Monday, October 19, 1998 --- New York (APJP) -- The good news this Sunday was the near-respite from Lewinskymania... and hardly a mention that documents from the dead-but-zombielike Paula Jones case were to be released this morning.

The better news -- it was a joy to behold the punditocracy squirming in their seats as they discussed the "budget deal" -- a de facto victory for Clinton -- and the growing backlash against the GOP. the continued impeachment "coup," and a do-nothing Congress. These were the real "topic one" this Sunday.

Fox News Sunday

"Who won the budget battle? Whither impeachment hearings? And does the Senate have the stomach for an impeachment trial?" Those were the questions with which Tony Snow opened FNS -- and which hinted at a definitive derailment of the Clinton "sex scandal" as Media Frenzy Topic Number One. Imagine that -- the budget "battle" is STILL at the top of the news.

Tony Snow and the Fox gang made "the budget deal" topic one with their first guest, House Majority Leader Dick Armey (R-TX). Brit Hume, Mara Liasson and Juan Williams were along for the mostly softball questioning.

Juan asked Armey if the budget agreement was "a big win for Democrats." Naturally, Armey answered "No," and listed a litany of reasons the deal was good for the GOP. Among the litany of "good fors," Armey characterized the deal as "a big win for Federalism."

Huh? What's this? We always thought the GOP was for smaller government -- and here was Armey rattling off a litany of "big government" programs! It was hilarious -- Armey practically sounding like a Great Society cheerleader by clumsily linking the GOP vision of "Federalism" to big-time education and defense spending! We're sure hardcore GOP-sters were squirming at Armey's presentation. So much for the Republican agenda.

Tony said "Republicans are mad that there are no big tax cuts." Not quite, Tony -- they're mad as hell that they're Impeachment Coup is off the tracks! Armey: "These things don't always happen when we want them... we certainly will" have a tax cut plan for next year.

And you can count on Clinton and his allies in Congress hobbling the scheme, Dick.

Brit turned the questioning to the GOP's purported "dashed hopes" of big gains in Congress. Armey: "I have known we would have a 12- to 15-seat pick up... We're going to go out and we're going to win" based on their candidates and agenda.

WHAT agenda for these candidates? More 24-7 Lewinsky flap? The GOP has no coherent plan since their "character counts" ad campaigns evaporated -- all we're seeing is the same old negative "Joe Democrat -- so Liberal you'll hurl your lunch"-type spots that nobody believes except for knee-jerk GOP "true believers."

And Armey never addressed the fact that for all the millions the GOP has got socked away, they're saddled with impeachment hearings like an albatross around their neck -- despite Mara and Tony's talk of what "strategy" the GOP would adopt for "all the campaign money [they] have."

Tony asked if it was still possible to generate voter enthusiasm with Presidential sex scandals. Plural.

Armey said he sees "nothing but enthusiasm from our candidates... Thank the Lord I never had to discipline my children for this conduct."

Ridiculous, Dick -- there's not a chance of a ski vacation in Hell that anyone buys this comparison of conduct a parent would "discipline" a kid for and adults engaging in private consensual conduct.

As is inevitable in these appearances, Armey took advantage of an opportunity to rattle off a barrage of GOP "issues": "lower taxes, smaller government, public housing reform to go with welfare reform, and watching the teenage pregnancy rate go down!"

Gee, Dick, you're a bit late: three out of four are points on which the Clinton Administration has delivered the goods, and progress on the fourth has been stymied by GOP attempts to push privateering schemes to "solve" public housing problems.

Hold it -- could Dick have decided to adopt the Clinton agenda? If so, hats off to him for following leadership America wants and supports! He's listening to those polls! No wonder the GOP caved... er, make that cooperated in budget negotiations over the last two weeks.

So there you have it -- Dick Armey, Clinton ally on issues and policy. It'll make his inevitable vote to impeach so much more believable.

Following the break, House Judiciary Committee members Tom Barrett (D-WI) Lindsey Graham (R-SC) were Tony's guests. It was mostly predictable pap -- but it showed how bloodied and worried the GOP has become with just over two weeks to Election Day.

