I guess, given the task that I have currently accepted, that I should weigh in on this one. First off, I despise the Larry Flynt publications. I can honestly say that I haven't looked at one in almost 30 years. But the messenger doesn't matter as much as whether or not the message is true. With regard to whether Dubya may have had an affair or not, and whether he paid for an abortion or not is only important to me in the same way that it was for President Clinton. That is to say that moral lapses are disappointing, they show an arrogance that I don't care for, but in the end result it is not as important to me as what the plan is for the working men and women, as well as their families.

But if, and I place strong emphasis on the if, this were to bear out to be true, then GWB would be fair game on an entirely different issue. You see, he and his associates have made strong assertions on three fronts. One is that they will restore dignity in the White House and get rid of the sleaze. Two, they are decidely and vociferously pro-life. Three, they have made much of the fact that Clinton should have been removed for lying under oath. In my mind IF this allegation were born out, I would judge him on these three transgressions as harshly as he has judged President Clinton. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. I would ask folks to not dwell on the act, because most of us are flawed and have made mistakes. But I would ask them to focus on the holier-than-thou type statements, and then judge on that basis. If one finds hypocrisy, that would bear very close scrutiny. Now, off I go to listen to my friend give his acceptance speech.

All the best,

Mick