and didn't happen by accident. Only New York Times columnist William Safire among the big media glitterati has been honest enough to call this what it is by intemperately describing Hillary Clinton as a liar.
  
  Clinton handlers attempted to focus Thursday's story on the first family's impending financial bankruptcy. Any honest account of Thursday's press conference would have explored the real problem with this marauding band of bumptious elitists--its moral and ethical bankruptcy. (February 8, 1996)

It Won't Be Pretty, But It Will Be Beautiful

• Media and political attacks on GOP presidential candidate Steve Forbes will increase in proportion to the danger he represents to them. So, as the campaign moves along and Forbes keeps spending his own money and refuses to go away, look for more and more strident screeching against him. Forbes, like Perot, represents the political establishment's worst nightmare: a player who can't be bought or intimidated by the system the others long ago succumbed to

Chapter 29,585 In The Elusiveness of The Truth Department

• "Since I was a little boy, I've been hearing about the Iowa caucuses." --Slick Willie, speaking at a campaign appearance this week in Des Moines, even though the Iowa caucuses got almost no public attention until 1972, by which time he was 25. ("Quotables" column, Chicago Tribune, February 13, 1996).

• Say what you will about the upcoming 1996 elections,the Republicans are fielding a miserable pack of candidates trying to find the one to lose to Slick Willie. Perhaps they know it's hopeless. One cosmic question this great nation ought to consider, though, is this: why, in a population of some 275 million people, can't we find any better than these buffoons to seek the presidency?

• Pat Buchanan's New Hampshire victory will unleash an unprecedented fear-driven storm of vitriol against him. It will come from those most deeply threatened by a Buchanan candidacy on the roll (and therefore out of control): the Republican establishment, the pols and insiders, the smug elitists in academia and the mainstream media, the old guard ruling class, big business and Wall Streeters. Buchanan dredges up the very real possibility that the jig is up for the elites. They'll ridicule his followers as xenophobic, radical isolationists, kooks, racists, extremists and, worst of all, Christians who actually believe they have a right to take part in the political process. There are already dark rumors that the stock markets are expected to drop in response to Buchanan's victory. It will get far worse. Unlike Ross Perot, who could be dismissed as a kook and a clown, and Forbes, who can be demonized for being rich and seems to be a one-issue candidate, Buchanan is a brilliant campaigner, formidable in debate, and he has ideas that appeal to millions of ordinary citizens. The truly awful news for the so-called "moderates" (code for those whose "beliefs" are poll-driven) is that Buchanan and those he represents aren't going to go away, no matter how strident the attacks against them. Signs of alarm are everywhere. Last night on CNN, Republican "strategists" were openly talking of the possibility that Republican powerbrokers might have to go to Senator Richard Lugar, for example, and try to force him to drop out of the race so his five per cent of the vote could go to Dole. Others said GOP bigshots might have to go to "their money people" and arrange for the flow of contributions to Lamar Alexander to be cut off. Columnist Linda Bowles brilliantly summed up the situation, and the rising hysteria and fear in her Chicago Tribune column February 20 when she wrote that "A historic shift in American politics is well underway and the intellectual elite of both major parties, who function as the political overlords of our society, are in a state of shock. . .the impetus for a major realignment of political parties has finally reached a critical mass. The people are beginning to realize that without a massive reordering of political forces, the changes they desperately want in national policy and direction will never happen." Bowles then went on to itemize: the people want term limits but are told they can't have them; they vote for change and nothing happens; they don't want U.S. troops in Bosnia but they were sent anyway; they want a balanced budget amendment, but it is denied; they want an end to deficit spending but are told it's impossible; they want government out of their pocketbooks and off their backs and out of their businesses and lives, but it won't leave. There's a perception abroad in the land, Bowles wrote, "that the campaign for the presidency is full of frauds and pretenders. Bob Dole, Steve Forbes and Lamar Alexander have no real passion for conservative values. . .and misrepresent themselves by running on the right. In the meantime, Bill Clinton is running in all directions." The ruling elite and insiders from both political parties, Bowles concluded, "will do everything in their power to crucify (Buchanan) and halt the spread of his message." (February 21, 1996)

Lamar’s Magic Money Machine

• Lamar Alexander is going to have one whale of a difficult time explaining how, when he was governor of Tennessee, his $1 "investment" in a group which bought the Knoxville Journal magically turned into a $620,000 profit. Why, that's even better than Slick Hillie's magical $100,000 cattle futures profits. Wonder if the media will get around to asking Lamar the question? I just hope Lamar doesn't tell us this kind of deal was available to anyone who walked in off the street.

• Jack Perkins, genial host of the Arts & Entertainment Network's "Biography" program, said in introducing the Feb. 23 special on former president George Bush that Bush used "military aggression" in the Gulf War. I thought that choice of words was interesting, particularly in light of the facts--which included Iraq's starting the conflict with its invasion of Kuwait--and the commonly understood pejorative connotations of the term "aggression." I know, I know, it's picky and paranoid to point out such things, but of such subtleties and manipulations are "public opinion" shaped and history written. (February 23, 1996)

Boy, This Will Really Fix Things!

• This morning's paper carried an Associated Press report that Bob Dole has shaken up his campaign staff by firing his chief pollster and his top campaign strategist. Sorry, this won't fix anything. A new pollster won't change any polls. Dole should fire himself. He's the problem with his campaign. (February 26, 1996)

• GOP bigshots still don't get it. They're spending huge amounts of time, money, and effort demonizing Pugnacious Pat when instead they should be addressing his ideas and campaign issues. They ignore the Buchanan Brigades at their peril. The demonizing only solidifies Buchanan's supporters--many of whom, being Christians, are already under attack and embattled--and makes the undecided voter wonder what in the world the big boys are so afraid of. Dole, Alexander, Forbes, Dornan, Lugar, Keyes, Larry, Shemp, Moe, whoever gets the Republican nomination is going to need Pat's lunatic fringe to have any hope against Slick Willie.

• Today's Best Laugh: Bob Dole telling a reporter that Steve Forbes "is trying to buy this election." Sure, Bob, you just keep telling yourself that.

Bonnie Blue Ball A Sellout After The Dougster’s Attack

• There was almost big trouble down in Richmond, Virginia, last week, but--whew!--the Bonnie Blue Ball went off without violence. The February 24 dance was sponsored by the Museum of The Confederacy as a birthday party for the institution and a way to attract new members. The event quickly became controversial when blacks and civil rights leaders criticized the museum for staging the event during Black History Month. Cries of racism and "white defiance" erupted. Former Virginia Governor Douglas Wilder went on NBC's "Today" show to denounce the event and compare people wearing Confederate costumes to "jackboooted Nazis." Strangely enough, none from the big media glitterati, the wacko Religious Left or the exquisitely sensitive American cultural elite could be heard chastising Wilder for his racist remarks. The New York Times News Service apparently sent a reporter, for its account of the ball noted that "the only black people among Saturday night's crowd of 500 were at the catering stations, pouring bourbon and dishing up black-eyed pea salsa and sweet-potato biscuits." Martha Boltz, a fourth-generation member of the United Daughters of the Confederacy who knows very well why, was quoted by the Times saying, "I don't see why pride in heritage has to be limited to one group." The part I liked best, though, was this: The ball's organizers, who had been worried about breaking even, sold out of tickets shortly after Wilder's NBC diatribe.

Aw, Jeeez. . .They Caught Him

• Within hours of Bob Dole's telling reporters they ought to be writing the "real story," that Steve Forbes was "trying to buy this election," some troublemaker revealed that as of January 31, Dole had spent $27 million on his campaign and Forbes had spent $25 million. Good! (February 27, 1996)

Watch The Animals And You’ll Understand Politics

• March 6 was a big day for Senator Bob Dole. Senator Richard Lugar and Lamar Alexander withdrew from the race and endorsed Dole. Texas gub'nor George W. Bush announced at an Austin press conference that he, too, was on the Dole bandwagon. Politics is hard for the ordinary man to understand. A few weeks ago Alexander was accusing Dole of having no ideas and no vision. Lugar, by running for president, presumably also thought Dole wasn't the right man for the job. Gub'nor Bush earlier had endorsed Texas Senator Phil Gramm. How, all of a sudden, is all that forgotten? What's changed? Are we to conclude that everything they said about Dole prior to March 6 was a lie? Or that Dole overnight 'got vision" and became something he isn't? Perhaps the best way to comprehend this is in animal terms. We've seen it on National Geographic TV specials. A herd of moose, elk or wildebeest. The males get all puffed up, paw the earth, rattle their antlers, butt heads a little. Gradually, one male after another decides he's outmatched, lowers his head, pledges fealty to the king. In exchange for no longer contesting the throne, the others get a promise of spoils. They get some of the leftover poon. They get to hang around camp, trade war stories, enjoy the security and fellowship of the herd. (March 7, 1996)

• Bob Dole ought to be arrested and jailed until he agrees to stop referring to himself in the third person. (March 8, 1996)

• "The Clintons, meticulous enough to write off a donation to the Salvation Army for three pairs of (then Governor) Clinton's used undershorts at $2 each, never claimed their alleged $69,000 Whitewater business loss on tax returns." --Ralph Reiland, an economics professor at Robert Morris College, writing in The Washington Times March 4-10, 1996 edition about The Whitewater Unpleasantness.

Rush, Rush, Rush. . .

• Rush Limbaugh is alleged to have said on his March 11 radio show: "It's this simple. Bob Dole is the next president of the United States." Oh?

• USA Today printed an unusually long (more than four paragraphs) story on Bob Dole March 21. In it were a couple of Dole quotes that'll be back to haunt him before this is over. First he had this to say about Slick Willie: "He's quick, articulate, very political. . .I like him." Then he told eager reporters Judy Keen and Judi Hasson that as far as he's concerned The Whitewater Unpleasantness and Slick Hillie's role in it are irrelevant to the coming campaign. Both topics, he said, are "off limits." My guess is there are 100 million or so Americans who'll hotly disagree with Beltway Bob about this.

Tiny Little Unscientific Survey Department

• We had two couples over for dinner last Saturday night. The talk turned to politics. I asked how they felt about the presidential race. Three of the four guests admitted being Republicans but spontaneously said they "sure didn't want to vote for Bob Dole." The other guest said he'd vote for Slick Willie. The guests are far more moderate in their views than Mogo or I. Their emphatic dislike of Dole as the Republican flag-bearer was interesting. Did it reflect, I wondered, the larger population of voters? Adding in the lovely and charming hosts, five of six at the table were far from thrilled with Dole. (March 20, 1996)

• New York talk show host Don Imus is the focus of considerable misplaced outrage today following Imus's guest appearance Saturday night at a Radio-Television Correspondents Association banquet in Wonderland, D. C. Slicks Willie and Hillie were at the head table, with House Speaker Newt Gingrich and assorted other luminaries, as Imus gave an after-dinner address filled with profanity, off-color jokes and outrageous comments about the Slicks, their cat, various Congressmen and news personalities. A few groans floated over the audience, but there was laughter and applause as well. Sunday's news and chat programs--CNN's "Reliable Sources" and "The Capital Gang" among them--featured film clips and discussion panels of journalists. These featured much handwringing and condemnation of Imus and occasionally shame and regret. Imus apparently was particularly crude in discussing the President's sexual dalliances. C-SPAN broadcast Imus' speech and was immediately contacted by Michael McCurry, the sometimes White House Press Secretary, who asked them not to rebroadcast the "tasteless" monologue. When the wailing's done, two points should be made. First, Slick Willie and the Clintonistas already have disgraced the Presidency with their behavior, and you don't hear anyone standing up to say the stuff Imus said wasn't true. Second, no self-respecting person would want to be in the same room with Imus, whose reputation is widely known and who has, in fact, a substantial following among the glitterati and political elites (Slick himself volunteered to go on the Imus show during the 1992 presidential campaign), yet the journalists' organization happily invited Imus into its midst. So the journalists have disgraced themselves and have not a shred of excuse for what's happened here. It will be interesting to see how the print media cover This Most Recent Unpleasantness. (March 24, 1996)

• Wow! Beltway Bob hammered Pugnacious Pat in the March 26 California, Nevada, and Utah primaries. The margins were monstrous--67 per cent to 15 per cent in California being typical. Dole now has the nomination clinched. Beneath the glitter of the numbers, though, are things that won't comfort Dole if he or his handlers pay any attention to them. Exit polls show what's been obvious to all but the comatose: Dole's support is 3000 miles wide and a quarter-inch deep. Half the California Republican primary voters, for example, said they wished there were other choices in the presidential race. Worse, one in every four GOP voters said they would vote for someone else in November---either Pat Buchanan, if he's on the ballot as an independent, or Slick Willie. Those polled said the most crucial issues for them were jobs, taxes, the federal deficit, and immigration. (March 28, 1996)

The Joke's On The American People

• Syndicated columnist Alston Chase, writing recently in the Indianapolis Star, argued that Slick Willie and Beltway Bob Dole are much more alike than we know. Of the Kansas Republican, he wrote, "Dole, however, doesn't reflect the values of his generation (earlier enumerated by Chase as a belief in progress, science, reason, absolute standards of virtue, tempered with optimism and faith in humanity). Unlike Reagan, he fails to convey optimism. His 'Johnny-come-lately' conversion to "family values" seems calculated. His humor often suggests cynicism. Quintessentially political, he appears a man without qualities. His universe seems to contain only one absolute: a blind and lawyerly faith in process, a belief that deliberation is more important than outcome." Both Bob and Slick, the columnist said, "are chameleons who change color to fit the demands of the moment." I'll buy that, and would extend it to the two major parties as well. Both the candidates and the parties are at bottom allies rather than foes. (March 29, 1996)

• Hmmm. Congress has passed line-item veto legislation after over 200 years of delay. Must be an election year.