Graham was asked by Tony about whether it would be possible to wrap up hearings by Christmas. Graham discussed "evidence that can be stipulated to;" Barrett characterized his role "as that of a grand juror" and that it's up to the House Judiciary Committee to determine what evidence can indeed be stipulated to -- a certain hint that the Grand Jury testimony itself will be rigorously questioned.

Barrett also mentioned the "relationship between [Starr's] office, the Paula Jones lawsuit and Linda Tripp... that triangle... There are questions arising from his office and his conduct."

Those very questions are proving worrisome for more than a few Republicans on the House Judiciary Committee who face reelection.

Graham tried in vain to stick up for embattled Independent Prosecutor Ken Starr, saying "Three judges have overseen his investigation and he has consulted with Janet Reno."

This only served to remind us that the three judges "overseeing" Starr are right-wing judicial reformers letting Starr get away with nothing short of gross abuse, and that Starr's "consultations" with Janet Reno concealed his discussions with the Paula Jones lawyers -- an outright deception that we feel should prompt Starr's license to practice law to be revoked as a bare minimum sanction. Graham's spin points were so ludicrous we're surprised he even said them -- he came off as far more erudite in House Judiciary Committee pre-inquiry hearings.

Tony asked Graham about the "there is no relationship" "present tense" of comments by Bob Bennett and Clinton; "He made representations to the court that were essentially false," replied Graham. Tell us something we don't know, Lindsey -- like when you and your cronies are going to realize that trying to convince Americans that this rises to crimes of state doesn't work. Tony then followed up with a speculative question about whether "Jane Does" in the Jones case might recant their affidavits. "Let's ask why they made false affidavits," said Graham.

While we're at it, Lindsey, let's ask why Jones contradicted her sworn allegations against then-Governor Clinton on at least five occasions -- under oath.

Will you call Mr. Bennett to testify before the House Judiciary Committee? Graham said they could call Bennett or Bruce Lindsey. We say they do so at their own peril -- especially given some of the questions Democrats could ask about Jones having brought the suit fraudulently in the first place.

Barrett's take on the same question: "I don't think that's necessary." We think Dems may be "daring" the GOP to call them. Tony asked how that is "dragging out hearings when calling Starr is not?" Barrett said he doesn't know if the GOP actually wants to call Bennett, then reiterated the triangle pattern, with Tripp acting "as an agent for him and for Paula Jones."

Tony, asked if the committee had any White House surveillance videos; Barrett said he didn't think so, and Graham said "I don't have those details..." then deflected: "This won't be a Kenneth Starr trial."

We beg to differ -- no matter how much you and the GOP-OIC-New Moralist spin machine may say to the contrary.

Following one of those irritating ADM commercials featuring the once-great David Brinkley, Tony Snow and Brit Hume welcomed the always-entertaining Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) in the sort of up-tempo, rapid-fire segment that has distinguished FNS from the competition but that we haven't seen in well over a month. All three were in overdrive -- especially Hatch, who looked and sounded like he'd downed half a dozen NoDoz.

"Why are Democrats so concerned about Ken Starr?" asked Tony. Because, said Orrin, Starr issued a "thorough" report exposing the "lies" of the Administration. "...I think Ken Starr will acquit himself very well... I think if the American people could see him in action..."

If he's not acquitted, Orrin, he'll be pardoned by the next GOP President -- that is, if there ever is another one. And the American people have seen him in action for four years, usually in his driveway blathering about "looking for the truth" while holding a bag of garbage. That should tell anyone about all they need to know.

Brit asked Orrin about "constructive " things Clinton could do; Orrin replied, "He needs to get that Paula Jones case behind him.... Everyone knows he lied in the Paula Jones case, everyone knows he lied in the Gennifer Flowers case..."

WHAT Gennifer Flowers "case"? She's made all sorts of claims -- and has been proven a liar on more than one occasion.

"He has spent 155 days outside of the White House... at least 51 fund-raisers.... and then he blames the Congress for doing nothing." Well, Orrin, Clinton has every right to raise money for his party and Democrat candidates -- as Bush and Reagan before him did. And it doesn't matter how many days he's out of the White House, how many fund-raisers he's at -- he's still the full-time President, as was then-fundraiser-in-chief Reagan (when he wasn't busy napping through Cabinet meeting).

