Republicans are trying to make a big deal over the lack of support Paula Jones is getting from women's groups. The trouble with Paula Jones is that her suit was going nowhere from 1990 til Clinton became a major candidate for the Democratic nomination. Then somehow she got enough financing for seeking legal remedies. Somehow - with Slick Willie selling his soul to an assortment of sleazy characters including the antiCastro crowd of thugs - he survived this miniscandal. Otherwise we'd be dealing with president Tsongas [or Kerry as either one would have done better than Clinton against Bush]. With Tsongas' record with the Concord Coalition and his agenda for cutting the deficit he could have kept Perot out of the race and his health care proposal was a lot better conceived than the Clinton fiasco. So the Republicans should be thankful that the Paula Jones story never took off.

On the other hand, they should be asking where the peace and justice advocates have been with regards to the abysmal foreign policy. His record for inane military intervention and his total lack of concern for rampant human rights violations are virtually identical to his amoral predecessors, yet evoke nary a response from the human rights groups - at least the well funded ones anyway. In the 1930s they called this sort of dysfunctional policy as appeasement; today they call it "constructive engagement". It didn't work then, it didn't work with South Africa, and it isn't working now. Why aren't the Republicans bringing the disgraceful conduct of the peace and justice people to the eye of the american public? Don't they care about justice?

1/14/97

"http://www.geocities.com">Geocities homepage

"http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/5059">index