• I fishtailed over to my neighborhood Kohl's department store Saturday and added to my fine wardrobe the following: a Bugle Boy brand short sleeved shirt made in Bangladesh, a Croft & Barrow brand white Oxford cloth dress shirt made in Honduras, a Sonoma knit polo shirt made in Guatemala, a Croft & Barrow polo shirt made in Guatemala, and a C&B Sport brand poplin lightweight jacket made in Korea. The unholy duo of Republican greed and unbridled capitalism is doubtless the reason there's nothing made in America anymore.

• Beltway Bob will likely be telling us in the campaign that he's all for term limits. He won't tell you that on April 3, 1992, he was quoted by the Associated Press saying, "I've never been for term limits. If people want to throw us out, they know how to do it." (March 31, 1996)

• The New York Times reported March 29 that pay for chief executives at America's largest companies rose nearly 15 per cent in 1995, the highest increase since the mid-1980s, the period known as the Reaganite-Bushite Decade of Greed. The Times noted that raises for corporate pooh-bahs have increased an average of 11 per cent since 1988 a period during which pay for working people has never risen by more than four per cent, and while these same corporations eliminated hundreds of thousands of jobs. The Times didn't suggest it, but doesn't consistency demand that we label this present period the Clintonista Decade of Greed? That is, if we want to be fair about these things.

• The wailing and lamentation over the untimely death of Commerce Secretary Ron "Uptown" Brown have reached near epic proportions. Flags are at half staff, the Clintonistas are elbowing their way into TV camera range for their ever so conspicuous grieving. Press conferences and speeches bloom in praise of the fallen martyr. When the spasms are over, the prosecutors investigating Brown's wheelings and dealings should get back to their work and follow the spoor to whatever its conclusion.

• Meanwhile, up in Chicago, that towering sleazoid, indicted and now convicted former Congressman Dan Rostenkowski of Illinois, has pled guilty in a deal with prosecutors that will send "Rosty" to prison for a mere 17 months and fine him mere chump change--$100,000. Rosty has spent the last year harrumphing indignantly and denying everything in the 17 counts of corruption alleging he'd defrauded the taxpayers of more than $600,000. Rosty was accused of stealing money from the House Post Office, of accepting kickbacks, hiring ghost payrollers, maintaining an office slush fund, and other improprieties--the full parody, in other words, of a classic Chicago ward-heeler.

• I repeat: The Republican Party is pursuing a death wish in granting its presidential nomination to Bob Dole. (April 13, 1996)

• Ron Brown's obligatory mourning and funeral period at least lasted long enough for the Rev. Jesse Jackson to attack Republicans for being insufficiently grief-stricken. Funny thing, we heard not a peep from liberals about Jackson's shameless injection of racism into this episode. Sorry for peeking. The least we could do, though, is publicly admit these guys get a free pass. (April 21, 1996)

• Speaking of Hopeless Causes Department: Bob Dole criticized Slick Willie last week for appointing "liberal" judges. Slick just shrugged his shoulders and pointed out that old Go-Along-to-Get-Along-Bob had "voted for most of them." End of discussion. Teflon defined. Point, set, match. (April 21, 1996)

• Technology is dangerous. Some troublemaker ran a Nexus computer database search of an entire year's issues of the San Francisco Chronicle and discovered this shocker: the words "right wing" appeared 568 times, "left wing" 86 times. Sorry for peeking. (April 22, 1996)

• Omen For The GOP Department: When you've got national polls consistently showing that strong majorities (60 per cent and higher) of women voters support Slick Willie, you've got big troubles. Slick's womanizing--and the disrespect and chauvinism it implies--ought to incite disgust and anger in women. But it doesn't. It's a mystery why. Does Slick carry a purple python around in his shorts? Are the Republicans so repellent that women prefer even Slick? One of the big foundations ought to research this. (April 23, 1996)

• Troublemaking From An Unexpected Source Department: The New Republic, hardly a spear-carrier of the Religious Right, notes in its April 8, 1996, issue that of the 44 senators who voted against a Republican school voucher plan this spring, only one--Ernest Hollings of South Carolina--has ever sent a child to a Washington, D.C. public school. School choice is O.K. for our masters, not such a great idea for the rabble.

• The U.S. Senate was so clouded by smokescreens last week that Mr. and Mrs. Front Porch couldn't be sure what was going on, but the outcome was what politicians in both parties ardently desired: terms limits is buried for now. The Senate didn't have the courage to have a straight vote on it. Furious parliamentary maneuvering sidestepped that. Polls still show, though, that 75 per cent of Americans favor term limits. The issue isn't going away. It's obvious that our elected politicians will resist it to the bitter end, however. (April 25, 1996)

• Rush Limbaugh stills insists Bob Dole will win the November election. I think Rush is dreaming.

• Slick Willie has announced a major new federal drug strategy. Press conferences in Miami. Photo ops with teenage girls. Leonine profiles. Odd that he's suddenly so interested. In the 1980s, when Slick was governor of Arkansas, a small airport at Mena, in the northeast part of that state, was a major drop point for drugs coming into the United States from Central America. Slick is believed to have known about the drug operations as well as outbound shipments of arms from Mena to the Contras in Nicaragua, but he made no efforts to stop it. The inconsistencies and contradictions are too complicated for ordinary people to understand. Mena is where the real scandal lies for Slick Willie, but the media are desperately eager to avoid investigating it, and so far have succeeded.

• The New York Times reported April 30 that Ralph Clark, a leader of the Freemen, an anti-government group involved in numerous confrontations with authorities, has taken $676,082 in federal farm subsidy checks over the past 10 years. Give the Times credit for digging out the hypocrisy here, but let's not forget that these are wacko right wing kooks and extremists they're exposing, not liberals, who would never do such things in the first place.

• Bob Dole got down and dirty for us earlier this week with the announcement that he was resigning his U.S. Senate position to devote full-time to his doomed candidacy for president. He appeared soon after wearing no tie and the press hinted this "casual" look represented a "new Bob Dole." The Kansas senator's announcement included a statement that his resignation meant he had "nothing to fall back on," that he would either take up residency in the White House or go on back to Kansas as a civilian once the election was over. Not quite true. He will have a government pension exceeding $117,000 annually, plus Social Security of $17,000 and tax-free government disability payments of $18,600 per year to fall back on, a more than ample reward for his over 35 years at the public trough. The average private pensioner gets about 27 percent of his former salary. Dole will get roughly 72 percent. Guess who the joke's on. (May 17, 1996)

• FBI agents taking apart the Montana cabin of suspected Unabomber Theodore Kaczynski found a copy of vice president Al Gore's 1992 book, Earth in the Balance. Many sections were underlined and copious notes filled the margins. Somehow Dan Rather, Peter Jennings, Tom Brokaw, and the other media big hitters didn't zero in on this obvious connection to the wacko Religious Left liberal movement. Had it not been for the intrepid American Spectator (June, 1996), this anecdote probably would never have seen the light of day. All concerned have apologized for peeking. (May 21, 1996)

Another Great Idea And Constitutional Right Whose Time Has Come

• New Tork Times writer Max Frankel, in a May 5 column, proposes that the government provide universal electronic mail service to all citizens. He reasons that the government once did this to assure universal mail and telephone service, so why not e-mail? Otherwise, Frankel posits, millions of Americans will be denied their right to share in this expanding technology. He cites a Rand Corporation study which says that absent coersion the free market is likely to deliver e-mail to only half the American population. The cost--a few billions here and there--would be no problem, according to Frankel, if government will just get in there with subsidies, encouragements, challenges, arm-twisting, new taxes, whatever it takes to get the private sector to pony up with the cash.

• Republicans are still said to believe that the "character" issue--code for: Slick Willie's shortage of it--will be a big factor in their favor in the November election. Sorry. Not gonna happen. We've been over this ground before. Slick Willie's character deficit was widely known (though not harped upon by the press) during the 1992 campaign. And though Certain Unpleasant Character Issues continue to dog the Clintonistas, polls now show that Americans by a 3-2 margin believe Slick is more trustworthy than Bob Dole. Slick leads Dole in all regions of the country, in all age and demographic groups, among all sexual orientations, races, creeds, colors, and veteran statuses. How much longer can the Republicans deny the obvious? The sad truth for the GOP and quite a few but not enough citizens is that all we need to know about Slick Willie is already known and Americans have rendered their verdict: a majority don't care about character, ethics, morals, or any of the rest of it. Quite apart from the kind of commentary this is on American society, there is one undeniable truth in it: Slicks 'R' Us.

• Wouldn't be any wars, I suspect, if upon their being declared presidents, commissars, senators, congressmen, premiers, party chairmen, high priests, ayatollahs, cabinet members, field marshals, joint chiefs of staff, dukes, kings, queens, princes, princelets, pooh-bahs, governors, chancellors, princesses, high commissioners, imperial wizards, mullahs, lodge captains, Lions of Judah and all the rest of them were snatched from the safety of their parlors, rammed into front line trenches and compelled to start shooting at each other, with the promise that they'd be shot down immediately if they turned around to head for the rear areas. Yep, that would fix 'em, all right. (May 26, 1996)

• The Whitewater convictions of the Clinton cronies Jim and Susan McDougal and Jim Guy Tucker in Little Rock naturally raise the red-hot question: will the verdicts have any effect on the Slicks' popularity and re-election chances? Answer: Nope. First, Slick himself is too smart and too clever--a teflon scumbag--to get caught in any of this. Second, we've been over this ground before and the American people have rendered their verdict: Slicks 'R' Us. He won't miss a beat in the popularity polls sure to follow within hours. (May 29, 1996)

• Bob Dole told eager reporters shortly after the Whitewater verdicts that he'd not said a word about Whitewater before the trial and he won't be saying anything now. Dole has more in common with Slick and the rest of the legion of Beltway insiders--at bottom, they're in the brotherhood together--than he does with the American people. It's the American people who are the enemy.

• Slick Willie appeared in news pictures at Memorial Day ceremonies for military veterans, saluting the flag, laying wreaths, honoring the fallen. Two observations: allowing this draft-dodging scumbag to appear in military ceremonies is a national disgrace, and it's beyond my comprehension how any military person with a shred of honor or decency would consent to appear at such ceremonies with Slick.

• Timothy Leary is finally dead, thus sparing the nation further of his drivel. He told eager reporters he had contemplated having his body frozen and returning to life in the future, but he didn't want to return during a Republican administration. This is another reason why Republicans must win control of the White House and hold it for the next 100 million years.

• Slick's lawyers in late May petitioned the Supreme Court to postpone the Paula Jones Unpleasantness lawsuit against Slick until he is no longer in office. Slick and his handlers are contending that as commander in chief of the armed forces, Slick is covered by a 1940 law that delays litigation against active-duty soldiers and sailors. Either none of them has a sense of humor and they actually are serious about this, or this is their idea of a knee-slapping howler. That a draft-dodging Slick should be able to hide behind a law aimed at real servicemen and women requires a truly grotesque leap of imagination. These people know no shame, however. (June 1, 1996)

• Nationally syndicated columnist Donald Lambro has sinned. He has peeked behind the curtain of obfuscation. In the June 2 edition of the Washington Times he reports the truly unpleasant fact that the national poverty rate in 1994--during the Slick Administration's Decade of Greed and Unbridled Cattle Futures, one hastens to add--is higher than it was at any time during the evil Reaganite days of yore. One thing we can count on: liberals will not be marching in the streets about this.

Back To You, Louis

• When black rabblerouser and religious leader Louis Farrakhan was criticized earlier this year for visiting Sudan despite claims that slave trading occurred there, he went ballistic. Puffed up and angrily harrumphing, he challenged the press to find proof, one lousy, stinking shred of proof, that there was slavery inside Sudan. Gilbert Lewthwaite and Gregory Kane, two reporters for the Baltimore Sun, went for the challenge. They entered southern Sudan illegally with the help of a Zurich-based humanitarian group and were able to buy two children for $500 each from slave traders. The lads had been kidnapped in 1990 and forced to work in the fields for six years. The reporters, having proved their point, returned the children to their father, and returned to the U.S. No word from Louis on this. (June 18, 1996)

No Convictions Yet, Anyway

• Wes Pruden, editor of the Washington Times, poses a cosmic question: "Can a man with no strength of his convictions (Dole) beat a man with the strength of no convictions (Slick)?" (June 23, 1996 issue)

It's Obvious Our Politicians Have A Lot Of Work To Do To Turn All This Around

• A USA Today survey in May shows 83 percent of Americans favor a balanced budget, 83 percent want to prohibit racial preferences, 82 percent want to make English the country's official language, 80 percent want life sentences imposed on drug dealers, 74 percent want term limits, 73 percent want prayer in the schools, 73 percent oppose legalizing marijuana, 71 percent want to reduce the size of government, 67 percent oppose "same sex" marriage and 57 percent oppose partial-birth abortions. (June 23, 1996)

• Slick Willie's proposing a national registry of sex offenders so police will have another tool to fight crime. Am I the only person in America who finds this amusing? On this issue, Slick's a cat chasing its own tail. (June 23, 1996)

• Justice Department spokesman John Russell was quoted in the Chicago Tribune June 26 saying that lying to any federal agency is a crime punishable by up to five years in jail and $250,000 in fines. Great. But how come it's not a crime when a federal agency or employee lies to us?