Is Clinton a do-nothing President? "You've got that right."

Yeah, Orrin -- but only because you and Congress don't want to act on his agenda, one which most Americans support.

Orrin made his Karnak-like forecast of the President's destiny: "I think he will be impeached in the House [but] I don't know of one Democrat [in the Senate] who will vote for impeachment."

Brit Hume got in his licks against the President while Tony and Orrin were talking about what Clinton said back in 1973 about the Nixon impeachment, saying "but he was a little kid back then, cut him a little slack." True, Brit -- only back in '73 we were talking about subversion of Constitutional process and high crimes of state, something not happening in this case. And Americans generally do cut slack to people who cheat on their spouses -- especially when they are apologetic and contrite.

Brit went on to imply that Clinton committed "...crimes for which a citizen would be convicted would not be allowed to vote." But that's about all Brit could get away with this week -- much of Hume's venom stems from obvious frustration over the public's rebellion from pundits and "New Moralist" prognosticators.

Hatch touched on the murder of Matthew Shepard and hate crime legislation: "You might have double jeopardy concerns -- states can solve hate crimes without hate crime legislation." Maybe -- but specific statutes would give state law enforcement organizations a stronger weapon to fight the rising tide of vicious hate crimes, including murder.

Tony asked Orrin about the possibility that James Hormel may receive a recess appointment: "This Administration has used recess appointments far too much."

Right again: far too much for the comfort of Asian-bashing Repubsters who tried to block Bill Lan Lee and looked like bigots. Far too much for your gay-bashing pals in the Senate who are promoting the politics of hate using Hormel.

Panel time began with one of those questionable "Fox Opinion Dynamics" polls putting Clinton's job approval at 41% -- and Gingrich's at 42%. Among whom, we ask?

Mara was first to make a forecast: based on these and "other polls," "even though the President had a great week it will not have a big effect on the elections... Congress used to be reviled, now their approvals are up."

What polls? Methinks Mara is talking through her hat. Job approval on Congress in DOWN in a number of polls.

Juan asserted that if this becomes a Lewinsky referendum, you will see a lot of Democrats turn out.

And we agree

Brit said to Juan that Clinton "lied and admitted it... that's a limb and you're out on it."

So he lied about his private life. Big deal -- YOU are the one out on a limb making broad assertions of "perjury" and "obstruction of justice" that wouldn't hold water in a lower court, let alone the court of public opinion.

Juan's reply to Brit -- "This is an issue that's percolating... we are intent on saying that the President lied [but the perception is] he is being unfairly prosecuted."

Brit later asked even if Starr were "in cahoots" with Tripp and the Jones lawyers, does this mean that the President didn't do this?

No, Brit... but that's not the question: how will the public respond to the partisan, zealous and possibly criminal conduct of Starr? Even Mara acknowledged serious, legitimate questions about Ken Starr's conflicts of interest.

The McLaughlin Group

John McLaughlin opened his show by pointing out that the GOP "caved" rather than conquered on the budget deal made last week.

They sure did!

No tax breaks, barrels of pork and a few roads were all they got from the White House -- save a too-high portion doled out to the Pentagon.

Pat Buchanan said that the GOP has a serious problem: "They gave the IMF the money for tax cuts." Yes, Pat, we "feel" your protectionist pain!

Eleanor Clift said that the GOP forgot that the President has more credibility than they do on important issues like education.

Tony Blankley said each side "took little swords to make into little ploughshares" that they will use at home during election week.

Lawrence O'Donnell said he is stunned that the GOP did not take credit for the fact that the President only got $1 billion out of the $500 billion appropriated; this, he said, was a great victory for the Republicans -- and remember, O'Donnell is a Democrat! He said this to point out that Republicans in fact have no mastery of the ability to project this as a victory -- a real victory over "write a check" government.

McLaughlin asked whether negotiations with the President are as difficult as they say; Blankley pointed out that the President changes his deals when the other side turns its back.

Buchanan said the GOP gave up its one "core" issue -- tax cuts.

And Buchanan is right -- because the only thing Republicans have ever stood for is giving away money to the well-off at the expense of those who need good government to provide them with a safety net.

