Monday, March 8, 1999 -- New York/Washington -- They still can't kick the habit. The race for the GOP Presidential slot is heating up. An Air Force officer was acquitted of all charges stemming from an accident in Italy in which a US jet caused a ski gondola to take a deadly plunge in Italy, and Europeans are fuming. The New York Times runs a sensational story about a breach in US nuclear security that emphasizes the hyperbole and downplays the fact that the problems happened under the nose of Reagan and Bush. Bob Dole is working to help negotiate peace in Kosovo. US jets bomb Iraqi anti-aircraft installations.

So it should come as no surprise that Monica Lewinsky was topic one this week.

Fox News Sunday

Tony Snow's first guest was Trent Lott, Senate Majority Leader and well-known associate of segregationists.

Question one: Lott's thoughts on "technology acquisition" by China, a story touted big -- and disproportionately critical to the Clinton Administration since it happened under the noses of Reagan and Bush. "China is getting to be more and more of a problem" on human rights and technology, said Lott, who wants to see a classified report on Chinese espionage released, saying "there is much damning information."

Of course, the information will be "spun" as damaging to the Clinton administration when in fact the situation is the result of sloppiness under previous Presidents.

Tony asked Lott about a witness who was "told to hold back information from Congress." Lott suggested "formal action," including the possibility of contempt of Congress charges.

This was the money answer -- Lott and his confederates plan to use the same multiple-investigation strategy that turned Whitewater into Lewinsky to turn this into another wide-ranging scandal.

Hume asked an obnoxious question about "credible charges of rape" not sticking to Clinton. Credible? REALLY, Brit? Guess you don't read APJ.

Lott called the failure of impeachment charges to pass the Senate -- catch this -- "a tragedy." Of course, it is the GOP that brought this tragedy on America -- and who will pay at the ballot box.

Brit persisted on Broaddrick -- what should be done? A Congressional inquiry? Lott praised her "courage" but sees nothing happening. Brit asked if the President should come forward (knowing full well that Clinton can't because of the legal and litigious minefield that has resulted from the idiotic Supreme Court decision to allow standing Presidents to be sued). Lott, of course, said he should.

Tony brought up the ridiculous possibility of the White House, "if they believe he is innocent," saying that the statute of limitations should be lifted and "bring on the evidence."

Talk turned to trade. "Our trading partners treated us like saps" by violating trade and labor rules. "I think we should put stiff penalties on them."

Gee Trent, we've seen how this game works before -- trade drops, prices go up, and the American economy and job market suffers.

But is it a trade war? "No." Hume asked Lott to distinguish himself from Pat Buchanan on trade; Lott supports fast track and open trade, but objects to America being "dumped on." He cited a WTO study on bananas affecting jobs in this country. He did say it's more than bananas.

We say it's more than American jobs at stake -- the trade agreements Clinton has pursued have helped boost the economy. it's almost as if the GOP wants to bollix these agreements to hurt the economy -- so they can blame Clinton.

Tony brought up Nat Hentoff's article claiming that Clinton committed crimes by engaging in acts of war against certain foreign powers. Lott talked Wag the Dog yet again -- "I felt like I was used last year by the Administration."

Right, Trent, like you weren't acting expeditiously. And you certainly didn't cry Wag the Dog when Reagan diverted attention from the murder of over 200 marines by invading that scary Marxist stronghold, Grenada, and ruining the tanning cycle for dozens of Caribbean med school students.

Brit brought up the scenario of defunding troops, and Lott said it was a realistic possibility. You've gotta love the irony of it -- usually hawkish Conservatives talking like a bunch of anti-Vietnam peacenik doves! Of course, the difference is that we were aiding a holocaust in Vietnam; we're now helping to prevent one in Europe.

Tony also asked about the Sudan bombing, giving Lott the chance to express more "doubt" about it.

The final question dealt with Social Security -- and Lott talked about a "tax overpayment" being returned to "the people" (read: "we will line the pockets of our rich patrons"). For the first time in a while on Fox News Sunday, there was some fast-paced wonkspeak about appropriations and budget balancing -- and Lott actually implied that there might be "savings" in defense spending. "There's always a tendency toward more spending... there should be more choice" in education and social security.

Yeah, Trent -- like choosing something that will help public schools in inner-city and impoverished rural communities. Seems there are a lot of those in Mississippi -- and we can't help wonder if your apathy toward helping that facet of your constituency is race-based.

Brit fed Lott a question on Monica Lewinsky: "Do you think she's still protecting him?" "Yes..." Lott began spewing about adultery and abortions, slamming Lewinsky.

By the way, Trent, speaking of adultery and abortions, do you have anything to say about Bob Barr?

Will the Senate reject Bill Lan Lee? "He was appointed in [an] illegal way," said Lott, also using the time-worn tactic of trying to paint him as a "judicial activist" who supports "quotas."

Nice, Trent -- considering that the right-wing judicial activists you support want to keep your white Southern pals in the CCC affluent and tax-free while stripping kids in poverty from food and medical care, let alone opportunity. It's occurred to more than one person that the reason you don't like Lee is that he isn't lily-white like you.

