I recently read a post elsewhere about the recent Ed Klein book on the Clintons and its coverage on The Drudge Report. My first thought is that we need a new expression, parallel to “that dog won’t hunt”, for situations where the issue has completely polarized. The post in question was making a big deal about some photos of Clinton interacting with attractive women not his wife and how the images were misleading. All I could think was, even if the images were 100% dead on and correct, they still would be pointless. Who, exactly, is going to care or more importantly change their opinion on former President Clinton and Senator Clinton even if Drudge published soft core porn of Bill Clinton’s infidelity?
On the other hand, the progressive partisans in some sense have to react with outrage because of their “it’s all about the sex” defense of Clinton during the impeachment. Having failed to address any of the substantive complaints about the Clinton Administration they are stuck denying or defending Clinton’s amatory adventures and claims thereof. And so the poster had to defend Clinton against even the mildest of accusations (kissing another woman on the mouth). I suppose just another example of “be careful who you pretend to be”.