The dominant conservative/libertarian/reaction so far seems to be, "Oh God, not another one."

Not me, though. I can't help myself. This is gonna be fun.

Early speculation, Kerry still gets the nomination.

Clinton could get away with it because he was...well...Clinton.

Kerry doesn't have nearly enough charisma to make it through this if the charges prove true.

Bush Vs. Edwards 2004

Thanks for having the cajones to go first, Chris.

I'm thinking, yeah, Kerry still gets the nod. Rather, he may still be getting the nod from that intern or whoever.

What Kerry ought to do now is something completely unexpected that demonstrates a sense of integrity and would dominate the news while this intern thing (if it is anything) is hushed up.

Imagine if Kerry made this statement:

I called this press conference because I felt obligated by my sense of honor to do so.

I appear to be benefitting from scandalous charges aganist a comrade-at-arms. I must speak up in his defense.

I have analyzed the evidence about the President's service in the Texas Air National Guard, and conclude that the evidence shows that he was never AWOL.

Unless those charging him with AWOL have something other than innuendo, they should shut their traps about it. The records show that George W. Bush earned his honorable discharge.

Man, would that look good on Kerry, and the press would STILL keep talking about Bush's less-than-completely-heroic tour of duty.

Too bad all the smart people are conservative Republicans.

Note: this idea originally occurred to me while trolling in Hesiod's comments.

So, if this holds up, let's review the remaining choices:

1. John Kerry, with bimbo eruption.

2. John Edwards, bimbo.

3. Howard Dean, eruption.

What will be more fun: seeing what the prenup says about this, or watching John Edwards in a tank?

Unless the intern is worth a couple of hundred million dollars, this is totally out of character.

I know I should say something sober and responsible here, but my honest first reaction went something like this:

[nelsonmuntz]

"HA-Ha!"

[/nelsonmuntz]

This is somehow Hillary Clinton's doing. Wait for a surprise announcement that she is "needed" and has decided to run.

What is with the Dems inability to keep their dicks in their pants? Something in the water? (drink the Kool-Aid my friends). As to the folks who say this has no bearing on his ability to be president, do you really think a man who would break his wedding VOWS would hesitate to screw any and all of us over if it would be to his advantage? Just FYI....

Um, Zipity, please point out five senators who wouldn't seel their own mother for more power? Where have you been hanging out? They're all whores, in one fashion or another. The sole exception that comes to mind is, perhaps, Dr. No aka Ron Paul.

Now, we all know the phrench, phrench-looking and phrench-thinking have no problem w/mistresses.

It's a requirement.

Monogamy is only for unsophisticated backwards Amerikkkans.

I want to know about the other incidents.

Geez, what is it w/boomers thinking they're still in their 20s? Did a gene mutate?

And if Drudge is right and the biggies have been sitting on the story...

Wait, where have I heard that before????

Anyone notice that the Kerry campaign hasn't denied it yet?

How about a debate between Kerry and Monica Lewinsky:

Kerry: Well, I know Bill Clinton, and this didn't affect his ability to lead....

Monica: First I like to say I blew Bill Clinton, and your no Bill Clinton.....

Here's a serious prediction: No Dem-friendly talking head will dare to suggest that Americans should "act more like the French" this time around...

Even those at DU are having trouble with it.

But I have not seen any fingers pointed at the "Big Dog"

The most interesting aspect of this story so far is Drudge's claim that this story is the reason for Dean's reversal of his out-after-Wisconsin pledge.

Since Kerry has seemed to be the front runner based on his perceived electability (in contrast to Dean), this scandal could give Democrat primary voters second thoughts if it makes Kerry look vulnerable to Bush in November. However, one would think that any benefit would redound primarily to Edwards, rather than Dean.

The interesting thing to watch will be to see how Dean takes advantage of this. If I were Dean's manager, I'd advise him to go full-on populist again. Embrace his inner YAAAARGHH! I'd have him go to Democrat primary voters and be completely frank:

"You know you like my views best, but the ELITISTS in the party leadership thought they knew better. They tried to convince you to vote for their choice by scaring you about who's 'electable'. Clearly, those ELITISTS don't know what they're talking about! If we want to take back the White House for America, we need to vote based on what we know is right. Don't let ELITISTS tell you who to vote for. Vote your conscience. Vote for the candidate who can REALLY beat Bush in November. Vote for Dean, FOR AMERICA! YAAARGHH!"

So here's the questions: is Edwards an easier or tougher opponent for Bush?

Speculation points. Let's assume the Drudge story has legs (pun certainly intended). What mindset do the Dem voters in the remaining primaries take?

1. Oh, hell, let's vote for Kerry anyway. He's practically got the thing won, and what the heck, Clinton got away with it...

or...

2. Oh, hell, Kerry's toast. Edwards is the only one left who can beat Bush.

or...

3. Oh, hell, Kerry's toast, and Edwards is too inexperienced to beat Bush. What the heck, if we're gonna lose anyway, let's go in style and vote Dean. At least he'll be fun to watch.

It's gonna be one of the three, folks...

I'm with Will Collier on this one.

Crank - LOL funny.

How long till the folks at Democratic Underground start claiming the intern was a Rove operative?