Spots: First Union, Fox Shows.

Segment two featured journalistic Judas Chris Hitchens and Howard Stern's book agent Judith Regan -- two of the most nauseating figures in journalism and publishing. These two should marry -- or at least have a sleazy affair -- they seem to have so much in common.

Regan bored us in a gossipy description of the "sleazy" negotiations for the Lewinsky book -- an assertion that had us laughing out loud. Takes two to tango, Judy -- our elves tell us some of your tactics make Lucianne Goldberg look like Norman Vincent Peale. The attempt to slam Lewinsky while whitewashing her image as one of the toughest and pushiest operators in the publishing world failed.

Pudgy Chris Hitchens said he did not watch the ABC interview and talked about Monica trashing the President, implying that Lewinsky was given inducements, and talked his own trash about the President's phones being bugged and the ridiculous notion that the President might be blackmailed, as the New York Post incorrectly reported this week

Tony asked if both Hillary and Monica were "enablers."

Oh, please, Tony -- are you trying to see how many people you can trash in one question? How about your acting as an enabler for Linda Tripp -- just what did YOU know about those "party tapes?"

Regan whined about the "two-hour Barbara Walters love-fest." Hitchens picked up on Lott's lead and began spouting about Sudanese bombings and rape.

Regan plugged the Monica's Story parody by "Anonymous" on her Regan Books imprint and called Bill, Hillary and Monica "morally retarded."

What a shill. What a hypocrite. Regan joins the legion of book bozos profiting from the pain of the Clinton and Lewinsky families.

Almost the entire segment was a waste.

Spots: Hammermill ("Great White" Paper -- if it's that white, we're sure Trent Lott uses the stuff), Mead-Johnson (the Boost Bar, fortified with anti-oxidants), Fox shows ("The X Files"), and local spots for Shakespeare in Love, Lymerix anti-Lyme Disease vaccine, and Oce.

Tony turned to the Republicans with their hats flying into the White House ring. The guest -- likely contender John McCain. Shrewish Catherine Cryer mockingly asked McCain about his "political amnesty" proposal concerning GOP infighting, and McCain sounded sane when he said that the GOP needs at this point to refrain from personal attacks, citing 1996 and the attacks on Bob Dole.

He joked with Juan Williams about not wanting to look like a "darling of the press," asking him to attack! Juan asked about McCain's effort being "Quixotic" and challenged McCain to say what the GOP stands for. McCain rattled off the usual litany of issues -- lower taxes, saving Social Security, and so on -- focusing last on foreign policy "embarrassments" like Kosovo.

At least he didn't mention "the children," about whom the GOP care so much -- so long as their parents can afford tony prep schools!

Brit asked McCain about the new China allegations. "The Administration obviously did not take the charges seriously."

Neither did those of Reagan or Bush -- and there ARE diplomatic reasons to leave Congress out of the loop, as Reagan and Bush also did!

McCain also attacked the Department of Justice, citing a New York Times article calling it "hapless and corrupt." We think McCain may be confusing the Reno Justice Department with the Meese Justice Department.

Juan asked McCain about the Log Cabin Republicans and the GOP stand on gay issues in the wake of violent homophobic acts. McCain did not name the Log Cabin Republicans, saying he would embrace "all of the party" -- treading lightly on an egshell issue as do all of his colleagues who want to court support from gay republicans but fear the wrath of the hard right. the answer was not indicative so much of McCain's stand as the overall touchiness of the GOP over gay issues in the wake of Matthew Shepard.

Tony peppered McCain with a number of issues at the end of the segment. Contempt of Congress over the current China flap? McCain supports a full outside investigation. Broaddrick? The President should address the issue himself. Steel quotas? McCain is concerned about protectionism and isolationism in good times -- "if we go back to those days, we will be in very serious trouble." Would he kill the bill that would fuel a trade war? He didn't say, but he might.

Spots: IBM, ADM, Invesco, "Power for Living."

Topic one of the roundtable: the Monica interview. Catherine Cryer and Brit both slammed the interview, and Brit insulted Lewinsky. Juan was closer to the big picture -- it was tied to her book deal. He also was "at a loss" over the nation "celebrating" Monica.

Celebrating? The poll numbers say that the interview HURT Monica.

Cryer decried the political culture being turned into a soap opera -- but will we ever see her blame her owner, Rupert Murdoch, for his part in this? We doubt it.

Juan and Catherine lit into Monica's criticisms of Ken Starr -- and Juan lit into her for having an abortion.

And Brit went back to talking about the "hideously seamy little affair."

Boring.

Spots: ADM, Fox shows.

Tony concluded by making fun of the Interior Department removing the, er, ahem, shall we say "distinguishing characteristic" of a male buffalo from its emblem for a speech made by President Clinton. "After all, who could imagine the President being associated with such a -- thing?"

Cute, Tony. But we'd be more prone to think of Bob Dole. Must be those Pfizer commercials.

