[Marxism] Re: Rather's facts on Bush were true, documents not provenforgeries

Fred Feldman ffeldman at bellatlantic.net
Mon Mar 14 12:34:29 MST 2005

Oh please. He *did* inhale. And oral sex is sex.


Carlos! How in heaven's name do you know that he inhaled?  Has any one
who was there ever said that he did?

I will tell you why I knew that it was POSSIBLE that he didn't.
Because, for what reason I don't know, I have never been able to inhale
smoke.  Never.

I tried to start smoking when I was a teenager, but I kept doubling up
in agony. Friends tried to show me how to safely inhale but to no avail.

Finally, I gave up smoking.  And this no doubt helped the US SWP's
antidrug policy to pretty much become second nature without much
internal conflict.

Well, it happens to now be an established fact that Clinton, for medical
reasons, COULD NOT INHALE. Its true that he tried to describe it in
terms that suggested some kind of moral choice, which is idiotic.

I don't want to start one of those grisly list discussions on sexual
mores, that go on forever.
But when I was young, there was absolutely no doubt in my generation
that "having sex" was "going all the way" or the reproductive act, with
or without birth control devices.  Any thing else was making out --
light, medium or heavy.  So if you were challenged by your parents, one
could reply "I did not have sex with that woman!" and do so with iron
moral conviction.

I would also add that this is still the standard by which women are held
to be and, for the most part, consider themselves to be virgins.

Of course, a lot of things have changed but I think a lot of basically
heterosexual youth still use variants of this stance.  It's a good
defensive posture, but also one that was effective because it was
believed.  By the way, of course, most of us also, I admit, did not
believe that gays and lesbians were really "having sex." This also gave
some leeway for some to wander from the straight and narrow and
experiment.  You were still just "making out," not changing your basic

Okay, a lot of things have changed. The legitimizing of gay sex changed
the standards in one way. And the sickening witch-hunt of the Starr gang
also contributed to changing them in the same direction, in an uglier

But I am convinced that Clinton (who sometimes seems a bit adolescent in
his outlook to me) believed what he said, when he responded, "I did not
have sex with that woman." I think he would have passed a lie-detector
test at that moment. And millions of young people agreed with him -- and
they did not learn it from him as right wing morality mongers claim.  It
was already a fundamental part of their belief system.

To get Clinton to admit he had had sex, the Starr inquisitors had to
come up with a definition of having sex which embraces a quite gigantic
scope of human contact.

For heterosexual youth, at least but not exclusively, everything but
"having sex is "making out" or whatever the term is today.  

The acceptance of these as the famous "Clinton lies," and Whitewater as
a high point of government corruption (well, at least that coverup was
partly defeated), was part of the reactionary role of the right-wing
Starr witch-hunt.
Fred Feldman

More information about the Marxism mailing list