Hillary and the “sex rumors”

Oh, yikes. Mickey Kaus goes there:

The trouble for Hillary is that when it comes to sex rumors she and her husband (unlike, say, John Edwards and his wife) have no credibility. They threw that away when the philandering charges they righteously denounced in 1992 and 1998 turned out to be basically true.

This is really getting to be too much, isn’t it? Look, I used to describe my political positioning as “somewhat to the right of Attila”, but even in those days, the Clinton sexual peccadillos just never bothered me much. I’ve always considered myself to be very, very lucky in that I found the perfect woman for me very early on (and wonder of wonders, she seems to think I’m OK too), but I’ve never given much thought to what other married people do under their own roof, or others. That it was the American people’s roof is what bothered me, not the sordid details of the situation — And even then, knowing what I know about human nature, I was more surprised that the Lewinsky incident ever saw the light of day than I was that it ever happened.

Let’s be honest for a minute here. Does anyone really think that the folks who might vote for Hillary Clinton give one smidgen of a damn about her sexuality, or the terms of her relationship with her husband? Considering everything that’s happened over the last seven years? Does anyone think the Republican party is in any position to cast slings and arrows about sexual matters after Mark Foley and Larry Craig?

I’d a damn sight rather vote for someone like Clinton, lesbian tendencies or no, than John by-God Edwards, who long ago mastered the art of telling people exactly what they want to hear, then taking no action whatsoever on it as long as his goal of enriching and glorifying John by-God Edwards was reached. And if you’re hearing that from me, you’d best stop and think about the inroads Mrs. Clinton has made with conservatives.

via you-know-who