This Weak

Like drug addicts unable to shake an old habit, Monica was practically the sole topic of This Weak, but with an incestuous spin -- much mention was made of both the ABC interview with Monica, and the book by This Weak resident loudmouth George Stephanopoulos got heavy play at the opening bumper.

But This Weak put a particularly get-Clinton spin on Monica mania by having as their sole guest Linda Tripp (shameless APJ plug -- have you ordered your "Linda Tripp -- Transexual Judas" bumper sticker yet?).

She started off whining about "Monica's self-justification" and "revisionist history." The big sound-bite that would be much repeated in press reports was tripp's characterization of Monica's comments to Barbara Walters as " fiction, fable, farce and fairy tale." Of course, Linda was in no position to make such a judgment, having not been there in the Oval Office, and her many assertions would remain challenged.

Tripp claimed that "easily 98 percent" of her conversations with Monica had not been documented -- given that we have 20 hours of these dingbats on tape, that means there must be about 980 hours of undocumented conversations.

Real journalists would have nailed Tripp for her assertions. Instead, Tripp got a wave of softball questions from conservative-friendly Sam Donaldson, which gave her the opportunity to claim that Monica "romanticize[d] a tawdry, abusive relationship."

It was just amazing -- Donaldson, who tries to depict himself as a probing, hard-nosed journalist, handling the questionable Tripp with kid gloves. The April Brill's Content was fully justified in giving Donaldson a "thumbs down" as a White House reporter, but this segment was an outrage.

Cokie Roberts asked Linda about her role in the entrapment of Monica at the Ritz-Carlton Hotel, playing some of Charles Ruff's arguments before the Senate impeachment trial. Linda claimed the assertion of a "conspiracy" was wrong -- because Monica was trying to convince Linda to submit a "false affidavit" in "Paula Jones' civil rights suit" as part of what she claims is "a conspiracy orchestrated by the President."

Isn't that the same lame story the Senate -- and most of America -- rejected? But who can blame Linda for making this assertion in the face of contrary evidence and common sense? Linda is still in a heap of potential legal trouble.

How did they treat her, asked Cokie? "Ugh... [her depiction's] are completely removed from reality... They were gracious at all times." Again, how the hell would Linda know? She was not there for the entire time, and only witnessed a small chunk of the action.

Then why has Starr put her under a gag order, asked Cokie? "I don't know, he has nothing to hide."

Again, Linda -- how would you know?

George Will confronted her about Monica dragging Vernon Jordan into the scandal at Linda's suggestion. Linda evaded the point, and in fact claimed that Jordan would be charged with obstruction had she "documented" the situation more carefully.

Another lie from Linda -- Tripp she DID drag Jordan into it, and there is no convincing evidence, let alone anything besides shaky circumstantial slop, of a conspiracy to obstruct justice.

Linda claimed that the President was lying when he said under oath that he did not advise Lewinsky on her affidavit, because Monica told her that they had discussed it. The trouble is that Monica's and Bill's testimony contradicts this scenario -- along with their prior and subsequent actions. Sam, of course, should have pursued this point but did not pursue Linda's implausible scenario.

Linda also claims that Monica told her that a version of the following conversation took place between Monica and Vernon Jordan on the way to her first meeting with Frank Carter:
ML: "Do I tell him the truth or the story?"
VJ: "What choice do I have?"
ML: "The story."
VJ: "Yes."

Cokie asked Linda about her ties to Lucianne Goldberg and the possibility of the book. Linda's reply: "Where's the book?" Cokie should have followed up with questions about whether she was keeping notes for a book, had drafted any sections, and so on.

We believe she was at work on a book that would trash both the Bush and Clinton White House staffs -- and Linda even said that she is now tempted to write a book to "set the record straight."

Sam then played one of her notorious tapes in which a 158 minute conversation between Clinton and a "Juanita" was mentioned. Tripp would not name the Juanita -- but claimed it was not Broaddrick. She claimed it was a "woman with whom the President would have difficulty" in the Paula Jones case.

But she then said "Our use of the name 'Juanita' was irresponsible."

No, Linda -- dragging women into a case and costing them hundreds of thousands of dollars in an effort to create a marketable scandal is irresponsible -- and greedy. Manipulating a young woman and taping 20 hours of conversations to fish for selective evidence is irresponsible -- and in this case, seditious.

And we believe that's exactly what you set out to do.

Linda claimed that Hillary Clinton had "hands-on" involvement in the Travel office firings. We say good for Hillary -- based on the disruptive political activities aimed at hurting the Clintons alleged to have come out of that office -- not to mention the questions which remain about the propriety of Billy Dale's conduct in that office at taxpayer expense.

Tripp ranted about all the dirt she had about Hillary, and how she may expose it in a book. She was trying to look like she was "teasing" a potential book-buying audience, but it sounded more to us like she is trying to politically extort the First Lady with half-baked, unprovable slop. She sure gave the freepers plenty to speculate about.

Tripp continued to insist that she only started documenting her relationship with Monica to "defend" herself against what she sees as her enemies. Interesting that she seems to have stepped on a lot of toes in two White Houses and was renowned as a gossipmonger -- and that the documentation began after Linda was sure that Monica was messing around with the President.

