Harrassment Law

Q: If you like policies, fine. But to call him sincere? That stupid lip-biting routine? They have Clinton on tape yucking it with someone at Ron Brown's funeral. As soon as he sees the cameras pointed at him, he immediately turns on the quivering lip routine. It's just a joke. Tell you what, I've got some land in Florida you might be interested. Clinton is a seducer. That's how he gets women, that's how he gets elected. So you oppose sexual harrassment law?

A: Clinton was subpoenaed to testify in the Jones case, which was about him sexually harrassing Paula Jones. That's a simple statement of fact. How is this disingenuous? I don't care if the Reactionary Right was behind it - so what? That's an ad hominem attack. The motives behind whoever helped Paula Jones are not relevant. This was a case about sexual harrassment. Clinton gave false and misleading testimony. So now who do you believe - Bill Clinton, or the multiple women who claim that he sexually harrassed them, and one who claimed he RAPED her? Doesn't that accusation disturb you?! And Bill Clinton has admitted that he lies about his sexual relationships, and has an extensive pattern

of sexually aggressive behaviors. So who do you believe - Juanita, or Bill? Personally, I do NOT want a rapist for our President. Yes, that matters, call me weird. Here's my main point, which you failed to address: Monica was about perjury in a sexual harrassment case. No trial, no perjury. If there had been no Paula Jones, AND if there had been no sexual harrassment law, we would never have heard of Monica Lewinsky. My point is, the National Organization for Women went for Clarence Thomas' throat over a similiar accusation. They said, it's not the weight of the evidence, it's the everity of the charge that matters. Yet they gave Bill Clinton a total pass