"Lobbying Interruptus!" said McLaughlin at the top of the next segment. He claimed that the President and the First Lady have not stopped lobbying Democrat ideals and prevention of impeachment, except for a "time out" for a visit from Peruvian President Fujimori.

Blankley made a remark that the chancellors of the world should send pretty young women to negotiate with the President -- this after McLaughlin showed the President ogling a pretty woman at the reception in super-slo-motion.

He showed it a second time -- and even WE laughed as the President gave the woman a thrice-over. It was a riot -- and yes, she was voluptuous. That's our guy! You can bet your bottom dollar that John, Pat, Larry and Tony were also eyeballing the fully cantilevered and curvaceous diplo-babe as Eleanor chortled at the testosterone-tinged spectacle.

McLaughlin then showed a commercial from Wendell Young, a Democrat, which brings up the Lewinsky scandal in his ads -- quite emphatically -- and then said that Republicans are spending all their time on Lewinsky and NOT on the true concerns of voters.

Blankley said he would not risk a commercial like this. McLaughlin called him high-minded, saying that you duck the issue by saying I can't talk about it because I have to vote on it. Good Lord -- now McLaughlin thinks he's a campaign strategist!

Buchanan said Democrats should say, "I am not going to fool around with this Lewinsky thing -- I'm going to get down to business," and that's just what they are doing.

Then McLaughlin showed an attack campaign against Rick White of Seattle because he voted to impeach the President in the House. The ad, run by opponent Inslee, is very good -- and consistent with what most of the nation thinks. This is seconded by the entire panel.

Is the McLaughlin Group now pro-Democrat?

Larry said the Democrats have nothing else as a rationale to run these Lewinsky ads. McLaughlin said these candidates are appealing to the die-hards to make them turn out.

But he is wrong. These type of ads are run to draw in the Democratic switchers --- the NON-die-hard Democrats! This referendum is not on Clinton's conduct, but on the impeachment, said Clift.

McLaughlin then showed Democrat unity theme speeches. He asked "Is the election a referendum on Clinton?"

Buchanan said yes, and added it is also asking "Do you want a change?"

Clift said people like Paris Glendenning didn't want Clinton around a few weeks ago --but Glendenning ran back to Clinton when the 80% black vote in the greater Baltimore area began to desert him.

Predictions were next: He asked how many Republicans will be in the Senate after November. The answers ranged from 58 to 60 which is a plus 3 of plus 5.

They are all wrong: it will be a plus 2 for the GOP because Barbara Boxer will pull it out.

And that was it for McLaughlin.

This Week

The opening now mentions "Featuring George Will" -- with an incredibly sinister shot of old George! He must have had one of his notorious migraines...

Richard Holbrooke was the unscheduled first guest. Sam and Cokie kept trying to lay traps for Holbrooke by bringing up strawmen like "extended deadlines," ground observers as "hostages of Milosevic" and claims that "NATO blinked." Holbrooke correctly detailed the complexity of the situation, which is neither cut-ands-dried nor welcoming of an easy solution, but Sam and Cokie kept cutting off his answers with terse comments that always began with a spit out "But -- but --..." Holbrooke gave lie to the assertion that NATO blinked, saying that in fact NATO was keeping the trigger cocked -- a straightforward message to Milosevic. Holbrooke also pointed out some AC reportage which gave lie to the assertions of This Week's naysaying cohosts.

George asked why Milosevic should believe you -- you didn't follow through on threats to Saddam? Holbrooke made Will look the blustering idiot, replying, "This is not Iraq; the fact that I was involved gives this real credibility and a false comparison with Iraq is meaningless." Will then raised the "verifiers as hostages" spin point, and Holbrooke hit back: "Not one American soldier in Bosnia has been shot at since Dayton." He did, however, point out something most of the press has been loath to mention -- that NATO and ground verifiers will also be eyeballing the Kosovo Liberation Army, who may well pose a larger short-term threat to NATO forces.

