-=> On 01-27-98  20:23, John Sampson did testify and affirm <=-
-=> to Tom Enright concerning Dufus' Waterloo? <=-
 
 TE> Sorry to delete the rest of your post, it was well written. 
 TE> What has surprised me is the depth of the media and public
 TE> reaction.  Why now?  Why this?  We all know that Clinton
 TE> has done as much or worse in the past.  Was this simply the
 TE> last straw or does the *perceived* vulnerability (youth) of
 TE> the girl have a bearing? 
 JS> Why now? Because as U.S. News and World Report said, the
 JS> American people in  effect said we had a deal. We would not
 JS> look at his past as long as he  behaved in the future. He
 JS> breached his end of the bargain.  This is no B.S.  This is
 JS> what was printed in the above publication. 
I think that's an accurate point. The Dufus made an
implicit promise in that 1992 Superbowl 60 Minutes
appearance that all such activities were behind him. 
 JS> Also, the girl involved was 21 years old, not that much
 JS> older than Chelsea.  Ergo, it might have been akin to
 JS> incest.
Let us also not ignore the ethical responsibilities
inherent in the mentor-student or teacher-pupil
relationship. Even in most liberal institutions, that
relationship still remains sacrosanct. 
 JS> Furthermore, this was yet another girl that worked for him
 JS> as opposed to a woman he met outside the sphere of the
 JS> White House. 
If all of those DI's must be court-martialed for their
relationship - in many cases, consensual - with trainees,
then how can their Commander-in-Chief not be held to the
same standard? 
... He who adds not to his learning diminishes it.  [The Talmud]
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20
--- PCBoard (R) v15.22/5
---------------