With you all the way, Clinton. Circular arguments hold no water with somebody who doesn't already buy into at least one of the premises.

Peg, I understand the English language well enough to know that if a claim can't be DISPROVED, then it's meaningless. There is nothing Clinton could do to prove he's not latently homosexual, since the very "definition" of that term indicates it's subconscious.

If I hate blacks, am I latently African? If I hate Jews, am I latently Jewish? If I hate skateboarders, am I a latent thrasher?

It's bullshit. It's a groundless venemous attack, or it's psychobabble. Either way, it has no place in a rational discussion.

Mind you, I'm not saying I hate blacks, Jews, or thrashers. (Somebody will always bring this up -- some people apparently are immune to the concept of "example" -- if this doesn't apply to you, ignore this paragraph.)

Neither am I saying that I condone the use of the word "faggot." I do not. I wish Clinton wouldn't use it.

But I don't think that his use of it makes him a "latent homosexual." Perhaps a blatant homophobe. But not a latent anything.

Alex