Sorry, Wes, Bad Bet

• "Mr. Dole is embarked on a mission to see how many adults are left in America. . .the Republican candidate for president is gambling that America has had enough of the children's hour." --Wes Pruden, editor of the Washington Times, in a May 26 column about Dole's uphill campaign in the face of Slick Willie's "confident reliance on the cheerful willingness of the (American) public to cut a little slack to a roguish shill."

• When 1992 news stories surfaced about President Bush's State Department lackeys rummaging through Slick Willie's old passport files, Democratic vice-presidential candidate Al Gore went ballistic. Gore accused Bush and his pals of "a startling abuse of power" and charged that Bushites were "politically using the State Department in a blatant attempt to politicize the entire bureaucracy in a failed effort to try to discredit Bill Clinton." Now it's 1996 and the Clintonistas stand accused of unseemly mucking about in secret FBI files on Enemies of The People and there's been nary a peep of protest from Al Gore. Strangest thing.

• Laurie Kellman, writing about Republican presidential candidate Bob Dole in the June 23 Washington Times, said Dole sees part of his campaign challenge as "repairing damage he believes freshman Republicans have inflicted on the party by pressing for too many changes too quickly." The "problem," if Dole could be honest, is that they moved at all. That's what has Dole and the other old bulls all shook up.

• Slick spoke poignantly on his national radio program June 8 of his "vivid and painful memories" of church burnings in his home state of Arkansas "when I was a child." Within a few days his handlers had to issue clarifications (code for: retractions) when media troublemakers checked with the Arkansas NAACP, the Arkansas History Commission, the Arkansas Black History Advisory Committee and other groups who all said there was no record anywhere of a single black church being burned in Arkansas during the 1950s and 1960s when Slick was a child. What these appear to have been, instead, were vivid and painful hallucinations. We can all sympathize with that, surely, and feel the President's pain as well.

Well, Which 'Scumbag' Was Kerry Talking About?

• Meanspiritedness has been reported on display in, of all places, a Democrat. Following a contentious Senate Whitewater committee hearing June 11 on whether to grant immunity to key witness David L. Hale, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts told reporters he "was not willing to reward a scumbag (presumably Hale and not Slick Willie) who has already violated the law and admitted he's a liar." Peter Jennings, Dan Rather, Tom Brokaw, Judy Woodruff, Bernard Kalb, Michael Kinsley and other media glitterati have not been heard protesting this.

The Cosmic Question Remains, However: Who, Indeed, Are We?

• John Toohill of Geneva, Illinois, wrote a letter in early July to the Chicago Tribune that nicely capsulizes majority opinion in America and explains why Republicans are dreaming if they think they can make anything stick to the Slicks. Hillary Clinton, he proclaimed, should not be denied "her right to have a role in her husband's presidency. She may be at the center of Whitewater and Travelgate and be suspected in a cattle futures deal and removal of files from the late Vincent Foster's office, but so what? Who are we to either condone or encourage attacks on the first lady's integrity or credibility?" Even the most meanspirited among us must concede there is no reply possible to Toohill's reasoning.

Perhaps This Explains It

• "You've got me. It doesn't translate. It may be we're (living) in the post-character era." --Terry Eastland, editor of Forbes MediaCritic magazine, quoted in a Boston Globe article July 7 which attempted to explain why the burgeoning list of scandals, in particular the Whitewater complex, tainting the Slick Administration have had no discernible effect on the Slicks' popularity and public support in opinion polls.

• The New York Times has become a fairly sensitive newspaper in recent years and in mid-July it saw fit to assign reporter James Bennett to explore what the Times perceived to be a trend on America's comedy circuit toward increasing savagery toward the President and presidential politics. "Humor watchdogs"--Bennett swears there are such critters--have detected that the jokes are growing in number and getting harsher. Jay Leno, David Letterman, and Conan O'Brien were interviewed. A survey was commissioned. All agreed it's a jungle out there. Slick Willie is lampooned as a serial philanderer (Leno) who campaigns with his fly open (Letterman). Dole is targeted because of his age (Letterman says he's in his 90s) and his "supposed crankiness." Slick Hillie's cattle futures trades and alleged involvement in assorted illegalities have drawn fire. Andrew Kohut, director of the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press in Wonderland, D.C., notes there's always been political humor but that the current barrages feature a sharpness and coarseness not seen before. "There is a personal quality to this stuff, particularly with this president," he said. John Sheehan of the Center for Media and Public Affairs told the Times that, "It's part of what we've become as a nation. We've become more cynical." I'd add only one footnote: unless I'm missing something, the country's never had people in the White House quite like the Snopesian grifters occupying the place today. Compare them, just for a recent example, to the Bushes or the Reagans. There's a reason for the savage ridicule the Slicks receive. The Slicks are the reason. (July 14, 1996)

• The pundits keep saying there's plenty of time for Bob Dole to close the gap and make a race of this thing, even win it. A lot can happen between now and then, they intone; and besides, the stink of the stuff swirling around Slick Willie and the Clintonistas may well finally catch up with him. I disagree. What's wrong with Bob Dole and the Bob Dole campaign cuts to the molecular level: Bob Dole is a disaster as a presidential candidate and his "problem" isn't going to go away. The Republicans are saddled with a hapless old bull who's inherited the nomination because he's been in line the longest. It's far more likely that Dole will be swamped by Slick Willie and in the process will drastically damage Republican candidates all over the country. There is and has long been an air of inevitability about the Dole candidacy, too, as if he were the pre-ordained nominee of a party with a death wish. If the Republicans allow this to happen, then they deserve the election disaster I suspect they're going to wake up on November 6.

Summing Up American Politics in Eleven Easy Words

• "(Lamm's). . .candor is bold, bracing, and will probably doom him politically." --Newsweek magazine, July 22 issue, in an article about the just-announced presidential candidacy of former Colorado governor Richard Lamm, known for his blunt, no-sacred-cows approach to public issues.

• The more courageous conservative columnists are hinting they can smell disaster for Bob Dole and the Republicans in the fall election. Tony Snow and Linda Bowles have flayed Dole with particularly brutal columns this month, and Harpers editor Lewis Lapham wrote so devastating a commentary on the sheer awfulness of Dole as a presidential candidate that Dole, should he read it, will find no option but to reach for the small, loaded handgun he keeps (or should) in his bottom right desk drawer. Syndicated columnist Cal Thomas, writing in the July 22 Indianapolis Star, finally has said the unthinkable: Dole should give up the nomination, bow out gracefully in a supreme act of statesmanship, and open the convention to a new nominee. Thomas hints that such a move is being discussed privately by Republican poohbahs who are convinced Dole will do incalculable damage to the Republican and conservative cause if he insists on running. Sounds like at least one person has come to his senses here. (July 21, 1996)

Getting Criminals Off The Streets

• The Chicago Tribune was bucking in late July for the coveted Earl Landgrebe Trophy with its front-page dirge about convicted sleazebag and former Illinois Congressman Dan Rostenkowski entering a federal prison in Rochester, Minnesota, to begin serving a 17-month sentence on various corruption charges. Landgrebe was the legendary former Indiana congressman who defended Richard Nixon well past the "smoking gun" stage of the Watergate Unpleasantness and who, only a couple days before Nixon's 1974 resignation in disgrace, told reporters "not to confuse him with the facts" because he was backing Nixon regardless. The Tribune, Rosty's hometown paper and a stubbornly idolatrous supporter of his until the bitter end, offered a front-page "New Lifestyle To Begin For Rostenkowski" story by writer Bob Secter July 22 that only thinly submerged the sorrow Rosty's sycophantic chums feel as their swaggering, burly poster boy and hero enters federal custody. Secter spent most of his 33-inch story handwringing over the suffering and indignities Rosty is sure to undergo. He noted that Rostenkowski will miss the "good liquor and fat steaks he downed regularly at swank eateries such as Morton's and Arnie's" and will now have to eat "bland institutional fare at a common table" in the prison mess hall. Secter said that Rosty's days "are bound to be tedious and humbling" and that his "fall from grace" will be marked upon arrival by fingerprinting, mug shots, a strip search and other indignities, to be followed by issuance of prison clothing, bedding, and toiletries, and a lecture on prison rules. "The adjustment could be especially hard on Rostenkowski, a man used to giving orders, not taking them," Sector lamented. Rosty, the article said, will be required to identify himself by his last name and his prison ID number whenever he encounters a prison guard, a checkpoint, or a roll call. The horror doesn't end there, either. The Tribune opined that "perhaps more devastating (to Rosty) is the loss of control. Rostenkowski won't be in a cell but rather a dormitory-style room with bunk beds that at a minimum will house three other inmates. From the toilet to the shower to his work assignment and the rec room, he will virtually never be alone. . .Rostenkowski will confront a battery of nit-picking rules about things such as how to make his bed, how not to litter, how to keep dust balls from accumulating in his room." The far more daunting assignment for America, which Secter and the Tribune didn't mention, is to keep scum like Rostenkowski from accumulating in our society. This is a man who ought to be in prison. That he was tried and sent there is one of the heroic accomplishments of our time. For those of us who cringe at the harshness of it all, there is comfort in knowing that Rosty will be paid his nearly $99,000 in congressional pension benefits while behind bars. (July 23, 1996)

• My mailbox is overflowing with parcels from political causes and panderers. During a three-week period in July I received 12 hefty envelopes bearing urgent warnings or pleas. Five bore Senator Bob Dole's name on the return address. Three enclosed special plastic membership cards available only to the select few. One came from Newt Gingrich. Several more came from the National Republican Senatorial Committee, another from its House counterpart. There was one notifying me--in somewhat conspiratorial tones, I thought--that I've been nominated as a delegate-at-large to the 1996 Republican Party Planning Committee, and, if I chose to accept the honor, I would play a vital role in formulating the party's official Policy Statement (I could do so by checking off the appropriate boxes on the enclosed "delegate survey and credentials confirmation" form and--at last we get to the point--sending the most generous wad of untraceable cash I can spare). There was another from the Republican National Committee. Citizens Concerned for the Constitution, Inc. weighed in with its plea for me to send money right away to help stop homosexual marriages. The Democratic National Committee sent a Platform Poll and Democratic Party Membership Acceptance Form and urged me to donate cash, checks, money orders, flavored condoms, gold bullion, jewels, whatever I had, to stop the godless Republican onslaught on all we hold dear. Newtie implored me to reveal whether I still approved of the Republican Congressional Agenda (and of course to slip a few hundred in small bills into my reply envelope). Dole himself sent a form letter telling me how proud he was to personally present me with my own "Victory 96" membership card--and by the way, could I send a tithe by return mail? Another Dole envelope enclosed a "special" tear-off photo of Bob and Elizabeth bearing the printed message, "With best wishes to my friend, Mr. Paul Kratchlow," and promising a special "insider" poll and Party updates if I could send a negotiable order of withdrawal from any of my vast holdings. I could all but feel Haley Barbour's arm draped warmly about my shoulder as I opened the letter bearing his imprinted signature. The letter welcomed me to the fold of special, select citizens whose advice was being sought on vital national issues via the enclosed "Mandate for Leadership" form especially registered in my name. Would I, Haley asked, be able to take a moment to complete it? And could I enclose a generous symbol of my support for the holy crusade against the godless Democratic onslaught--a check or credit card number? An outsized 11X17-inch envelope disgorged a "Registered Independent Opinion Poll" from the We The People Institute promising me a chance to, by god, Stand Up and Be Heard if I'd just complete the survey and, by the way, give generously to stop the antichrist and the hobgoblin-of-the-day (cash, checks, money orders, credit cards accepted). I read them all with keen interest. On some, I scrawled moronic replies in crayon or magic marker--Yay! Right on! Left on! I Fully Agree! The Nation Needs This! Arch Deluxe Will Never Replace The Whopper! Why Aren't These People in Jail? All Hail The Mentor! Where is The Rev. Jim Jones When We Need Him? Others I ripped into small pieces which I stuffed in their postage-paid envelopes and deposited in the nearest mailbox. It makes me proud to be an American, and an insider, one of the special few to really know what's going on.