Sam concluded with a question about being back on the job at the Pentagon -- at which point Linda said she was not back at her old job with a "high-visibility" program. "I've been assigned to an agency whose name escapes me at the moment."

That ought to go over real well with her bosses.

Spots for Pfizer (Bob Dole's stealth Viagra spot), DiTec funding, and ABC's "20-20."

The roundtable topic -- the "Week of Monica." It was mostly a bore.

At one point George Will said Monica now has far more self-esteem than she has earned.

Oh, please, George -- you and your pals had it both ways here, despising the "little tart" while using her to smear Clinton. Attacking her right to self-esteem after having her name dragged through the mud by a press out to get Clinton is petty. And after the humiliating way your first wife threw you out of your home, you're the one enjoying far more self-esteem that you're entitled to!

Spots for Merrill Lynch, GE ("Kids need safe places to play" -- guess that rules out all the dioxin dumps GE created), ABC shows and local spots preceded the only substantial segment -- a Linda Douglass taped piece on George W. "BushBaby" Bush Jr.'s nascent campaign. Yes, it's in the exploratory stage, but make no mistake -- he's running, and Linda featured Bush's comments about "welcom[ing] people of faith into the political process."

Oh, please, BushBaby -- as if Pat Robertson and Gary Bauer haven't already insinuated themselves on the process. They'll still be attacking you tomorrow behind your back -- if not to your face in the press.

"We have a real race going here," said Cokie, doing what she does best -- stating the painfully obvious. Bill Kristol mentioned that Uncle Ward Connerly, black Republican from Claifornia, would be pushing legislation to kill affirmative action in Texas tomorrow. Of course, Kristol used the "opposition to preferences" language preferred by his fellow New Moralist fascists to mask the racist nature of the initiative. Cokie said wrongly that the University of Texas had put into place policies similar to those in California and still maintained "good" minority enrollment -- a situation contradicted in news stories out of the Lone Star state and statistics out of the school.

And, of course, there were more spots -- for America's Pharmaceutical Companies, Texaco, GE and a PSA for mentoring --- preceding a short segment to plug George "Li'l Brutus" Stephanopoulos' new Clinton-bashing tome. The fake-good-humor, fake-congratulatory tone of Cokie mentioning the book and George's Newsweek cover photo preceded a Q-and-A to set up George talking about going from idealist to a dispirited haired hand who saw "patterns" that bothered him. George Will made much of how "bad" Hillary looked, and mentioned the tale Steph tells of Mario Cuomo vacillating over an offer to be nominated to the Supreme Court. Kristol: "It's a good read, better than Monica's book."

Our spinterpretation: "It's a good read because George bashes Bill way more than Monica."

Sam: "I suspect they are going to denounce you or call it a bunch of hooey."

Nonsense, Sam -- they'd never give the backstopping little dweeb the pleasure. They'll handle it the same way the Reagans handled their daughter's bitter little penny dreadful -- with the silence it deserves.

We won't be bothering with it ourselves.

A last wave of spots -- for GE, Compaq, Pfizer, Merrill Lynch and the Oscars-- preceded a plug for ABC News programs.

We acted on the overwhelming urge to take a shower.

Face the Nation

Talk about restraint! No Monica. No Tripp. No Broaddrick. The two subjects: Social Security, Medicare and Tax Cuts, and the ethics of selling human eggs.

The guests were Deputy Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers and Senators Ernest Hollings (D-SC), Phil Gramm (R-TX), and Susan Collins (R-ME).

Bob Schieffer asked Gramm about the big one-eighty that the GOP seems to have taken: talking tax cuts one minute, then putting even more of the surplus into Social Security -- what is going on here?

Gramm said "It's suicidal to get into a debate about Social Security." In other words, he's saying it's a lose-lose for the GOP. Gramm supports surpluses invested in individual accounts that would belong to workers, and dedicate those accounts to paying Social Security benefits.

Schieffer asked the money question: "Does that mean that there is not going to be a tax cut this year?"

Gramm: "There is not going to be a net tax cut this year."

This is an issue to watch, particularly with Civil War in the GOP heating up. The hard-righters will whine and moan; the far smarter Senate GOPers are keeping their powder dry for next year. Sit back and watch the fur fly...

Summers said is pleased that the Republicans have come around, but believes there is still a lot to work out. The President's plan "provides for elimination of the national debt in the next 20 years, lengthening the exhaustion day of Social Security trust fund 20-25 more years, and making a substantial contribution to Medicare."

He is not sure whether the Republicans' plan would go quite as far as that. Neither are we -- cleaning up after the debt disaster Reaganomics created may take longer than two decades.

Schieffer asked Hollings if he was satisfied that there is going to be a surplus. Hollings' surprising reply: "No, there is absolutely not any surplus!" He went on to say that they voted not to impeach the President because those were, after all, lies about a personal affair -- but lies about affairs of state could reach the level of impeachment, and the big lie is, as everyone knows, that we do not have a surplus now in Social Security. Hollings cited a $730 billion deficit, and if a surplus happens, Hollings supports a plan to cap the debt at the end of this fiscal year.

