Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Janet's breast, and a sexually repressed nation

If the Kerry "revelation" becomes headline news...

It is worth noting. Under... Clinton -- under, in other words, a sexually aware and energized leadership -- the nation was largely at peace, attained record budget surpluses, record low unemployment, international respect and admiration. Women's rights were assured and gay rights were protected and Clinton was welcomed like a freakin' rock star abroad, and, from what I understand, he still is.

And now we have Shrub. And now, it is all reversed, inverted, painfully ingrown, like a bad karmic toenail.

Look. It ain't rocket science. Lack of sex, repression of libido, ignorance of sexuality or sex education, lack of sexual celebration or outlet -- these things, on a national level, on an energetic universal level, can only result in conflict, bitterness, angst and war, and the need to flaunt bogus machismo, invent new enemies and strut around the planet thinking you're literally God's gift to empire when you're really just a draconian impotent bully.

Look at the world's most rigid and violent and oppressive nations for proof, at Syria Saudi Arabia Afghanistan China et al. Notice their attitudes toward sex and women and sexual expression. Draw easy parallel with Ashcroft and Dick Cheney and Rove and BushCo's anti-gay anti-women anti-choice propaganda. Voilà.

more...

http://radio-exile.freeservers.com/come_back.htm

this is gibberish...any number of things changed between the Clinton admin and now...and failure to cat around on your wife does not necesarrily translate to sexually repressed...ask around...