For years I have been preaching that, especially in matters of importance, one should not judge things on the basis of who is right or wrong, but rather, on what is right or wrong. The temptation to focus on the lurid details of the allegations against the Bill Clinton is great. Frankly, Leno, Letterman, and every talk show host in the country secretly prays that if there ever is a resolution to the embattled Clinton administration, it is delayed for at least a few more rating periods. I mean, come on ... international trade treaties or "doing it" on the carpeted seal of the United States in the Oval Office ... what's the talk around the water cooler at work? However, regardless of whatever does or does not result from the mountains of paperwork (which has required the premature killing of thousands of trees), history will mark this period as the personification of Hypocrisy. My space is limited, but consider just this short list: The promise of "the most ethical administration in American history." The Clinton Clown College makes the Grant administration look like the Last Supper with the original cast. "Where's Waldo" replaced by "Find the unindicted co-conspirator." A former draft dodger (then and now a liar) rattling sabers, draping himself in the flag, and even claiming he was immune to lawsuits because he is "Commander in Chief." Champion of the failed "Don't ask/Don't tell" policy, who wishes he had made it law long before Judge Starr got a new title. The administration that would "cooperate fully" with any investigations into allegations of impropriety has routinely, consistently, (and often with malice of forethought) , stalled, obfuscated, "lost" records, suffered from periodic memory loss, and frankly, in all probability, LIED, sometimes under oath. Despite the wrongminded compliance to the "United Nothings" orders, Clinton was prepared to send American troops into harm's way (in violation of U.N. policy and orders). The Clinton defenders have been as shameless, myopic and disingenuous as the inner circle quislings. The National Organization for Women has been so hypocritical as to actually cause some chapters to sanction Big Mother and separate from the parent. Anita Hill, canonized, pillared, believed, rebuffed, and canonized (in that order) has again taken a tumble. NOW, (the adverb ... no relation to the above-mentioned witches caldron) Professor Hill claims her case was "different" from any of these other charges against Clinton. Odd, the Willey story strikes a startling familiar note to many. However, the self-righteous, unbridled, professorial defender of women's rights is currently urging women to consider the bigger issue of the administrations policies toward women before judging his personal behavior. Duh? According to Anita, and the wicked witch of the east (Gloria Steinem), the Kathleen Willey incident, if true, would be improper and crude, but not sexual harassment. WHAT? Even the wounded NOW President Patricia Ireland recently noted " ... it may not be sexual harassment -- it may be sexual assault." Hill says, "We live in a political world, and the reality is there are larger issues other than just individual behavior." True. Issues such as perjury, suborning perjury, obstruction of justice, fraud, abuse of power under the color of authority, violation of oath office, and felony are a lot more than bad taste.