> have her choices affirmed as more than victimhood. Clinton's behavior as a
> goaty, sexually irresponsible adultering betrayer of his wife can be
> condemned, while simultaneously acknowledging that Monica was a consensual
> partner in the "encounters" - to use her preferred description.
Oh yuk yuk yuk. Must we talk like senators? Clinton's marriage is a typical marriage of political convenience. But for the benefits of political power that Hillary and Bill share, their marriage long ago would have dissolved. Now, this context considered, who are we to judge Bill for having "affairs"? Or Hillary for that matter? His actions were not sexually irresponsible so much as politically irresponsible. What more significance should be assigned to this phenomenon to begin with?
>
> And notably, the White House quickly put a stop to the initial "stalker"
> rumours in favor of more flattering descriptions of Monica, on the (correct)
> assumption that Monica was likely to voluntarily support Bill.
I rest my case.
Steve