Guest number two was their original "top-billing" guest: ex-Vice President and Presidential wanna-be Dan Quayle, who showed his New Moralist emperor's clothes throughout -- and left us grasping for the Pepto when we weren't laughing at his ghostwritten, stale sound-bite replies, such as: "We don't like the fact that there are not tax cuts. We think that the spending has gone up way too much... There are a lot of Republicans in this town -- and more importantly outside the Beltway -- that are very disappointed that tax cuts were not a part of this budget agreement." Of course, Republicans are as apt to raise spending as Democrats. We wonder if Dan -- who bears more than a passing resemblance to Jimmy the Idiot Boy from a Nickelodeon network cartoon series -- knows this fact at all. But one thing's for sure -- expect one of Quayle's top issues to be tax cuts -- then ask yourself who'll really get them.

When Dan was asked "Why no tax cut?" he replied "Good question... we need a tax-cutting Congress." Not much later he gushed over "Republicans [having] to get back on message and they will. They put $8 billion back into defense spending."

Well, gee, Dan, doesn't that amount to $8 billion in lost tax cuts? We laughed.

Will also wrapped himself in the Kristol cloak of virtue when he asked "Do you blame Americans for continuing to support the President?"

Quayle: "There is a disconnect between the polls and the public... 68%? I don't believe that either!" Then you are in denial, Dan, living in a world where you blame the public for not loathing or hating the President the way you and you Moral Wehrmacht do. Maybe it's because the President is trying to stick up for the small guy while the Christian-Taliban GOP and Newt Gingrich do their best to rip up social safety nets and make the world safe for brokerages to make billions from risky Social Security stock schemes.

George was trying to goad Dan into further "blaming" the public: "Are they culpable? Are they morally lax?"

They just don't get it -- the public can se a trumped-up scandal involving what looks to be extorted perjury, and knows that to be a bigger sin against God, the Constitution and their fellow citizens than any consensual acts the President may have been involved in.

Quayle blamed the "reasonable prosperity" the country is presently in for deflecting from moral outrage, adding "the day of reckoning for Bill Clinton is coming."

Right. He'll be censured, America will move on, and you will whine and moan about "where's the outrage?" You'll also look like a fool, because America knows where the outrages were committed: in the chambers of Judge David Sentelle, the offices of a half-dozen ultra-right lawyers, the home of Linda Tripp, and the Office of Independent Counsel.

Where, Dan, is YOUR outrage at Starr setting up himself as a de facto fourth branch of government? You used to rail against "big government" when you were VP -- now you lend credence to it!

Here's another one from Dan: "Bill Clinton has lied under oath. Lying under oath is perjury. Perjury is a felony."

None out of three, Dan! Bill Clinton admits to having given misleading answers because the Jones lawyers backed themselves into the wrong definition of sex. Lying under oath is NOT perjury unless certain criteria are met -- and we're willing to bet you a potatoe -- er, potato -- that Clinton's answers wouldn't stand up in court as perjury. Third, not all perjury is a felony.

Cokie pointed out that "The more Republicans talk about [the Big Lewinsky,] the more they fall behind in the polls."

Dan's soundbite-ready answer: "We won't win on the President's problems. We'll win on what we've done."

Okay, Jimmy, what have Republicans done in this Congress? Just about NOTHING! "That's right, voters, I did NOTHING! Re-elect me and my GOP pals and we'll make darned sure you get two more years of PURE, UNADULTERATED NOTHING!"

Sounds like a winning strategy to us, Dan.

How desperate are Republicans? George asked Dan if a gain of 2 in the Senate and 8 in the House a victory?

Gee, George, what happened to those bold assertions of "20 or 30" that your fellow New Moralists were flogging a month ago? They went up in a puff of Lewinsky!

Dan echoed the lowered expectations: "That's what they're talking about... 8 is a benchmark."

Sam asked Dan where he stood on his decision to run; Dan replied that he hadn't decided but would "be out campaigning this year." Campaigning sort of implies that you're running whether or not you've announced, doesn't it, Dan?

The following segment featured beleaguered Illinois Senator Carol Moseley-Braun, whom Sam characterized accurately as "behind and must fight for her political life... buffeted by a barrage of ethical accusations." Sam asked Moseley-Braun about the commercial in which she admitted to "making mistakes" -- what mistakes specifically? MB pointed out the fact that she had been subjected to exceptional scrutiny, and took the opportunity to light into her opponent: "[He] has never had to speak about any of the issues [and] has refused to answer Tribune questionnaire." Sam asked again, "Which mistakes?" MB shot back "We could have an entire show about all of the stuff thrown at me."