• I've checked my files. Here are my votes for President: Lyndon Johnson (1964), Hubert Humphrey (1968), George McGovern (1972), Jimmy Carter (1976), John Anderson (1980), the Libertarian Party candidate, name unknown (1984), George Bush (1988), George Bush (1992). No wonder my judgment's being called into question every day. Why, they ask? Why did you vote that way? I had no excuse in 1964. I was swept away in sympathy for LBJ as President Kennedy's heir. In 1968 I actually liked Humphrey, and disliked Nixon. In November, 1972, even though the Watergate burglary (June, 1972) was only just over four months old and barely news, I was convinced Nixon was involved and a crook to boot, so my McGovern vote was a protest. In 1976, I had sworn never to vote for the man who pardoned Richard Nixon, so chose Jimmy Carter over incumbent Gerald Ford. I perceived Carter as an "outsider" who wanted to change things, not the incompetent buffoon he later revealed himself to be. In 1980 I felt Reagan was an amiable dunce whose insights into the problems facing the country were about one-quarter inch deep. Carter was a joke, so I voted for Anderson as a protest, to "send a message to the bastards in Washington." In 1984, neither Reagan nor Mondale could have bought my vote, so I tried the Libertarian candidate, whose name I've long forgotten. In 1988 it was Bush and Dukakis and the latter seemed a fool, so. . .Bush. Four years later, in 1992, it was Bush versus the Slicks. Bush was a deep disappointment, the Slicks unthinkable. . .I pondered Perot until I was inside the voting booth. At the last second I voted for Bush. When you stop and think about it, this is a fairly sorry, pitiful parade of talent for the highest office in the land. For much of my life I lamented that and believed the country could do better. I've changed my mind. It can't. The system is a whorehouse and it provides us the best whores available. (August 1, 1996)

• About 200 people gathered on the Mall in Wonderland, D.C., on a mid-July Saturday (although a federal lawsuit will doubtless soon be filed by demonstration sponsors to get the "official" headcount increased, since the organizers had predicted at least 25,000 would show up) to march, sing, stamp their little feet, and demand that a new "multiracial" category to be used in the federal census in the year 2000. Backers claim this new category is needed so that "racially mixed" children and adults can "establish their own identity." The census already lists black, white, American Indian and Alaska Native, Asian and Pacific Islanders, Hispanic or Spanish, and Other categories. According to an Indianapolis Star editorial, the new category is opposed by the NAACP, the National Urban League, the National Council of La Raza, and possibly other groups. This, friends, isn't about personal identity. It's about federal money and the treasured front-row spots at the public trough that such federal designations insure.

• A Chicago Tribune poll shows what everyone can smell. . . Slick Willie's remarkably popular and has huge leads over Dole in all categories of polling, among all sexes, all ages, all income and occupational groups. Almost half--46 percent--feel the Slicks should be re-elected. But when voters were asked which candidate they "admired and respected," Slick's "approval" fell to 31 percent. Pollsters asked another intriguing question, one which I feel yielded a striking insight on where American society stands today. Voters were told to assume that all the negative stories and rumors about the Slicks were true. They were then asked if the Slicks should be re-elected anyway. Fifty-four percent said yes. There's a message in there for all the ninnies, handwringers, and mean-spirited Puritans who criticize the behavior of others and it is that they are outnumbered in the American populace, and they may as well face the music. The critics are increasingly irrelevant and are being pushed offstage by the Clintonistas and fellow travelers. The Slicks do indeed represent a majority of Americans. Slicks 'R' Us. (August 7, 1996)

Slicks 'R' Us--Bet Money On It

• Lost Angeles Times Syndicate columnist Paul Greenburg recently examined Slick Willie's ever-shifting political personas and noted that even by the 1992 election, Slick "had taken so many different positions on the issues of the day that he could have a presidential debate with himself." Greenburg believes that the difficulty in labeling Slick Willie today "indicates that there may be nothing there to label. This is just fine with the Clintonized culture of the 90s, which tends to prefer empathy over character. . ." He mentions a recent poll which showed that 77 percent of Americans think character less important in a president than an ability to understand people's problems. Greenburg's conclusion isn't much of a compliment to Slick, and even less one to the American public. "Clinton," he wrote, "may no longer have an identifiable core of political belief from which to deviate. The most unsettling thing about the political personas of Clinton is not their number and variety, but the suspicion that, after all the masks are gone, they may reveal--nothing." And here's the hammer for Mr. and Mrs. Front Porch: "Which raises the disturbing possiblity that, yes, he is truly reflecting us."

• Within hours of a news leak that Jack Kemp was on Bob Dole's short list of running mates, WHTR-Channel 13 television in Indianapolis was on the air offering viewers a chance to vote on the matter by calling a special "quick poll" hotline. Thousands and thousands of breathless Hoosiers swamped the phone lines, no doubt, believing that Bob Dole will actually take their silly opinions into account. The wasteland continues.

• Bob Dole's choice of Jack Kemp as a vice presidential running mate is a stroke of genius--and desperation, too. The irony was painfully obvious the moment both appeared for the official announcement together Saturday at Russell, Kansas, Dole's boyhood home. Millions must have concluded that the ticket is reversed: Kemp should be the presidential candidate, Dole the spear carrier. Alas for Republicans, Dole has been in line longer. (August 11, 1996)

• Kemp will breathe some life into the moribund Republican cause. He is nearly alone among "name brand" Republicans who have credibility with blacks and other minorities. He is intelligent, loquacious, articulate, and candid, and is therefore regarded by the party faithful as a bit of a renegade. What the heart longs for here is for Kemp to be able to debate Slick Willie. That's a match that would gladden Republican hearts. The game isn't played this way, though. Such public confrontations as can be arranged will square off the vice presidential candidates, Gore and Kemp, leaving Dole to be humiliated and eaten alive by the infinitely slicker Slick Willie.

• Some of us are breathing deep sighs of relief that Dole didn't at the last minute persuade Colin Powell to be the vice presidential candidate. Powell is not a Republican and he is not a conservative. His natural home is the Democratic Party. He should run for president under that banner. To drag him into the Republican party is to invite the Trojan Horse inside the barricades.

• Polls show Dole trails Slick by as much as 28 points among women. There's no explanation for this other than one we won't go to.

• Republican strategist Ed Rollins was on Larry King Live the night of the Jack Kemp rumor breaking. Rollins described Kemp as "the ultimate team player." An hour or so earlier the big network anchors, Brokaw and Rather, were portraying Kemp was a renegade, "a loose cannon," an uncontrollable and selfish self-promoter. King asked Rollins where on the political spectrum he'd place Kemp. Ed said Kemp is "a thinking conservative." Before Rollins he could go further, King butted in with a snicker and sniped, ". . .as opposed to a non-thinking conservative?" Another guest on the show, Democratic Senator Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, immediately trotted out the Religious Left mantra and labeled Kemp "an extremist."

• The slipstream media will make much and make it endlessly about the supposed rivalry and bitterness between Dole and Kemp. While it's true the two have said some unkind things about each other over the years and are not in the same camp politically, the nub of it is . . .so what? Dole doesn't believe in anything but deal-making, and the two men have made one. They'll get along just fine in this campaign. Sorry Dan, Sorry Tom, sorry Dan, Cokie, Larry, Al, and the sorry rest of you. You'll have to find something else to blab about.

• I watched TV coverage of both the "Pat Buchanan Convention" and the Reform Party Convention. These thoughts: a) the crowd at Buchanan's rally was better dressed, b) Buchanan is a superb and eloquent speaker, c) for my money, the best line of the evening was Buchanan's comment that "America doesn't need a third party. It needs a fighting second party that says what it means and means what it says." Dream on, Pat. Dream on, America.

• It just drives the media people crazy when the rabble don't follow their script. CNN's coverage of the GOP Convention's opening night was marked by numerous examples of distortion and slanting of the news. CNN's blue whale of a correspondent, Candy Crowley, roped what she surely thought would be a novelty, a black female Republican delegate, and launched her interview with the predictable loaded question about how come there weren't more blacks and minorities and other federally certified victim classes here in San Diego and wasn't all this "big tent" talk hypocritical when as far as the eye could see there was nothing but a bunch of white people and Religious Right wacko kooks? The black delegate, bless her, surprised Crowley and the nation by disagreeing with the entire Crowley mantra. Crowley several times attemped to return to the loaded questions. But each time the delegate declined to take the bait and instead responded with putdowns so smooth that Crowley appeared to not even realize she'd been slam-dunked. This media news-steering was evident throughout the night. Judy Woodruff, Bernard Kalb, Larry King, and others kept up a steady drumbeat of thinly veiled ridicule, harping on how the images and messages were being "managed" and "tightly controlled" by troglodytic party pooh-bahs. There were repeated references and lingering camera shots during opening night speeches to the numerous delegates who were "reading newspapers, wandering around, paying no attention" to the speaker This was CNN's subtle way of telling Americans that if even Republican delegates didn't take this seriously, why should they? CNN's floor coverage essentially consisted of its reporters asking loaded questions--the reporter's beliefs flimsily disguised as questions--and hoping to goad the interviewee into saying something controversial or subversive. There were repeated references to and loaded questions about abortion, the issue liberals fervently hope will destroy Republican unity. This media bias, this agenda-making is transparent and tiresome. It's too much to expect them to stop it, but I wish they'd quit denying they do it.

• Glitterati from every corner of the earth came together in New York this past weekend to celebrate Slick Willie's 50th birthday, and who knows how many of them Slick fathered? At a gigantic Radio City Music Hall gala a video narrated by actor James Earl Jones chronicled Slick's life. Five bucks says they forgot to include the scene where then Governor Slick asked Paula Jones for a blow job in a Little Rock hotel room. Just a hunch. (August 19, 1996)

• Slick went on CBS-TV's "Sixty Minutes" program August 18 to protest Republican attacks on Slick and his co-president during the recent GOP Convention. "I don't think the Republicans can damage my character," Slick said, in an unwitting moment of truth. "They can attack my reputation but not my character." He added, no doubt hoping that saying it would delay a verdict on more than one pending indictment, that "God is the ultimate judge of character."

• Susan McDougal, one of the Slicks' Whitewater business partners, has been sentenced to two years in prison. She contended in her defense that she "naively" accepted an illegal $300,000 loan and "blindly" left all financial details to her then-husband, James McDougal. The trial judge rejected that notion. The claim is laughable. Whatever else these people are, they're not naive. McDougal's lawyer hit the streets immediately, claiming the sentence was "bait" aimed at snaring the Slicks and that the reason a sentence was imposed was because Mrs. McDougal refused to offer evidence against the Slicks. Sure. Like everything else related to the Slicks, all this was just made up by Republicans, people out to get them.

• Eager reporters weren't there to tell us, but don't you imagine the Slicks drew a long, long breath of apprehension when it was announced over the weekend that the scheduled sentencing of their former business partner, James McDougal of Whitewater and Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan fame, has been delayed until November? As James Jefferson of the Associated Press wrote, the delay is "the clearest sign yet that (McDougal) is cutting a deal with prosecutors who want his testimony against other figures in the Whitewater case." Two of those "other figures" are the Slicks. The bad news for America is that the delay is till November 18, after the Slicks' re-election.

• I daresay one of the most interesting letters to the editor of my lifetime was published August 28 in the Chicago Tribune. It came from James Padar, a retired Chicago Police Department lieutenant, and was apparently triggered by the flood of news publicity leading up to the Democratic national convention. No news outlet worthy of the name could overlook the obvious: the Democrats were returning after 28 years to the site of their infamous 1968 convention marked so indelibly in the public eyeball by violence. We all remember the scenes, surely: hippie protesters versus a rogue police force in the streets and lakefront parks, protesters everywhere screaming and marching, legendary mayor Richard J. Daley mouthing vile epithets from the convention floor at Connecticut Senator Abraham Ribicoff who from the lectern was harshly attacking Chicago police tactics. . . Padar's letter noted how frequently the Tribune and others now use the term "police riot" to characterize the actions of police during the 1968 gathering. The term, he said, "has been quoted frequently and attributed to the findings of the Chicago Study Group commonly known as The Walker Commission (after then Governor Dan Walker) in its report entitled "Rights in Conflict." According to Padar, though, the term "police riot" does not appear even once in the commission's report. Padar says the term was coined by Governor Walker in his foreword to the report, and that study group members strenuously objected at the time to its use, saying it sullied an otherwise objective account of what had happened. Padar noted one of the painful realities of the media age: inaccuracies such as this are seldom corrected and even if they are the correction hardly ever completely catches up to the original. He chided the Tribune for using the term while citing "federally commissioned studies" but refrained from even suggesting that any sort of press bias might be in operation. This is a fine illustration of how "history" is made, though. All in all, Padar's was a calm, rational, reasonable, nonjudgmental expression of opinion from a reader. And what a surprise, coming as it did from one of the rioting police officers from those evil days of rage.

Keeping The Account Open For Last-Minute Deposits. . .

• Vice President Al Gore's anti-tobacco comments at the Democratic national convention tugged at everyone's heartstrings. Gore was asked the next day about taking "tobacco money" and admitted he'd continued to bank those checks for at least six years after his sister's 1984 death from lung cancer. His comments surely mean all Democrats everywhere will immediately cease accepting any money from tobacco-linked interests. Oops, no they don't. When asked about the "enormous sums of money" that (tobacco giant) Phillip Morris Co. is spending to help sponsor the Democratic convention, Gore said, " I think that ought to be reviewed." This is code for: we'll stall till your attention span lapses and go right on taking all the big tobacco money we can get. (August 31, 1996)

• Senator Christopher Dodd's impassioned plea on CNN that we must "stop the personal attacks" and stop attacking the personal reputation of our opponents has finally been decoded. What Dodd meant but could not say is that if Republicans will just stop making Slick Willie's character and personal reputation a matter of public discussion then the Democrats are home free in this election. Slick's personal reputation is his only vulnerability. If the Democrats can remove it from the public debate, they have no issue at all to fear.