Schieffer did something he rarely does -- ask a question that was a dig at the President: "Let's go back to this business of the big lie. This is your President, a Democratic President...."

But Hollings wasn't talking about Clinton: "Wait a minute. It's the Republican party. And it's the media."

Pow! Guilty as charged! Good one, Fritz!

Hollings continued: some newspaper articles last week mentioned that "there is no budget surplus. We are finally bringing you, fellows around. You heard the introductory remarks of Face the Nation talking surplus. Everybody is talking surplus -- there isn't any!"

Schieffer [not giving up]: "When you talk about the big lie here in public and that this is a reason for impeachment, do I understand that you think we ought to consider maybe bringing impeachment charges against the President on this?"

Hollings: "Against the President, the Congress, and the media, yeah!!"

Hoo-boy! You go, Fritz!

They all laughed.

They continued going back and forth about which plan will and which will not save Social Security. Collins said the Administration's plan will not. Summers said the debt is the real burden; under the President's plan the interest payments will be zero 20 years from now, and quotes top economists who believe this plan is fiscally prudent. Gramm said it's a phony trust fund; nothing the President does lowers any burden on taxpayers; on the contrary, the gross debt goes up. Hollings agreed, saying it would be like saying your Visa bill with your MasterCard; you'll still have the debt; and paying off Wall Street now will cause inflation. Summers disagreed. Collins disagreed with his disagreeing. And, mercifully, Schieffer announced, time's up!

The second segment, on ethics of donating eggs for designer babies, was not half as enjoyable -- but CBS is actually years ahead of the curve, since bioethics will be a hot-button issue of the next decade.

The guest was Professor Susan Wolf, Bioethicist, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. The catalyst for discussion: a couple recently ran ads in ivy-league campus newspapers advertising for donors for eggs. The donor should be 5'10 and have a high score on SATs. They offered $50,000. Schieffer called it "a story that gives me the creeps."

Borger: "What is the ethical problem with this?"

Wolf stated that when you start offering $50,000, you are not talking egg donation anymore. You created a market. It's beginning to happen over the web. She mentioned the $3,000-$5,000 suggested by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, and added that "we don't want to cross the line into a market in eggs."

Borger asked about whether there should be "some kind of government regulation on this industry before it skyrockets out of control? Wolf said here probably should be, citing regulations on organ donation and the fact that very few fertility programs actually do genetic testing -- if you are offering $50,000, it is a big incentive for the donor not to mention a genetic problem and not to consider seriously some of the physical and psychological risks that ought to be considered.

Unfortunately, nobody mentioned the fact that the present controversy pits two hard-right issues against each other -- the issue of ultra-deregulation of markets colliding head-on with the ethics of selling human eggs, which many Christian denominations are already edgy about. The controversy also plays into issues of race and class -- aspects which were barely touched on.

Schieffer's final word, on the impending retirement of Sen. Connie Mack (R-FL) and the high cost of getting or returning to Washington, was a barely-veiled scathe aimed at the current campaign system. Schieffer was soft-pedaling -- he should have fired away at the companies that profit most from the high cost of political TV ads -- the owners of the major networks and cable systems.

But his bosses would not like that, now, would they?

John McLaughlin's "McLAUGHin" Group

John McLaughlin, who really ought to get a new shtick, began his program, as always, with the real "Issue One" -- a commercial for General Electric! The plug airs even before McLaughlin and his laughable team start shooting off their mouths. Can General Electric dictate your opinions more brashly?

His "next" Issue One: Poor Little Rich Girl -- a montage of Monica Lewinsky photos aired to the song.

He then quoted liberally from her book -- in a way designed to mock Lewinsky.

Michael Barone, the "genius" at Readers Digest, compares Bill Clinton with George IV, citing what he characterizes as regal "raffishiness." Eleanor Clift said it was embarrassing to read this stuff (because, of course, she hasn't had a real adolescent romance for 40 years). Tony Blankley claimed Clinton was "ruthlessly exploiting her." We laughed -- really, Tony, you must dwell on another planet.

Larry O'Donnell said there is nothing new in this book. McLaughlin opined that Clinton was "doing a disservice" to the American people for not revealing his love from women. Eleanor Clift said she thinks Monica seems pretty generous to Clinton after being dumped like this.

McLaughlin then went into a ridiculous notion: that Monica "saved" the Clinton presidency!!! What a howler! Could he be more of an ignoramus?

John then went into the "job search" issue, quoting Clinton as being "obsessed" with her job search. Oh my!

He also pointed out the conflicts in her statements -- and then blames them on Clinton! Amazing, isn't it?

Eleanor Clift delved into the "fact" that Bill is not comfortable with his sensuousness. Michael Barone, who has no place being on this or any other pundit table (you should read his crap if you don't believe us), talks about Monica and Bill in more vicious terms, and gets a laugh from McLaughlin. Larry O'Donnell, another Brutus Democrat, talks about Clinton's non-targeted lying. "He doesn't know who to lie to." And Clift agrees. Are the very people who owe their positions on The Group to Clinton now turning on him too? They seem to ignore the fact that politicians pile lie upon lie in the course of their duties: to shape policy and law.