George Will couldn't resist turning back to Monica Lewinsky, asking MB "Is it troubling to feminists?" MB pointed out that while it raises issues of sex harassment, Mr. Starr's report is about sex.

Cokie concluded the segment by mentioning MB was down 30 points "in the poll" -- but didn't mention which one. MB expressed her gratitude to the First Lady for doing a commercial for her campaign, then turned to issues: "Republicans crowed about killing school construction [and] most of my issues have not gotten out because of the [Lewinsky] din... People are beginning to understand that peephole politics of destruction is the way the game is played these days so they won't have to discuss [issues]."

We don't think the New Moralists in the GOP want to face that truth, Carol.

The roundtable was tiresome, save Sam's Reynaudesque astonishment: "Could you imagine -- the President coming out a hero within his party." Sam couldn't hide his indignance over the fact that Clinton is back on the roost in a big way.

But WE were astonished to actually agree with Sam on one point in the budget agreement that is close to his heart: "$2 billion for cancer research, up from $800 million... Hats off to you, thanks!"

George Will had us rolling on the floor when he made mention of the "2YK computer problem." Yes, "2YK." We bet he still uses an IBM Selectric.

And panelist and New Moralist Ayatollah Bill Kristol commented on Clinton's impeachment travails: "Better to get rid or clear him -- not censure."

Don't make us laugh, Kristol -- you want to see him cleared about as much as you want public education thoroughly funded, the social safety net preserved, and a national health care plan.

George Stephanopoulos was gleeful in pointing out "Quayle has set the bar at 8, not 15 or 16." So were we -- and if the tide of discontent continues to rise, the GOP will be lucky not to lose seats. George Will pointed out that "Republicans have a lot of money -- but so did Ford when they tried to sell the Edsel." Whoa! We were slack-jawed at that comparison! Will may not be "losing his religion," but he sounded as dour about the near-term for the GOP as a number of other right-leaning pundits this week. About all that Bill Kristol could add was a disingenuously upbeat "Republicans will do well."

And pigs will sprout wings and fly, Bill. Backlash is a bitch...

Meet the Press

Thus far, Sunday morning pundits from Tony Snow to John McLaughlin seemed to have become Clinton supporters overnight! Nothing in the three shows seemed to indicate that Republicans will fare well during their Impeachment Coup-cum-Witch-Hunt -- nor do as well in the elections as expected and predicted by the pundits for the last few months.

Then came Tim Russert, television's Dean of Clinton-Bashers. What did he have to say?

"What fate awaits the Congress in November?" Russert asked of RNC Chairman Jim Nicholson and Clinton staffer Paul Begala. Nicholson said we are going to "sweep all across the board." Begala said he would rather "affect elections than make predictions." He said Americans will ask themselves whether they want "progress or partisanship."

Nicholson said, "We got in in 1995 and we have changed things. We balanced the budget, cut welfare, and gave 5 million people, kids, health care."

Of course, he forgot about the 40 million people, including kids, that the GOP ignored and who still have no health care.

Russert pointed out that even Republicans are attacking the GOP; he quoted two prominent Republicans as saying the party has abandoned all they stood for and are simply trying to preserve their seats. Nicholson said he would agree on the tax cut issues, but then went on to list a bunch of things Republicans accomplished -- basically nothing.

Begala said the $500-per-child "tax cut" is ridiculous. The $1 trillion tax cut the GOP was trying to push would have destroyed the President's efforts to protect Social Security and made Nicholson look foolish.

Russert then asked why the President has "cost" the Democrats so much. Begala said the President has actually brought the Democrats back from the abyss that started before his terms.

Begala is right -- Clinton as a New Democrat has moved the party to the right and this will show in the polls in 2000. 1998 is probably too early.

Nicholson added that when Clinton became president there were 33 GOP-controlled state legislatures and now there are 48. He is right -- and this is a great danger for the Democrats down the line as GOP governors line up to run for President. They will, ipso facto, present a greater depth of experience for the nation as a whole. The Democrats must pay more attention to state races -- not only for this reason but for what Republican-dominated state assemblies could do to redistrict to Democratic disadvantage!