• It is interesting to note that Dodd did not say that the descriptions of Slick's character and reputation were inaccurate. He simply wants us to stop discussing the topic, a distinction that even the intrepid CNN news team didn't make last week.

• Among prominent features of the Democratic national convention were the repeated references by delegates, dignitaries, worshipful camp followers and hangers-on and truth-seeking reporters to the Slick Administrations's putting 100,000 more police on America's streets. Wonderful theater, but unfortunately a bald-faced lie. Legislation authorizing federal funds for 100,000 additional police was indeed passed during Slick's first term, but only between 20,000 and 30,000 additional cops have actually been added (Attorney General Janet Reno conceded in early summer that the number was about 17,000). None of the big mainstream media people I watched or read during convention week managed to point this out. At the convention, posters jubilantly proclaimed the magical 100,000 figure, and media cameras lingered lovingly on them.

Things We Didn't See At The Democratic National Convention

• 1) Liberal speakers interviewed as they left the platform and asked repeatedly why they avoided the issue of welfare reform, 2) homosexual activists interviewed and asked how they could support a President who says he intends to sign legislation forbidding same-sex marriages, 3) convention organizers asked to explain why a disproportionately high number of union members--nearly twice their share of the population at large--made up the Democratic flock and why white heterosexual males weren't given their proportionate share of seats, 4) the press locating a single Christian delegate and asking the individual how he or she felt when party leaders described people of faith as "extremists," 5) any pro-life delegate interviewed and asked whether that group was going to stage a walkout on national television, and 6) TV cameras finding a single delegate sleeping or picking his nose while a speaker was on the platform. (Paraphrased from a Linda Bowles column August 21, 1996 in the Chicago Tribune.)

• "(Senator Bob) Dole's first wife says that she can't recall him reading a book for pleasure or listening to music during their 23 years of marriage. In fact, claims a close associate, 'Bob Dole has no passions. He doesn't even have a sports team. It's the vacuum, the total absence of intellectual curiosity. . .'" --Gail Sheehy in "Valley of the Doles," an article generally trashing Senator Bob Dole and his wife, Elizabeth, printed in the September, 1996 issue of Vanity Fair magazine.

A Minor Item The Worshipful Mainstream Media Never Got Around to Telling America

• (Jack Kennedy) "had contracted gonorrhea in 1940 when he was 23, and by the winter of 1951 he was suffering from recurrent symptoms of venereal disease. His "nonspecific urethritis," as it was euphemistically called on his medical charts, had become a serious problem. . .he was never entirely cured." (From Young Love, a recently published book on Jack and Jackie Kennedy, written by author Edward Klein, excerpted in Vanity Fair magazine, September, 1996.).

Greg Huddleston Was Willing To Go Look This Up--Why Won't CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, the New York Times And The Other Big Mainstream Media Truth-Questers Get It For Us?

• A few cranks and troublemakers have long wondered how Slick Willie could afford a trip to Moscow and other European points of interest during his impoverished anti-war protesting days as a college student. Greg Huddleston of Brumley, Missouri, has uncovered a clue the big media folks somehow haven't. In a letter to the editor printed in the September, 1996 American Spectator, Brumley claims the answer may be found in a suit filed in a federal district court in Missouri (Mace vs. Blunt, Case No. 92-4484-CV-C-9), wherein it is alleged that the mystery-shrouded funds for Slick's trip to Moscow and his extended stay in the Prague home of his Oxford roommate, Jan Kopold, came from the Vietnam Committee for Solidarity with the American People, an organization established in 1967 by the National Liberation Front and its North Vietnamese allies to collect and organize American pacifists and war dissenters. Here ought to be a major story for the big media, but don't expect any of them to be interested. Not even Bob Dole will want to bring it up.

• The Catholic Campaign for America took out a full-page Chicago Tribune ad August 28 to urge national convention delegates to work to change the Democratic Party's pro-abortion stand. The ad claimed there are "millions of pro-life Democrats who are leaving the Party over this moral issue. . ." My, my, what a surprise. You never get even a whiff of a hint of controversy on this matter from the big slipstream media types covering the campaign. It's only the Republican party which is being "torn apart by the abortion issue," which always seems to be fueled by "extremists," "Religious Right wackos," and "mean-spirited crackpots, kooks, and haters." None of CNN's floor commando team were caught corralling delegates to ask about the mass defections over abortion. For all viewers could tell, no such Democratic controversy even exists.

Still Swooning Over Pat

• The legendary Pat Paulsen was caught by a Chicago Tribune photographer soliciting contributions for his own Pat Paulsen for President campaign at a Democratic evening gala August 28 at the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. Pat has aged some, of course, but he's still recognizable to those of us who swooned when he first ran for President back in the 1960s. Among his platform planks in those heady days was one urging that America, to conserve natural resources, begin manufacturing shoes from the skin that forms on chocolate pudding. That one hooked me forever. (September 1, 1996)

• Bernie Kalb pronounced CNN's convention coverage as "fair and quite balanced" in the wrap-up session after Slick's August 29 speech accepting the Democratic nomination. No one got to debate that with Bernie and his cohort of Judy Woodruff, Ken Bode and Bill Schneider. In the "Capital Gang" convention wrap-up immediately following, Margaret Carlson of Time magazine said that the swiftness which which the Slick Administration dealt with the Most Recent Unpleasantness--this time Dick Morris--"ends it as a news story." Oh. That must mean, then, that Time and the other big media trust-questers will be relentlessly pursuing all those stories the Slicks have been stonewalling on. Sure.

• "Fair and quite balanced" coverage from CNN? Here are some notes from CNN's Republican Convention coverage. . .anchor Bernard Kalb repeatedly referred to delegates "milling around, not being in their seats, not paying any attention." Candy Crowley trolled the convention floor asking one delegate after another about "rumors" of a walkout by Buchanan partisans. . . Judy Woodruff wondered with disdain "how many times we're going to see" Jack Kemp playfully making a passing-a-football motion and Bernard Kalb injected excitedly, "Too many!". . .Kalb saying "none of this is accidental--it's orchestrated" as cameras showed delegates clapping and chanting. . .Woodruff pointing out (at least twice) that only two per cent of the Republican delegates were black and that didn't reflect the 12 per cent of blacks in the American population. . .Kalb adding that "you can see for yourself--just look around--there are not very many blacks here.". . .Woodruff noting sarcastically after keynoter Susan Molinari's speech that "it's particularly interesting that the (Republican) party looks more harshly on immigration today than it did" when Molinari's grandparents immigrated to the United States. . .Woodruff noting that Molinari "didn't utter a word about abortion". . .Al Franken, Woodruff, Judy Meserve, Kalb, and the elephantine Crowley pounding over and over and over on the abortion issue, trying to keep it alive. . . Clintonista George Stephanopoulos saying Dole's speech was the most divisive speech since Barry Goldwater's 1964 Republican Convention address. . .political analyst Bill Schneider saying he thought Dole wore a hairpiece, saying Dole was "contemptuous " (CNN code for "mean-spirited"?) of the White House staff, and wondering "where Dole's sense of humor was.". . .Meserve cornering a Georgia delegate and saying there was "no fervor" apparent in their delegation for the evening's proceedings, saying she saw the delegate "shaking his head" (implying disgust) but--surprise!--being told by the delegate that, on the contrary, he felt it was a great night, and that he was "shaking my head in wonder," not disgust. . .Franken picking out an 18-year-old Asian woman immediately after the Dole speech to ask if she felt Dole "was very much in touch with the younger generation". . .Woodruff taking issue with Dole's statement that he was "the most optimistic man in America" by saying she found "some dark pictures" in Dole's references to a need to crack down on violent criminals and for America to have a defense against enemy missile attack. Woodruff, apparently greatly concerned that Dole actually mentioned Slick Willie in his speech, vowed to do research on how many times a presidential candidate "mentioned his opponent." She later repeated her disagreement that Dole was optimistic, saying "this was a serious speech tonight." If CNN treats the Democratic convention this way I'll eat my shorts at center court on national television.

• CNN night after night during the Republican Convention switched to its correspondent, Yolanda Gaskins, in Ohio where she'd corralled a "focus group" of--CNN really stressed this--uncommitted neutral voters. And each night, it seemed, these people said over and over that they were unimpressed, bored, weren't getting any answers to their deep concerns from the parade of speakers in San Diego. Most of the group responded from a selfish perspective--"what's in it for me?"--such as Deborah Newport, identified by the network as a "Dirver's Education Teacher," who wanted to know what was in it for her, since "people who work don't get welfare."

• Oklahoma Congressman J. C. Watts gave a rousing, articulate and largely-ignored speech at the Republican Convention. If Watts were a Democrat he would have been on the cover of every national managzine and major newspaper in the country and he would be lionized as a brilliant, rising star. J.C. has made the unpardonable decision to be a Republican, however.

• Hearing the Democrats bawling and braying on national TV about "family values" was indeed high irony. It was only four years ago that this same party was ridiculing and scourging Republican Vice President Dan Quayle for claiming that family values mattered. I know, I know, we're not supposed to notice.

• The Republicans seemed willing to acknowledge their recent past at the convention: former Presidents George Bush and Gerald Ford spoke, and Nancy Reagan represented her husband Ronald. The Democrats seemed anxious to deny theirs. Where was Jimmy Carter? Fritz Mondale? Michael Dukakis? This was Slick Willie's convention; it was therefore essential that the Party's and the candidate's true pasts and present intentions be disguised.

• Seeing the still grotesque Bella Abzug interviewed on the Democratic Convention floor was a personal highlight for me. She ridiculed Elizabeth Dole for "extolling her husband," and praised Slick Hillie. I was reminded of the old joke, obviously still true, about the difference between Bella Abzug and a bowling ball. . .CNN's hard-hitting A-team of Bernard Kalb, Judy Woodruff, Ken Bodie and Bill Schneider said it 25 times if they said it once with multiple references to "all the criticism (Slick Hillie) has been subjected to," but never once itemized the reasons why: the legendary cattle futures trading, the mysteriously disappearing and reappearing Whitewater documents, the proven lies, the shadowy involvement in Arkansas real estate projects, the document shredding at the Rose law firm, the obsruction of justice in the Vince Foster death, the bizarre memory loss epidemic among Slick Hillie and her staff and dogsbodies when called to testify or answer news conference questions. . .keynote speaker Evan Bayh, too, mentioned the "100,000 more police" the Slick Administration hasn't put on America's mean streets, and said that violent criminals were being "severely punished" under the Slick Administration even though the average American murderer spends only five years in prison for it. . .Bodie rhapsodized that "convention rhetoric doesn't get any better than this" in reference to speeches by Jesse Jackson and Mario Cuomo, and added that "of course it will be a long, long time before anyone forgets Hillary Rodham Clinton's speech tonight." I enjoyed the contrast between CNN's camera work and commentary at the GOP and Democratic conventions exemplified by repeated comments in San Diego about all the people on the convention floor who were "wandering around, reading newspapers, chatting with friends, ignoring the speaker," thus telling its audience subtly that whatever the hell was going on at the Republican convention was boring and not worth anyone listening to. It was a different tone in Chicago. CNN's crew fairly chirped with excitement and approval at the Democratic proceedings. Though an occasional camera shot showed people milling around, talking, paying no attention to the speaker, I never heard a single mention of it by CNN's intrepid scribes. Bode said the opening night Demo crowd was "very attentive" and added, as "America The Beautiful" was sung, that "you couldn't have any more fun than these folks are having down there now." Another CNN staffer said "It'll be a seamless convention. . .it's going to be an interesting show, that's for sure." The same crew whimpered incessantly about how the Republican convention was "managed," "tightly controlled," "carefully scripted" and so forth (this is liberal code for "seamless"). CNN's floor crew in San Diego grabbed everyone in sight to ask loaded questions about abortion, yet the topic was barely mentioned if at all in Chicago. Journalists bristle when these things are pointed out. They stoutly deny that their biases intrude in their "reporting." But anecdotal evidence in the daily lives of Mr. and Mrs. Front Porch compellingly argues otherwise. Poll results released in the past month are worth repeating over and over: About 90 per cent of the professional journalists polled said they voted for Slick Willie in the 1992 election. Other polls over the last decade have consistently revealed this staggering leftward tilt among the nation's scribes. Yet they insist they're objective. Well, they're not. I don't even expect them to eliminate the bias. I just wish they'd admit it exists. That would at least end the hypocrisy.