Blankley called him a "congenital liar," at which point Clift defended the President. Barone plays the "Cry Wolf" game: "People on Capitol Hill don't believe anything Clinton said."

But we all believe everything THEY say, don't we, Barone.

McLaughlin asked about "the other" Bosnia-related incident -- at which point Blankley "explained" that Monica was giving the President fellatio when he was talking about military movements with some Congressman.

We ask: so what? The Congressman he was talking to had no power to change anything -- it was just another Presidential chore. Why not enjoy oneself while pleasing the Congressman's ego?

Clift attacked Clinton again - this time calling him "a teenager." O'Donnell said "it's demented - but not teen age."

McLaughlin said he thinks Clinton's IQ is 160 or more, but his emotional IQ is lower.

Well, that might well be -- but any psychiatrist will tell you that is true of most people with genius IQs.

McLaughlin wanted to know whether Clinton will be more or less attractive to women now. Clift said "his daughter will not look at him the same way." Barone, true to form, mentions Juanita Broaddrick's fairy tale as if it were true. But McLaughlin pointed out that there was nothing involuntary on Monica's part -- and in doing so he actually defends Clinton and insinuates that the Monica flap is evidence that he is not violent as Juanita claimed.

McLaughlin then asked, if all of this had been known during the trial would it have affected the trial?

Blankley said no, but it would have changed the '96 election.
Clift: no.
Barone: no.
O'Donnell: no, but it would have changed the '96 election.
McLaughlin: no. Blankley then interjected that the Senate voted for their own personal political interests.

Of course, Blankley and O'Donnell could not have been more wrong. The voters would not have believed Monica, Paula, Dolly or Juanita in '96 -- they don't believe them now.

A new GE commercial -- about kids the future of the world depends on and the one million hours they have pledged to help kids. Oh, brother. GE then comes to you as a "financial partner" -- in insurance and investments. What is that all about?

Issue Two: Go, Pat, Go.

McLaughlin plays a clip of Bat Puchanan declaring for President. He reminds us that he beat Dole in New Hampshire in 1996. Puchanan will be George "BushBaby" Bush Jr.'s nemesis, pointed out John. We agree -- and are pleased! Divide the GOP, Puchanan, and lose while you're at it!

O'Donnell said that Buchanans message couldn't be worse. Blankley said he thinks Pat should be a Democrat. McLaughlin then showed Buchanan attacking the White House, referring to it as a "Temple." It was sick but hysterical: "Pull down the curtain on the sorry soap opera." Blankley pointed out near-correctly that the "third" of the nation who hates Clinton will like this statement.

It's more like a fifth, Tony, but we'll let it slide.

Clift: "Buchanan is hardly alone in bashing Clinton" -- and he doesn't run on a shoestring, he spent $35 million in the last election.

McLaughlin wants to know the chances for Pat to win in New Hampshire or place 2nd. Bat news, Pat -- no one gave you more than a 6th out of ten.

It was time for another GE commercial, about "enriched" light bulbs. "Enriched" light bulbs -- are they anything like enriched bread or enriched uranium? The soap-opera GE commercial on life insurance came next.. You know the one: "This curl, this smile, this whining brat...." GE Profile ranges came next. McLaughlin is a veritable supermart for this company! And again GE, this time about how GE lights Degas and Renoirs. That's four GE commercials in a row.

Predictions:

Clift: No Medicare reform this year. Blankley: GOP will stop Clinton's big spending. Huh? Barone and O'Donnell were unintelligible. McLaughlin: Clinton will visit Central American next week.

Big deal!

After one more GE commercial , the show was over. Someone should pull the plug on these windbags -- for good.

Beat the Prezz

We knew we could count on Tim Russert for an almost-all-Monica, all-Clinton-bashing, all-hour show, and he delivered the goods -- save for his "cover story," a meet-the-candidate segment which Russert has dubbed "A moment with Lamar Alexander."

Russert's first non-story was from today's New York Times concerning China stealing atomic secrets from Los Alamos. He did not, until the end of the segment, point out that these secrets were stolen during the Reagan and Bush Administrations. Instead, he tried to confuse, saying that China has stolen all the nuclear secrets form Los Alamos and that the Clinton Administration did not react quickly and decisively enough.

Who does Russert welcome? None other than Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL), the GOP chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee. Shelby claimed that the present story is the worst breach the US has suffered in many years, and that he thinks our security is very lax. He also feels that there is too much openness -- a no-so-veiled shot at Clinton. Tim, GOP buttkisser that he is, asked Shelby what he plans to do; Shelby claimed he has been on top of this for years, but that Clinton hasn't reacted, and now that he is beginning to react it may be too late. In short, Shelby is falsely claiming that Clinton damaged our national security, Thus marking the start of a new round of attacks on the White House -- substance, not scandal.