Russert asked if November will be a referendum on the President. Nicholson said he is not afraid of a backlash -- and then laughably claimed that Republicans are not talking about Clinton because they RESPECT the constitution.

Wrong: they are not talking about it because they are afraid and ashamed of what they've done.

Russert asked about certain Democrats distancing themselves from the President. He quotes Senator Dodd -- past Chairman of the DNC -- calling Clinton an "idiot." Well, shame on him.

Begala had little to say but rhyme and verse.

Russert asked how the country gets over the president "lying" to them, as we grasped for an airsickness bag. Right, Russert -- as if they cared. Begala said "they" must ask if this is enough to throw a man out of the White House. He then brings up Gingrich's 13 charged felonies. Good move, Paul -- but you also should have pointed out that only about 25% of the country has anything to "get over."

Nicholson said that the President showed real weaknesses and brought up the issue of a few naval officers who are circulating a petition about the Presidents morals.

Gee, wonder if they'll be promoted? We wonder also, which Republican General put them up to it?

Nicholson said the people want this behind them, but that the DEMOCRATS are delaying it. We laughed out loud. That takes the cake!

Russert brought up Paula Jones: will he settle? Begala said he is not advising him on that issue. "I would rather not comment."

Russert turned to Nicholson and asked if the President settles ,will it be a tacit admission of guilt? Nicholson said generally yes.

We agree -- and urge the President NOT to settle. It is quite obvious that Jones and her team were part of an entrapment strategy designed by Ken Starr and his "funders."

Russert showed a clip from Don Imus's MSNBC show on which Paul Begala told Imus he shaved his beard because he thought "someone at the White House should come clean with the American people." Heh heh heh....

Following the break, Russert welcomed none other than "Minister" Louis Farrakhan.

Farrakhan wrote a letter to Clinton this month and it said, in part, that America is in "prophecy" -- in a position that Egypt had with God -- so it really doesn't mean anything about who wins the elections. He went on to say that if the President is impeached, then a trial must take place, and then of course he could be turned out of office. But the very man that this country has dogged could be THE SAVIOR of this nation!

Hoo boy -- even we won't go that far.

But Farrakhan isn't nuts -- he's trying to mobilize the black community to get out and support Clinton. Of course, Farrakhan is so psychotic that later in this interview he attacks Clinton mercilessly.

Farrakhan isn't sure why blacks support Clinton because he has cost them a lot. But, he says, when they see the President brought before the world and humiliated, blacks "have a sense of what this is and think is he being wickedly and viciously mistreated."

Russert pushed him on the president's "morality." Farrakhan said that if every President was put under the microscope it would show that Washington was a slaveholder -- and others were murderers, fathers of bastard children, and worse.

Russert then read a statement of Farrakhan's which claims that Monica Lewinsky was a Zionist "plant" to weaken Clinton in his quest to give the PLO more land in the Israeli peace negotiations. Ha, ha, haha - that is a good one! Lewinsky and Lucianne Goldberg are the Jews, he means. We are not sure that Goldberg herself is Jewish.

Farrakhan asked why we now have to publicize the weakness of the President when this was never done before? A good question. He then referred to the Biblical story of Jonah and how he was the only one to save his city. The King of Minovah came out in sackcloth and ashes to save the city. "Unless the President atones and America atones," it will not be saved.

Well, that's a good one, but we were surprised that he didn't point out that Lucianne Goldberg's son is named Jonah!

Farrakhan then began a weird rant about Jews that finance the NAACP and the fact that they "control" black intelligentsia inordinately. Russert asked why he only singles out Jews; Farrakhan claims "they" control the media, put blacks in "degrading" roles, "control" the record industry (yeah -- tell that to Herr Thomas Middelhoff at Bertelsmann/RCA) and put us before the world as "clowns and purveyors of filth."

Of course, nothing could be further from the truth. And hence Farrakhan emerges looking like a racist fool himself -- as usual.

Farrakhan called the President a terrorist for bombing the Sudanese "pharmaceutical plant."