• The Slick Administration's Most Recent Unpleasantness, the one involving Slick's pollster/adviser/guru/confidante/close friend Dick Morris, won't get many of us lathered up. There've been so many they've become . . .well, boring. Morris is merely Chapter No. 4812 in a continuing saga. Slick's numbers won't be affected by it, either. Morris will be rewarded with a blockbuster book contract, a TV miniseries, a Broadway play, a sports and leisure clothing line, and various other spinoffs and ancillary product rights. So let's not get judgmental. What's so unsanitary about a whore listening in on White House telephone calls, anyway? (September 4, 1996)

• Susan McDougal and her attorney, Bobbie McDaniel, were given a full hour on CNN's Larry King Live Sept. 6 to troll for public support and combat the widespread suspicion that she's not leveling with us on the Madison Guaranty S&L Unpleasantness. A federal judge has ordered her to jail for contempt for refusing to answer a question about whether Slick Willie testified truthfully in her Whitewater/Madison Guaranty trial. Larry asked her why she didn't answer the question and Susan said she was simply exercising her constitutional right not to. She said she was afraid to testify before a grand jury because there was a plot to get her, to twist her testimony, and above all it was a politically motivated plot to destroy the Slicks. Larry, representing all the little people in America, said that when someone refuses to testify the public usually concludes they've got something to hide. Daniels retorted that "people who feel that way don't understand our Constitutional and constitutional rights." He said it was McDougal's constitutional right not to testify. Larry missed a chance to educate attorney Daniels about paying attention. No one is suggesting McDougal doesn't have a right to refuse to testify. That wasn't what King was saying or implying. The issue King raised--which Daniels is paid to blur--is what her refusal suggests to a prudent and reasonable Mr. and Mrs. Front Porch. The truly sad thing for McDougal and her attorney is that the Constitution does not require the rest of us to believe there's nothing smelly there when someone exercises their "right" not to testify. A subtle point, granted, but one worth noting.

• A CNN poll this week showed that 57 percent of the American people support Slick Willie's handling of the latest Iraq crisis. I'll bet 57 percent of the American people could not find Iraq on a world map.

• No matter how much the big media glitterati hope it won't happen, it always does: some troublemaker out there keeps track of things, keeps records, analyzes them, and reports back to Mr. and Mrs. Front Porch. Surely we recall the journalistic grumping and grousing during the August political conventions. The Center for Media and Public Affairs in Wonderland, D.C. has issued a report showing that journalists took up 12 times more air time than newsmakers during convention telecasts and spent most of it complaining about how little there was to report. USA Today noted in its Sept. 13 issue that fewer than one in three stories dealt with the policies, records, or qualifications of the two nominees--Bob Dole and Slick Willie--and those stories tended to be negative. Network spokespeople were not available to comment on the findings, the newspaper reported.

• We note for the record that Dick Morris signed a $2.5 million book contract within two weeks of resigning as Slick's lead political strategist, and that the book will be published after the November election.

• I Swear I've Never Talked to This Guy Department: "It takes a village, all right," one bitter Democratic strategist said. "A village with a whorehouse in it." (Unidentified Democrat at the party's national convention in Chicago, quoted by writer Michael Kelly in an article in the Sept. 9, 1996 New Yorker regarding the Dick Morris Unpleasantness.)

• You could feel the pain of Newsweek's political writer Howard Fineman as he wrote about the kickoff of Bob Dole's presidential campaign. Already, he lamented, meanspiritedness is in the air. Dole has fired a couple of admen who, said Fineman, were "accused of the cardinal sin of making (ads) that weren't tough". . .enough. They were replaced by others known for producing the nastiest possible ads while ostensibly sticking to the issues. Fineman said the Clinton campaign was humming along smoothly, despite the Most Recent (Dick Morris) Unpleasantness. Dole, on the other hand, was said to be struggling, stumbling, without direction or focus. It was clear Fineman didn't approve of rough stuff. His view appears to be widely held, if all the squealing and wailing about "negativity" is any guide. I don't get it. Politics is supposed to be mean, nasty, and brutal, isn't it? Isn't this what America rewards and honors in every facet of its public and business life? (September 18, 1996)

• Freshly declassified documents show that the United States government knew that hundreds of Americans were held captive by the North Koreans even after the official "prisoner exchange" marking the armistice signed in July, 1953, but kept that information secret from the American people. Translated into plain English, the New York Times News Service stories about this most recent revelation of government lying to its subjects show that the U.S. abandoned the over 900 Americans to a lifetime of captivity for political expediency. This story followed by only a few weeks another Times revelation that the Pentagon, White House, CIA and State Department knew in November, 1991 that chemical weapons (code for: poison gas) had been stored in an Iraqi ammunition dump blown up earlier that year by American troops in the Persian Gulf War. The report was kept hidden even while the Defense Department said it had no evidence American troops might have been exposed to chemical weapons, and the report was not shared with the troops. This fundamental truth about the state--that it has no greater interest than self-preservation and will willingly sacrifice any or all of its subjects in pursuit of that end--is worth remembering as we contemplate our own duties and loyalties as citizens, and our relationship as individuals to our government. Only the naive believe that our nation will be loyal to us if forced to choose. (September 19, 1996)

How History Is Made

• David Maraniss of the Washington Post provided a snapshot look at how history is made when he reported from "On the Slick Willie Bus" rolling through the Northwest. Maraniss noted that Slick boasted that 30,000 people had showed up to see him at a daytime speech in Seattle, and later in the day he jacked up that number to 35,000. The local newspaper, citing police estimates, said the crowd was 10,000. It would seem purely a matter of chance which number gets into the historical record. But Slick has produced at least 2:1 odds that historians will use a higher number than the police estimate. (September 19, 1996)

If One Is True, The Other Can't Be

• Proof that we've entered another dimension, where up is down and down is up, and All Hail Slick Willie, Our Redeemer. . .headlines in the Sunday Indianapolis Star say that "Hoosiers Are Concerned About Values, Morals. . ." These follow by only a week or two other Star headlines which said Slick was leading or running in a dead heat with Bob Dole in Indiana. (September 22, 1996)

• The bleeders have already begun their assault on the latest federal welfare reform legislation. The Star kicked off September 22 what surely will be an ongoing series on people who'll be heartlessly ejected from the public dole by the stricter laws. "Hoosier Welfare Recipients Stand to Lose $24 Million" screamed a four-column headline which just as easily could have told us that Hoosier citizens would save $24 million more of their own money to spend as they---not the government--chose. Today's article noted that over 800 drug and alcohol addicts will lose their Hoosier welfare checks, and chronicled a mother who now will be unable to claim Supplemental Security Income (SSI) for her juvenile delinquent son. The Star did not note that part of the SSI program has become a hugely profitable and popular scam. Savvy system-milkers have been known to "coach" their children on how to misbehave at school so as to lay the groundwork for earning the coveted "attention deficit disorder" designation, which then qualifies the family for special SSI "disability" payments. Here's a $10 bet: we'll see unrelenting liberal efforts over the Slick Administration's next four years to revoke or nullify the welfare reform bill, and if there's any way Slick can do it by presidential fiat, he will. There's simply too much at stake (code for: clients of the Democratic Party) for them to allow this to go on. Let the demonizing of Republicans, conservatives, and meanspirited starvers and murderers of innocent children, grandmothers and other helpless victims of the Decades of Greed continue. . .

• Newspapers nationwide this week began running a multipart series about America's economy and foreign trade by James B. Steele and Donald Bartlett of Knight-Ridder Newspapers. Steele was interviewed last week on CNBC. He said we've been sold a bill of goods by national politicians who've told us for decades that the more American goods we can sell overseas the better life will be for American workers. This was the mantra accompanying the NAFTA legislation passed by Congress in 1994. Steele and Bartlett say it's a cruel joke, that most of the "millions and millions of jobs created by exports" are in fact low-wage jobs, and that millions and millions of high-paying manufacturing jobs are being lost in the shuffle. While the net gain in jobs is there, the American blue collar worker is a terrible loser in the game. This is what Ross Perot's been saying for several years, to howls of ridicule from the intelligentsia. Corporate profits, stock prices and dividends have soared, though. Steele and Bartlett cite the Colgate-Palmolive Co. as an example, and offer a detailed account of the company's 71 percent downsizing and restructuring of its domestic workforce. . .while hiring thousands of additional workers overseas to make products it then imports to the United States to sell to Americans. In 1980, U.S. workers comprised 45 percent of Colgate's total workforce in 1980. Today it's 17 percent. The joke, Steele and Bartlett seem to be saying, is on us. This sort of heresy has already brought out the attack dogs, including a Newsweek column by Robert J. Samuelson in the September 23 issue ridiculing the Knight-Ridder series as "junk journalism lacking integrity and competence." Samuelson even wonders why "a reputable newspaper publishes it." Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between. The intensity of the attacks such stories generate is intriguing, though.

• A sidebar story the big media will avoid is this: the decision to prevent Ross Perot from joining the debates is less about "realistic chances to win" than it is about protecting the two-party monopoly and preventing third-party challenges. The commission's claim that only those with a realistic chance of winning may be in the debates is tantamount to shutting out all but Republicans and Democrats. The hopes of outsiders to break into the tight, little two-party game are severely limited in the first place by state and federal election and ballot access laws massively rigged against them. Locking them out of the debates assures they have no realistic hope of ever winning sufficient votes to "have a realistic chance" of winning. Perot is a buffoon, granted, but without his agitation and prodding Republicans and Democrats would not have addressed some crucial issues such as a balanced budget. Keeping Perot out may make the Republicans and Democrats happy, but it's a disservice to the electorate. (September 23, 1996)

• Emblematic of the Dole campaign's futility is this: even the Ross Perot issue goes by default to Slick. The Dole camp did not want Perot in the debates, correctly reasoning--though unable to admit it--that their man would finish third in a three-person debate. The Clintonistas, meanwhile, were able to publicly argue in favor of allowing Perot in, and thus be seen as generous, broad-minded, and fair, while the Dolesters (Doledrums?) are viewed as fearful and narrowminded. Let's get this stinking election over and get on with our long national nightmare.

• Someday I hope we get an analysis of how the Republicans fell so far between 1994's election and this one. The Demonization of Newtie (aided immeasurably by his own hubris) surely was a factor. The incredible slickness of Slick is another. A misreading of the mandate, perhaps? Certainly a failure of will. Certainly an unwillingness to counter wacko left liberal lies (the one about Medicare "cuts" is a perfect example). Probably an insufficient commitment to the 1994 campaign's core ideas (Bob Dole certainly doesn't believe in anything but the deal, and compromises) in the first place. The Republicans have been outmaneuvered, outfoxed, out-demagogued on every important issue. Yet they continue to barrage us with pleas for support and--above all--money. I wouldn't donate to the Republicans under any conditions, not even the pending landslide re-election of Slick Willie and The Clintonistas. The Republicans are a party of blundering, inept, gutless, stupid fools who deserve what they're getting, and worse.

• Frank Greer, identified as a "Democratic Stategist," was a guest panelist on the Charles Grodin Show on CNBC the night of Sept. 24. He casually tossed off the liberal mantra that Slick Willie has "put 100,000 more police on the streets." No one challenged it--not even his two Republican foes on the program--even though it's widely known to be an outrageous lie. Only two explanations seem possible: either howling incompetence and ignorance, or these people are joined together in an effort to fool the public.

• Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer says the GOP collapse may be attributed to three things. . .first, a misreading of the so-called "mandate" from the 1994 election; second, Slick's clever rhetorical move to the center; and third, the sovereign and infallible American people, who in Krauthammer's reading were bluffing all along about wanting to cut the size of government. The people don't actually want smaller government, they want talk about it. And best of all, Krauthammer writes, is a Democrat doing the inveighing, as Slick did in his 1996 State of the Union Address. Slick's claim (that the era of big governmnt was over) was hollow, says Krauthammer, but "the applause thunderous." Krauthammer believes the Republicans have resolutely avoided ideological combat ever since Slick outmaneuvered them on the budget-balancing government shutdown showdown. He describes their San Diego convention in August as a "festival of mush." The Republican surrender, he believes, makes the 1996 election one of the "most unimportant in postwar history," since the differences between Slick and Bob Dole are now "microscopic." I'd quibble with that last point. Even if the candidates refuse to stake out ideological positions, every election is crucial because ideology is what will determine the future direction of our society. Liberals know this. Not enough conservatives do. (September 25, 1996)

• If the Republicans are smart they'll spend their time and money getting congressional candidates elected and forget about the presidency. Control of the Congress is the best and only hope of blunting what assuredly will be a leftward lurch by the Clintonistas after November 5 once they're no longer restrained by the need for re-election.

• It's leaked into the news by troublemakers and extremists out to get the Slicks that there is a six-month gap in the log recording access to the confidential FBI files the White House was improperly and illegally examining in 1994. The log shows whose file was requested and who asked for it, and is blank between March and September of 1994. The press was apoplectic over an 18-minute gap in President Nixon's tapes. Wonder how they'll react to a six-month gap in the Filegate Unpleasantness? The keeper of that log, a female assistant to now deposed White House security director Craig (Nobody Hired Me, I Just Walked In Off The Street One Day And Went To Work) Livingstone, has disappeared. Federal prosecutors are said to have a subpoena waiting if she's found alive.

• Something to bet money on: Slick will pardon Susan McDougal, Jim Guy Tucker, and Webb Hubbell, no matter what the election results, but after the election. They've been loyal soldiers and kept their mouths shut. It's the least they deserve.