And Russert egged him on, talking about White House "complicity" with the Chinese. Complicity? Unbelievable. Russert continues by trying to link "Chinese money into the Clinton campaign." This was outright laughable. Sure, Bill Clinton himself sold our nuclear secrets to the Chinese for a few million in campaign cash. Russert should be hanged.

Shelby, usually honest, said, "I certainly hope not." But it was at this point that mention was made that that these so-called secrets -- which anyone can get on the World Wide web -- leaked in the 80's during the Reagan Administration. So the charge really becomes why Clinton didn't punish the Chinese. And Shelby then looks like a wuss himself -- he does not think "most favored nation" status will fail to pass Congress for China.

So what's the story, Tim? Nothing, as usual.

A round of commercials followed. We saw spots for Mass Mutual, Compaq Computer, and ADM (of course), this time talking about NATO and the Warsaw Pact: "What about world food security?" Yeah, right. We are so sure we can count on ADM for that! ADM, sounding so stupid, said that hunger "could" be the biggest security threat of the 21st century. We hate to tell them this, but hunger is always what starts wars. Read your history, Mr. Andreas.

Following the break, Russert then brought Monica to the fore. He interviewed Michael Duffy, who wrote the Time cover story on Monica. Duffy said "It's about her, not anything else."

Wow, how insightful.

Of course, it isn't about her -- it's about her bank account.

Russert said he thinks that Monica should have remorse. This was hilarious -- Russert is Bill Bennett Two. Should have? Monica showed remorse when she apologized during the Barbara Walters interview -- Russert must have been of sitting on the pot at that moment.

And Andrew Morton, author of Monica's Story, said Monica does feel remorse. Russert didn't like this, so he pointed out that the very day Lewinsky met Clinton, they engaged in sex.

Gee, Tim, that never happens with anyone else, does it.

Russert then quoted Senator Lieberman -- a disgrace to his Democratic Party who sold the President down the River for his own gains and who finds himself with diminished stature in the Senate as the result of his ill-timed and ill-advised attack on Clinton -- claiming that Monica and Bill are "sickening." Duffy claimed that Monica was totally unaware of what she was doing. Morton said she treated him as a man, not a President -- that's how this relationship evolved.

Morton then claimed that Monica did not set out to seduce the President. We think this is completely wrong.

In fact, Russert said, "...and she seduced him," completely ignoring what Morton said. Russert has recently shown this same lapse in judgment of the words he chooses to say on Beat the Prezz.

And Russert, swine that he is, kept pushing, this time about the President's judgment. Duffy said Monica thought the White House would have come after her if she hadn't had the dress.

Gee, Duffy, they didn't "come after" anyone else. Yes, they told the truth about Paula Jones - but they didn't "come after" her. If they did, she would be far poorer today.

Duffy said Russert thinks she should see a connection between her silence and her job search. But she doesn't. Duffy and Russert here conspire to make Clinton look like he was buying her silence -- this despite testimony and evidence to the contrary. Morton pointed out that Lewinsky's mother, Marcia Lewis, and her family were trying to get her away from D.C. -- and that Clinton was just one factor.

Although Monica said the conspiracy was Linda Tripp's, claimed Duffy, she doesn't see the reality. Russert, of course, agrees with Duffy. Morton said it seems to him obvious that it was a right-wing conspiracy.

Morton really drove this home -- yet Russert ignored this. Morton said Tripp, to Lewinsky, is "The Devil Incarnate."

Duffy actually said he thinks Lewinsky is stupid and claimed Monica could not tell him what the bond between her and the President was - beyond sex. Again, Duffy lies bald-faced -- she told many people about much more than sex, even if she was deluded.

Morton said Lewinsky does not even believe her instincts anymore.

Russert again showed his disgusting bias, this time saying "Monica Lewinsky is famous for one thing, her sex life; what does this say about our culture?" Disgusting, yes, but also hilarious in that it shows what a transparent Bill Bennett clone Russert is.

What does it say? It says that biased and anti-journalistic talking heads like Russert can get away with character assassination with nobody to stop them.

Morton said that Russert ought to be debating why the public should be funding this garbage -- which a very good question.

Naturally, Russert ignored him.

Duffy insulted Lewinsky again, "hoping" the public wouldn't hear from her any more.

Commercials for ADM, FedEx, Charles Schwab (hoping to get your social security bucks) and a gaggle of NBC commercials at the station break half time, including SCR investments on their New York affiliate.

Russert then begins his "Meet the Contenders" series with -- of all people -- Lamer... er, Lamar Alexander, a man laughed at by most Republicans and hated by many for draining money from their Presidential campaign treasury by running at all.

Everyone knows Alexander is a loser -- yet Russert treats him as a real possibility.

"Who is Lamar Alexander, and why should he be President?" asked Russert.

The answers are "Nobody" and "He shouldn't."

But Lamar goes into his "It's the children, and we must fight terrorism" shtick. Russert asked about Alexander's attack on Bush's "Compassionate Conservative" speech. Alexander called BushBaby's speech "Weasel Words."

Well he's right, but Russert tried to paint Alexander as not being loyal to George Bush Sr. Talk about a weasel -- you will never hear Russert chastise the ex-Clinton Administration people who have turned on him.