Um, hold it, Lou -- how can he then be the Messiah as he claimed only moments before?

Oy veh!

Farrakhan said he would not support Jesse Jackson for President.

"Support him for what? He knows he cannot win an election.... He will gather Blacks and then turn them over to Gore.... Don't play with us, let us go!"

Farrakhan appointed Mohammed Aziz, who was convicted of murdering Malcolm X, to run one of his mosques and his security. Farrakhan said Aziz was convicted wrongly and that he feels he is justified. This is what's wrong with America, he added: you keep on paying for your crime even after you have served your time.

Farrakhan said advice on elections -- to vote for Satan or Lucifer -- is a waste of time. "Why should we vote for either one?" Russert asked if he is calling for a separate Black state.

"We have to do something," he answered.

Russert asked whether there will be another million man march. Farrakhan said, "God willing, in 2000 there will be another march, this time with wives and children in order to strengthen the family."

We assume that means a 2.8 million person march.

Finally, Russert welcomed moron David Maraniss, who wrote an entire book -- "The Clinton Enigma" -- based on the August 17th "Clinton admission speech."

Maraniss talked about the president's weakness in admitting mistakes -- then said that that Clinton has always been late and that shows something.

What, we ask? But he doesn't answer this.

He admitted there is nothing evil in these features. He talked about the President's parsing of words. Wow -- how insightful. Maraniss claimed that when he defends himself "he does it like a Jesuit" -- then hurries to say "when a Jesuit thinks he is wrongly accused."

Russert then shows Maraniss a letter Clinton wrote to Colonel Holmes (on his draft dodging issue) and about how he may have misled him. "I think his strongest weakness has been his efforts to conceal, " chirps Maraniss.

Maraniss said that Clinton's admission that he had a "lapse of judgment" was not truthful because he knew his sexual involvements would cause him trouble. Even as far back as 1988 he stopped his announcement for President when his friends gathered around him and pointed out his sexual history. But this was right after the Gary Hart fiasco.

We can only assume that Maraniss thinks that Clinton should apologize for every transgression on world television that evening.

Maraniss explained that the "forces of darkness and light" are always in Clinton. Well -- what a deep conclusion! Maybe David should turn to writing New Agey "self-help" books based on his erudite insights into Clinton.

Maraniss said it was surprising to him not that he misled the First Lady but that he could have misled her. Maraniss claimed that Hillary chooses to believe what Clinton tells her because she knew what she was getting into.

Gee, that's an original position for a wife who loves her husband or her current lifestyle. Of course, no other women does this.

"The notion of her leaving him would be to leave herself" moans Maraniss -- well that's poetic, and partially true. But it rises far above Maraniss's ability to understand basic human nature or the simple fact that most people suffer from enigmatic behavior, not to mention the fact that many women stay with men who are imperfect within marriage -- and so, parenthetically, do many men.

Maraniss makes much of the President saying to him personally that he "has to believe in life after death... because he needs a second chance."

It seems to us that Maraniss feels that most others don't need this second chance.

Maraniss said he doesn't think the President will change his behavior -- using Custer as an example.

Tee-hee.

Maraniss, like so many others, is simply feeding at the Clinton trough, publishing a "biography" much too early -- if only to get the jump on other historians.

We urge you not to bother with the Maraniss joke of a biography -- unless, of course, you are a Republican zealot. But then, you've probably ordered yours already.

And that ended the show. Remember -- if it's Sunday, it's the Reverend Brother Russert Witch-Hunt and Gospel Hour! Amen!!

One final comment: look at Meet the Press today. Look at the programs that preceded it.

Then stop and ask yourself: are the pundits trying to save themselves now that it seems the President might just "get away" with being human?

You bet they are.

Missing in Action

There was little or passing mention of the murder of Matthew Shepard on the big network shows; Wolf Blitzer, however, led with this story and an interview with Attorney General Janet Reno, who articulately advocated stronger hate crime statutes. Get Blitzer away from the Lewinsky flap and the guy asks some pretty thoughtful and probing questions.

Also meriting little mention: the Maryland-based Middle East Summit, continued economic turbulence and volatile stock and currency markets, and the complexity of the Kosovo situation (outside of the Holbrooke appearance on This Week).