• Oh no! Another hobgoblin: gun ranges! Gun control activists have another nightmare following a brief flurry of suicides at target practice ranges in California last month. In the latest episode of sheer guts and determination, 62-year-old Arthur Kampf paid $18 to rent a pistol at a San Rafael target range, calmly listened to the safety instructions and signed the necessary forms, and even joked and laughed with range owner Mark Baradat. A few minutes later Kampf put the pistol to his head and shot himself. He was the third suicide at gun ranges in San Francisco since August. Anti-gun forces are now demanding gun rental restrictions, and Assemblyman Louis Caldera, a liberal Democrat from Lost Angeles, is hinting he'll introduce appropriate measures when the California legislature convenes in January.

• But while California is trying to close off suicide options, an enlightened Australian province is opening them up. The Northern Territory legislature became the first in the world to pass a voluntary euthanasia law in 1995. It took effect July 1, 1996, and Bob Dent, 66, a retired carpenter suffering from terminal cancer, became the first to celebrate on Sept. 22 when he tapped the word "Yes" on a computer. This was his final instruction to medical attendants to go ahead and flip the switch releasing a lethal mix of drugs into intravenous tubes. Dent went out peacefully and smiling, observers said. Activists (code for: people who don't have a damned thing better to do than pester the rest of us night and day) are feverishly at work trying to repeal the law. Here's hoping Northern Territory legislators have the courage to resist.

Rattling Their Cages

• I happened to be in a gigantic Barnes & Noble Bookstore on Indianapolis's east side yesterday and decided to have a little fun. After verifying that it wasn't on the shelves, I went whimpering to the nearest sales clerk for help in finding Emmett Tyrell's new book on The Slicks, Boy Clinton: The Political Biography. It's the latest in a seemingly unending series of exposes on the Slicks, I said, and I've gotta have it. She looked in the computer said it was in hardback, and knit her brow in concern. "Hmmm," she sympathized, "I don't know why we wouldn't have it." I told her it was also available in "trade paperback" as well. She suggested I go look in the political science section and if it wasn't there they'd be glad to order it. I looked. No Tyrrell book, though the section offered such blockbuster best-sellers as The Noam Chomsky Reader, a collection of essays by the famous left-winger, and two other Chomsky titles, plus Karl Marx's The Theory of History, something called Extremism in America, and the New Republic Guide to The Issues for the 1996 campaign. Tyrrell's absence was just an oversight, I felt sure. I told the clerk I thought it would sell like hotcakes if they just had a pile. She promised she'd let the big cheeses know of my interest, and maybe, by golly, they'd get some. Later, of course, I got my own copy through the Vast Rightwing Conspiracy Book Club. (September 25, 1996)

• Wacko Religious Left radical congressman David Bonior of Michigan called a press conference Sept. 26 to demand that Newt Gingrich step aside as House Speaker until the ethics committee probing Newtie's affairs has completed its work. Fair enough, if Slick Willie will step aside until the various special prosecutors and congressional committees finish exploring his.

• "Congress on Monday gave final approval to a catchall spending bill that funds the government for another year and gives up substantial ground on cuts Republican leaders previously won." --Mike Dorning writing in the Chicago Tribune's October 1 edition on the final days of the 104th Congress. The phrase in italics sums up the ruinous state of the vaunted "Republican Revolution" we heard about after the 1994 election. They met their match in Slick and the Clintonistas and have been routed on the field of battle. Time to give it up, boys.

• The African nation of Chad is issuing a limited edition postage stamp featuring Elvis Presley and Slick Willie. A nearly breathless ad in USA Today provided details. Each stamp is about four times the size of a regular U.S. postage stamp. They feature Elvis with his guitar and Slick with his saxophone. The two are together on one commemorative sheet. They're available at only $9.95 plus--ironically enough--postage and "handling" (not a word I like to use in connection with either of these Giants of Our Age) of $3. A Certificate of Authenticity (capitalized, to add fake importance) is included. I've sent in my order. How about you?

• Someone has calculated that Slick Willie proposed $8 billion in new federal spending programs on his 500-mile train trip from West Virginia to Michigan City, Indiana, in the days leading up to the Democratic national convention. There is no record of a single big media person asking how Slick intended to pay for these programs. But when a Republican proposes a tax cut the media join in screaming that it will ruin the nation, explode the deficit. I know, I know, we're not supposed to notice.

• Vice president Al Gore attacked Bob Dole in a New Jersey speech this week for voting against the V-chip legislation supported by Democrats. A woman named Blanche asked Dole if the federal government would help poor people buy a new television set equipped with the new V-chip when they became available. Gore, according to those at the scene, did not directly answer her question, but did say "inexpensive" V-chips would be available. This could be our first glimpse of a new liberal Democratic constituency. It has the smell of another raid on the federal treasury. Best stay tuned.

• Callers to the Rush Limbaugh show this week offered lots of advice to Bob Dole for Sunday's debate with Slick Willie. Drogo, from Albany, New York, said Dole should stick with and support the Republican Contract with America. Drusilla from Menlo Park said Dole should hammer away at Clinton on the many scandals staining his administration. Another fella said Dole should point out that Slick's a liar. On and on it went. All very touching and sincere. And all a wasted effort. Dole doesn't believe in the Contract with America. Dole has promised not to say anything about Whitewater. America already knows Slick is a liar. Dole has no animating core beliefs or principles. He believes in nothing more than the deal. He is a beltway hack who's fed at the federal trough for over 35 years. This, after all, is Go-Along-To-Get-Along Bob. Clinton will destroy him in the debates. Deservedly so.

• Republican Senator Fred Thompson is playing the role of Slick Willie for Bob Dole's debate preparations. You sure can't envy Thompson. How is he ever gonna get the stink off him when this is over?

What Better Sums Up American Uncivilization As The 20th Century Draws To A Merciful Close?

• Dick Morris is advising Slick Willie and the Clintonistas about family values.

• Here's the dilemma facing Mr. and Mrs. Front Porch when they step into the voting booth November 5: Slick Willie and Bob Dole have much more in common than in opposition. . .Republicans and Democrats are more alike than not. . .at bottom, Democrats and Republicans are in league with each other to protect the system and will choose each other ahead of the public interest anytime they're forced to choose. . .many citizens surely know in their hearts that the two major parties are in a silent conspiracy to not address crucial issues and that the country desperately needs an antidote to a corrupt, rotten two-party political system . . . but a vote for a third party candidate is a vote for Slick Willie.

• The 1996 election campaign's greatest mystery to me is why Bob Dole and Jack Kemp both refuse to attack Slick Willie and the Clintonistas on issues that cry out for examination: the purloined FBI files, the travel office scandal, Slick's and the party's outrageous demagoguing on Medicare (for just one example), drug use by White House staff, the numerous scandals and corruptions surrounding Slick Administration appointees, the issue of pardons for Slick's friends, business partners and others involved in The Whitewater Unpleasantness, the Slicks' plans for health care reform in the next Slick Administration, and even the "character" issue. Special prosecutors are active, a shelfload of books have been published on this sleazy, corrupt band of Snopesian grifters, there's enough material, enough stink, to keep Dole and Kemp and the Republicans busy for years. . .yet what we get is utter silence. Nary a peep about any of it. Several explanations are possible. Perhaps the Democrats have damaging information on Dole or Kemp. Perhaps there is a conspiracy of silence--both parties have agreed to keep certain issues off the table. Perhaps the Republicans have been spooked, scared off by the incessant drumbeat of demagoguery from the Democrats about "meanspiritedness" and "negative campaigning," or by the often-cited polls purporting to show that large numbers of citizens are fed up with "negativity." Whatever the reason, the Republicans have been neutered and immobilized, whether by their own hand or the opposition's. Either way, this pre-emptive silencing of the opposition will go down as as one of the greatest triumphs of political strategy in American history, and one of the greatest mysteries.

• Veteran columnist Jack Anderson spoke to the Washington Writers Group this month and described Slick Willie as "one of the most accomplished liars" in American politics. He said the scandals surrounding the Slick Administration would have made it impossible, 20 years ago, for a candidate to have even run for office, let alone be elected and re-elected, but today they don't seem to matter much because the public believes all politicians are scum and that Slick is no worse than anyone else. Anderson added that the greatest menace to human civilization "is our own bad qualities." He borrowed a phrase from Czech president and author Vaclav Havel to describe what is happening to American society--"pollution of the spirit."

It Wouldn't Be Pretty, But It Would Be A Service To This Great Nation

• The so-called presidential debates are a fraud on the American people. They're not debates and they add little to the public dialogue needed for an informed electorate. They consist of: the candidates repeating the sound-bites they've been spewing for a year or more; the candidates evading questions; the candidates (primarily Dole and Kemp) and the press not asking the right questions and not pursuing the non-answers. I'd pay money to be the moderator for just one debate. As soon as the candidates came onstage, I'd have stagehands nail their shoes to the floor and chain their hands to the podia. Then I'd fix both of them in a malevolent glare and say, "We're not leaving, boys, until the questions are answered. This program is open-ended. I'm prepared to stay here indefinitely--and now that you're nailed to the floor, so are you. You'll be fed intravenously and provided bed pans for body wastes. Except for toilet breaks, you'll be televised "live" for the duration--until you are dead or you answer the questions. It's your choice. I'm asking the questions. I'm asking the follow-up questions. And there will be follow-up questions until you provide a complete answer. Are we ready?" (October 15, 1996)

• The Chicago Tribune on October 14 carried what may have been a first for the mainstream press. It noted that the Slick administration's crime bill "will eventually pay for the hiring of 100,000 additional police officers" around the nation. . . instead of repeating the liberal lie that the 100,000 cops are already walking the beat.

• Give CNN's Bernard Kalb some modest credit for at least acknowledging the obvious following the presidential non-debates October 16. He briefly had as post-non-debate guests one of Slick's handlers, Paul Begala, and one of Dole's. He asked both the same question--how did they think "their man" did in the debate? Both gave predictable, scripted, mantra answers. Bernie replied that they were both "spinning" and said he'd like them to stop that if they could, forget about their jobs and offer an honest appraisal of the debates. Both men essentially repeated the mantra, demonstrating they could not. Did I detect just a bit of exasperation in Bernie? He should know better. And he has no ground on which to complain after his own lifetime of not asking the hard questions, and insinuating his own personal agenda into his broadcasting.

At Last, A Case Is Made For Discrimination

• Actor and TV star Bill Cosby refused to pose for a photo with Wonderland, D.C., mayor Marion Barry at a recent gala in the nation's capital. His publicist allowed as how Cosby was "not a fan of the mayor." Good!!! (October 17, 1996)

• Driving The New York Times Crazy Department: Emmett Tyrrell's new book on the Slicks, Boy Clinton: The Political Biography, has catapulted itself onto the Times best-seller list for the week ending October 6. . .and as of October 14 former FBI agent Gary Aldrich's expose of the Slick White House, Unlimited Access, has been on the Times list for 14 weeks.

Slick Will Not Utter Truer Words In This Campaign

• Bob Dole several times timidly tried to raise the "character issue" in Wednesday night's presidential debate and except for one dismissive remark, Slick ignored the matters. Referring to the various scandals and unpleasantnesses alluded to by Dole, Slick said at one point, "I don't want to respond in kind to all these things. . ." (October 17, 1996)

• Dole's lack of forcefulness and passion in pursuing the few issues Slick's vulnerable on reflects his confused and rudderless campaign. I'd bet money he raised the topics Wednesday night only because his advisers insisted on it. Dole is the most temperamentally and philosophically unsuited candidate for president I've seen in my lifetime. George Bush is a close second. Dole's campaign is one long, excruciatingly drawn-out howl of embarrassment and pain. He's the Chinese water torture candidate.

• "Bob Potts Research Inc.of Washington has prepared a list, all from public sources, of almost 100 Clinton friends and associates tied to one scandal or another."--William C. Triplett II, former chief Republican counsel to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, writing in the October 16 issue of the Washington Times.

• "President Clinton, in Houston. . .campaigning for re-election, noted: "And I know I've spent more time in Texas than anybody else running over the last 40 years." Except for George Bush, Lloyd Bentsen, John Connally, Phil Gramm, Ross Perot and Lyndon Johnson."--John McCaslin, writing in his 'Inside The Beltway' column in the October 13 issue of the Washington Times.