Russert, we hope you read this. You are a damned hypocrite.

Russert talked about Ronald Reagan's 11th commandment: "Do not talk badly of another Republican." Alexander pointed out that Reagan ran against a sitting Republican president himself.

Russert asked if BushBaby has this locked up -- as if Alexander had said nothing. He said he will be in the top three in Iowa and NH -- and "then we'll see."

Yes -- then we'll see you drop out!

David Broder asked Lamar about abortion and education. Broder quoted Lamar saying he would abolish the US Department of Education. Lamar admitted he failed at that. He is still in favor of this, but his "method" would be to send the money "back home." He said he also wants "hope scholarships" -- hey, isn't that Bill Clinton's program?

Broder said that few people know that 7,300 people would lose their jobs which would save $250 million -- yet Lamar wants to give $40 billion is tax deductions to the voters. Broder nailed him! Bravo!!

Lamar tried to change the subject. He said he wants to attack teacher tenure, but to pay the good ones more. Broder then said that Lamar wants to make EVERY school a charter school, which would mean that local and state boards of education would also disappear. What a laugh! Lamar said, well, maybe it would take ten years. "The money would go to the parents and then to the schools of their choice." Broder then talked about Lamar's "New World Standards." But Lamar said it is not really a national test. He weaseled around and said that he likes Bill Bennett's idea to have a Silicon Valley Math Test. But he's not for a Washington based test -- Lamar's way of having it both ways, having national standards but not calling them national standards. Broder pointed out how proud Lamar is about stopping the Vanderbilt University ban on blacks at its law school , but now backs a Proposition 209-style national standard on affirmative action in schools. Lamar said programs should always based on need , not on race.

He said he thinks strengthening the family is enough.

Russert brought up David Duke - the Nazi Klansman from Louisiana. Shamefully, or perhaps shamelessly, Lamar failed to put down Duke. Lamar weaseled out of that and said that "if he could find Duke in an election, he would oppose him," but there is no way he could kick Duke out of the Republican Party.

This is true, but Lamar should have said he wished he could. He did say he opposed everything Duke stood for, and this was a cheap shot from Russert. Russert then asked him if he would increase taxes as President. What a stupid question. What do you expect him to say, Tim -- yes? Only Teddy Kennedy would have that kind of guts.

Commercials for The CPA Association, United Airlines, GE "Renoir" Bulbs, Canon Laser Color -- they claim the color of trust is Yellow? -- and the US Post Office (Clinton ought to look into this).

Russert spends the last segment with a panel, starting with polls showing Gore losing to Dole or Bush. And then he and the MTP panel started their favorite team sport -- piling on -- but this time the target was BushBaby!

Russert turned to Wayne Slater in Austin, Texas. Slater said there is little doubt Bush will run, unless he hears a big yawn out there. Russert wants to know what is driving this Bush "boomlet."

It is his name, of course -- nothing else. People supporting him are there because they think he can win -- plain as that.

Slater said that Bush does not like to attack opponents instinctively.

Russert then asked about Bush's past -- a good question. Slater said he thinks it is a big concern. He said he thinks that Bush said he thinks nothing in his past will preclude him from running. Slater knows that "something happened in the past" -- but no ones knows what it is. Bush will say, "I have never cheated on my wife," but he won't say that about drugs, alcohol, etc.

Fred Barnes, a genuine hard-right moron, said these polls may be a problem for Bush because he will run a cautious campaign. And Broder disagreed that Bush is a front runner. We agree -- the polls today mean nothing. Only after the first primaries will Bush's lead -- if he has it -- assure him the nomination.

Russert defended himself pointing out that only 17% of the people are committed to Bush. Barnes pointed out that Bush's record is Texas is not enough to run on. But Barnes said he thinks that Bush will run as a "cultural conservative" and a "Christian."

We sure hope so -- because that will spell certain doom for him.

Slater claimed that Bush Sr. and BushBaby are very different. Gov. Bush is very engaging -- he knows your name, he loves to talk to people. Aides think he is too informal. He is also different than his father because he is more conservative. Bush did what Alexander wants on education in Texas already -- he is not a moderate.

Broder said he thinks that BushBaby has one asset: he has accomplished what he has with a Democrat legislature. That is a metaphor he can carry over from Texas to a national race. Barnes pointed out that Bush also won big with Hispanics and blacks in Texas. This is the most frightening thing for Democrats to our collective mind.

Barnes claimed that even if Bush was a drunk and a drug user that he had "an intervening event" (his Born Again period).

Right, Fred-- and if you believe that, you are certain to buy property in Iraq.

Broder wisely knows that writing off Al Gore too early is nonsense. Barnes tried to link Gore to Clinton ( a big theme with hard-right pundits already) and claimed that will help Bill Bradley.

Russert, the jerk, of course puts in his two cents in support of Bill Bradley.

Slater adds that Bush will now find out if he can take a punch. His wife said that the last year that Bush senior ran was the most miserable year of her life.

Well, gird yourself, Mrs. BushBaby -- you ain't seen nothin' yet!

-- The Editors