• I had two encounters with Power Players last week at Clowes Hall. A male voice announced he was calling from Congressman Dan Burton's office and wanted "front and center" tickets for the Broadway musical, Man of La Mancha. No such tickets existed, since they'd been on sale for nine months. I explained that but the lackey was insistent. He demanded to know who he should talk to about "VIP tickets." The arrogance in his voice suggested he was used to getting his way and that no was not an acceptable answer. He became even more agitated when I calmly repeated--my own mantra--my initial comment, that there were no more "front and center" tickets available for any show at any time for anyone. Finally I suggested he contact the show's producers, a local company, and talk to them about VIP tickets. He hung up in a huff. Later the same day, a woman called and said she wanted us to set aside four tickets down front and that she would send over her "house man" to pick them up. She apparently didn't believe it when I told her that we could not "set aside" or "hold" tickets for anyone over the phone and in fact were not even allowed to sell tickets by phone for her particular event. She became rather combative about it, wanted to know who set such policies and, of course, who we thought we were, anyway. Four times--I counted them--she dropped the phrase "my house man," obviously hoping to make it quite clear that she had slaves and was not used to having rules apply to her. I remained steadfast, patiently explained the procedure for obtaining tickets. She at last relented and said that she'd send her "house man" over to the box office to pick up four tickets. These episodes brought back a fond memory from last winter when a caller imperiously introduced himself as an aide to Indiana Governor Evan Bayh, who wanted at the last minute some prime seats to Phantom of the Opera. All the good tickets had long since been sold, of course, and I told him we didn't have any "front and center orchestra" seats. "Not even for the governor?" he said. I could imagine him offering that sly, knowing wink these people are so good at. This was another person obviously used to having the seas part in his path at the dropping of the governor's name. "We don't have any left even for Jesus Christ Himself," I replied. I'm a little ashamed to admit it, but there's something deeply, perversely satisfying about encounters such as these.

• As pathetic and directionless and futile as Bob Dole's presidential campaign is, wouldn't it have been helped if Phil Gramm, Steve Forbes, Lamar Alexander, Pat Buchanan and a few others had been active for the Republican cause? Buchanan, in particular, would have been a formidable foe for the Democrats. But all these people have vanished, been invisible in this struggle. Why? One of the big foundations ought to research this.

• Another Clintonista was in Indianapolis October 26 to continue demagoguing against the evil, child-starving, coot-killing Republicans. Health and Human Services Secretary and wacko Religious Left liberal Donna Shalala was in town to stump for a local unindicted charlatan for the U.S. Congress, Julia Carson. Shalala told a meeting of some 20 assembled coots that if Republicans win they will eliminate Social Security and Medicare. "Think of your world," Shalala howled, "if Medicare and Social Security didn't exist. That's a world run by Republicans." Someone--the truth-questing Indianapolis Star reporter didn't tell readers who--asked if liberals weren't stretching the truth a bit to call the Republican plan to reduce spending by $270 billion but still increase spending by about seven per cent a "spending cut" as the Democrats have done for more than a year. Shalala, the Star reported, conceded it was not actually a "cut" but rather a reduction in planned increases. She quickly added, though, "that it will amount to the same thing as a cut. . ." Carson, who has reportedly been involved in several local unpleasantnesses but remains ever-popular, had brain-damaged former heavyweight champion Muhammad Ali in town October 29 to stump on her behalf. (October 27, 1996)

Just A Hunch: Weird Al Will One Day Wish He Had These Words Back

• "The ethical standards established in this White House have been the highest in the history of the White House."--Vice president Al Gore, straight-faced, on "Meet The Press" Sunday, October 13, 1996. None of the truth-questing journalists on the panel uttered even a single syllable of challenge to this statement.)

• Today is Day One of Indictment Watch. Let the prayer begin. (November 6, 1996)

• Let the national lottery begin, too: how long before Slick Willie issues pardons?

• Bob Dole was rightly accused of lacking any animating political philosphy and running an aimless campaign of simpleminded mush. His concession speech Tuesday night contained proof that Dole never understood--and still doesn't--who he was running against and what was at stake in this election. Dole admonished supporters who booed the mention of Slick Willie's name by telling them sternly, "I said repeatedly in this campaign that the president is my opponent, not my enemy."

• CNN declared incumbent U.S. Senator John Kerry a winner in Massachusetts with less than one per cent of the votes counted and Kerry ahead by approximately a 2,500 to 2,200 score. How is such a projection possible?

• At 9:02 p.m. election night, CNN's Bernie Kalb said "the polls just closed in Louisiana and it's still undecided."

• At 9:10 p.m. Larry King gave Slick's press secretary Mike McCurry about five minutes of prime air time to appeal to west coast voters to get out and vote so Slick could have the Democrat-controlled Congress he wanted. About 10 minutes later a Republican spokesman was given a chance to make the same pitch. The Democratic national chairman and wacko Religious Left senator from Connecticut, Christopher Dodd, renewed his plea for an end to "personal attacks" and negativity (code for: stop making factual statements about Slick Willie and the Clintonistas). (November 7, 1996)

• Measured against my dread of what I expected to happen, the election was an acceptable tradeoff: America gets four more years of Slick Willie, but the California Civil Rights Initiative passed (watch for the ACLU and others from the Religious Left to sue immediately to block the will of the electorate) and the Republicans kept control of the Congress. The latter may at least act as a brake on Slick and the Clintonistas' wacko social engineering and prevent the starvation and murder of millions and millions and millions of innocent children and senior citizens who would otherwise be condemned to liberal death camps by mean-spirited extremist Democratic legislative schemes.

• Exit polls in Ohio perfectly capture the state of American society. Ohioans voting for Slick and Dole were within three percentage points of each other when answering questions about whether their candidate "stands up for what he believes in" and "shares my view of government." The real peek behind the curtain came when touchy-feely questions were asked: 1) "He cares about people like me" drew 67 percent from Clintonistas, a mere 19 percent from Dolemites; 2) "He is honest and trustworthy" produced 85 percent "yes" from Dole supporters, 9 percent from those voting for Slick Willie; 3) "He is in touch with the 90s" yielded 89 percent for Slick and 5 percent for Dole; 4) "He has a vision for the future" produced 70 percent affirmative from Clintonoids, 18 percent from Dole voters. Follow-up questions were asked about the voters' concept of the role of government. Seventy-one (71) percent of those voting for Slick Willie felt government should "do more to solve problems" compared to 19 per cent of Dole voters.

• Somebody will do the math on this. . .about 50 percent of the registered voters actually voted Tuesday. Slick got 49 percent of the votes cast. Does that mean that one out of four registered voters--a piddly 25 percent?--decided who gets to be president? Scary.

• Hmmmm. Abortion didn't fatally split the Republican Party, as liberals hoped. What won't destroy the GOP next?

• I'll confess: I voted for Ross Perot for president. I voted out of deep anger at the Republicans for saddling us with Dole's fraudulent candidacy, out of deep revulsion at Slick Willie, and to send a message. I believe third-party and fringe-party efforts desperately need to be encouraged, however hopeless they are. (November 7, 1996)

• CBS was rumored to have hired Dick "The Toe Sucker" Morris as an election commentator/analyst. Since I did not watch even a split second of network TV coverage I missed that. CBS, like Morris, like network television, is irrelevant.

• Slick is quoted by the Associated Press as telling a group of supporters in Little Rock shortly after the election that his "political attackers" were "a cancer" that he, Clinton, intended to "cut out" of the system. Sounds pretty mean-spirited and divisive to me. But there's been nary a peep of protest from The Rev. Al Sharpton, Rep. Charles Rangel, Ted Kennedy, Dick Gephardt, John Dingel, Jesse Jackson, David Bonior, Peter Jennings, Marion Wright Edelman, Al Gore, Lani Guinier, Michael Kinsley, and the rest of the wacko Religious Left liberal hypocrites and Clintonoids. Strangest thing.

• Slick and the Clintonistas are talking about an end to divisiveness and a need for bipartisan cooperation. I hope it doesn't happen. Cooperation and compromise mean only one thing in dealing with Slick: conservatives lose. The issues dividing liberals and conservative are so fundamental as to make compromise unacceptable. What we have is exactly what Pat Buchanan famously described at the 1992 Republican convention: a war over the culture, a war for the soul and the future of our country. It is a war. I say: let's keep fighting. No quarter asked, none given.

• Rush Limbaugh's mantra for the past year has been Bob Dole's going to win, Bob Dole's going to win, Bob Dole's going to win. Rush ridiculed and snickered at callers who were worried that Dole was a terrible candidate, that the Republicans were frittering away their 1994 election momentum. I wonder what he'll say now that it's obvious the Nervous Nellies were right and he was wrong. (November 7, 1996)

A Bit More Than Glucose Is Deranged

• Here I am at home on a bleak November post-election Thursday. Gordon Lightfoot sings in the background. His music is infinitely melancholy, sad, and aching. Lead-grey skies leak drizzle. My joints and muscles ache. My feet are sore, my toes numb. Dr. Feelgood, before his attention wandered, said something about a possible "glucose derangement" when I mentioned it. I am unemployed and fifty pounds overweight, with no will to do anything about it. My country is increasingly in the hands of those I regard as alien barbarians. A wasteland stretches before me. If I owned a small handgun I would at least have it out on the desk, be thoughtfully pondering it. (November 7, 1996)

• Al Gore versus Colin Powell in 2000? Unless someone presently unknown emerges, the Republicans will have great difficulty fielding a viable candidate four years hence. Oklahoma's J.C. Watts would make a fine vice-presidential candidate. I'd still feel more comfortable if Powell ran as a Democrat. Maybe Weird Al and Colin as tag team?

Mystery Truly Shrouds

• Nobody in all the post-election punditry has yet explained the fundamental paradox of women voting in huge majorities for Slick Willie. We know that they did. But why? (November 7, 1996)

• Another nominee for most astonishing election statistic: Exit polls showed that about 25 percent of self-described conservatives voted for Slick Willie.

• "It is almost inconceivable that Republican leaders could have failed to recognize the fatal flaws. . .in presidential candidate Bob Dole."--Columnist Ken Tomlinson, writing in the Dec. 8 Washington Times, and predicting further Republican disasters unless control of the party nomination process can be wrested from the Washington insiders and power brokers who engineered the Dole candidacy.

I'll Second That, And It Still Is!

• "It was unimaginable that someone like me could ever have become president of the greatest country in human history." --Slick Willie, in his victory speech Nov. 5, 1996, in Little Rock.

• An Army officer and a drill sergeant are accused of raping and sexually harassing female soldiers in a scandal erupting at the Army's Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland. Army brass are promising a full investigation. The episode ought to make those concerned with fairness ask this cosmic question: is it fair to expect military personnel to conform to a higher standard of behavior than the nation expects of its commander-in-chief, Slick Willie?

• Imprisoned former Illinois Congressman and supernova sleazebag Mel Reynolds has been indicted on federal charges of bank fraud, illegally spending campaign funds for personal use, and using forged documents to try to obtain bank loans. Reynolds is presently serving a five-year term in an East Moline, Illinois prison. He was convicted in October, 1995, on sexual assault and obstruction of justice charges. He went off to prison in October, 1995, shortly after resigning his congressional seat. He screamed all the way to East Moline that his conviction was a racist conspiracy and that he was innocent of all charges. The latest indictments bear the odor of trumped-up charges, too. No doubt the feds made them up just like the others.

• The post-election silence from the Clintonistas makes me uneasy. They've dipped below radar. You know they're out there burrowing, plotting, planning something. If they don't come up to daylight soon we'll have to drop some concussion grendades down their burrows to force 'em to the surface. No nation can sleep easy with Slicks on the prowl. No question they'll strike. Just a question of when, where. (November 24, 1996)

• One of Slick's fellow unindicted co-conspirators, James Carville, is organizing a nationwide jihad against Whitewater Unpleasantness special prosecutor Kenneth Starr. Carville told eager "Meet The Press" reporters November 24 that Starr is an agent and lackey for right-wing Republican extremists who are out to destroy Slick, and that he, Carville, would be on the attack forthwith to bring the truth to the American people. Starr, of course, wouldn't exist if there were truly "nothing there," as Slick's handlers and acolytes claim. Carville's mad dog act is a measure of how deeply the Clintonistas fear an uprooting of the truth. (November 24, 1996)

• The bleeders wasted little time finding a wacko Religious Left liberal judge to stop California's Proposition 209 from going into effect. The new legislation forbids discrimination against or special preferences for anyone based on skin color. Judge Thelton Henderson, a Jimmy Carter appointee in 1980 and a former director of the American Civil Liberties Union in California, quickly issued a restraining order and said the antidiscrimination law may be discriminatory, adding that--and this is classic left-wing activist mantra--the "courts must look beyond the plain language of an enactment." This is code for: words mean what Judge Henderson says they mean. This is Alice in Wonderland stuff come to life. This, friends, is not about fairness or discrimination. It's about political power, constituencies, and front-row seats at the trough.

• These are not uplifting times for journalists. A Harris poll at year-end shows widespread public dissatisfaction with our ink-stained wretches. First the obvious: Local TV remains the most popular source of news for most folks (34 percent). Newspapers came in third. Seventy-five percent of those questioned said they felt it very important that the news media expose corrupt public officials. Seventy-five percent said political bias infests the media, and the majority felt the bias was "liberal." Now the more subtle findings: One out of four persons polled said he felt the press "hurts American democracy." Only 51 percent felt reporters "got the facts straight" and a huge majority--84 percent--indicated they'd support government requirements for balanced reporting, to the point of imposing fines for inaccurate or biased reporting. Over half the respondents felt journalists should be licensed to practice their professions. The public, according to Harris pollsters, believes journalists are arrogant, cynical, and biased, and only one in four felt they were "intelligent." The qualities which journalists say they highly prize in themselves--honesty and compassion--barely registered in the Harris poll. (December 31, 1996)

Back to top