I'm sure the people at DU will find a way to blame it on GW. They'll come up with a theory. But again, this whole thing has somehow been set up to benefit Hilllary Clinton.

I'm guessing he's been having a fling with Sylvia Perrins, heir to the Lee & Perrins Worcestshire Sauce fortune.

That two-timing, two-timing rat.

Fanatic may not be far from the mark. According to Drudge, the first public tip-off came from Wes Clark.

Somebody remind me, Clark is the political protege of just which Dem faction/family...?

A guy who manages to get a 2nd wife worth 500 million, and is dumb enough to jeapordize it so soon by shtupping the intern, lacks sufficient focus to be Leader of the Free World.

I bet it's Chris Lehane - all the way.

On another note, I happened to notice this very unfortunate Wash Post/Banner Ad combination for Mr. Kerry a few minutes ago.

I had to preserve it.

Oh yeah, a bottle of Booker's says that Dick Morris accuses Hillary of leaking this within the next 24 hours.

Rahul, to be serious for a moment, Edwards would in many ways be much more formidable that Kerry.

Just what we need, another sweet-talkin' southern lawyer. Especially when we need tort reform.

Been there, done that.

I'm having a hard time believing indidelity on Kerry's part. Not that I think he wouldn't do it, but the man is pug ugly. Unless the intern in question has serious myopia.

Will Allen: Yeah, I think so too. Its a little worrying... on one hand, Edwards has the 'inexperience' tag, but on the other hand, he is the least dislikable of the sorry lot.

I'm pretty sure that Howard "I have a Scream" Dean is out of the picture?

JohnO, Ron Jeremy is pug ugly too, and he's been into more women than the average feller.

Never underestimate the power of a forked tongue.

JohnO - two words:

Henry Kissinger

Fanatic: Please. Ron Jeremy is a lot more respectable than John Kerry.

Rahul,

Point ceded.

This isn't Clinton II, this is (amazingly) *worse*. He apparently airmailed this woman out of the country to keep her quiet and get her out of the way. Kerry makes Clinton look downright gentlemanly. (oh my god did I really just say that?)

If this is true, Kerry's done. He was supposed to take the moral high ground...the noble war hero against the AWOL shirker. Now the flood gates are open...it's all Jane Fonda, interns and ketchup from here on out.

What, this many posts and no JFK jokes?

How about -- "Well at least now Kerry can claim he really has something in common with JFK besides initials..."?

I wonder what Liveshot will have to say about preserving the sanctity of marriage now?

Myria

Some guys just don't get it . . . if you're married, and you try to have a little "tomato" on the side, it'll "ketchup" with you eventually.

Sorry but as long as wild speculation is in play...

There are some big time machinations going on inside the Democratic party right now. Wes Clark makes sure this story gets out right after he *leaves* the race? What?

If you look at the Hillary angle, Clark might as well be her personal executioner. Jumping in to rob Dean of much needed media hype, and tossing a bombshell into Kerry as he smiles and walks out the door. Who's left standing, Edwards? The non-descript trial lawyer that barely won his home state?

Hmm, Bush looks vulnerable. Hmm assuming Kerry goes down the tubes, no current Democrat looks capable of going all the way. Time for Hillary to swoop in like a pantsuited Wagnerian valkyrie and play savior? It's so grotesque it might just be true...

I just figured we needed a comment here by another guy named "Will."

Oddly, most of the Lefty (tinfoil hat) blogs I check daily are silent on this. Weird.

But they're still foaming about whether Bush actually showed up and was present for duty on the duty days he was paid for. You know, the military just loves to pay people for not showing up. That's why they issue pay stubs.

Weird.

This is wonderful. I don't know what effect this will have on the primary, but if true it will finally knock Janet Jackson's sagging boob off my TV for a while.

Just where do these interns come from? I found out: Here

The devil does wear pantsuits. That's common knowledge among the technorati.

This casual hook-up shows bad judgement and poor taste. I've lost all respect for this intern.

Perhaps he simply wanted to look more European, by dipping his french fry in something other than ketchup?

This is actually good for Dems, as Edwards has a better chance against Bush. Kerry's baggage from the last 30 years may not worry the Dems, but it certainly was making Rove salivate, no killer, just death by 1000 cuts. There would always be something new, flip flop on this, said this in an interview way back when, etc.

Edwards inexperience may be attacked, but it's just a single target. People will get tired of it quickly. I'm not saying he's got even odds against Bush, just that his chance is better than Kerry's.

Any talk of this coming out of the WH is ridiculous for this exact reason. Now they have to shift gears for the second time.

Dated Dean, Married Kerry, got cheated on and hired a lawyer . . .

Heh. Scrappleface is on the job: "Alleged Kerry Intern Scandal Sparks Clinton Endoresement"...

http://www.scrappleface.com/MT/archives/001582.html#001582

if he really shuttled her out of the country....

Well, just like Martha Stewart uis finding out, it's not the crime that gets you, it's the cover up.

Mike said:

Some guys just don't get it . . . if you're married, and you try to have a little "tomato" on the side, it'll "ketchup" with you eventually.

He's really in a pickle. I'm looking forward to the rest of the campaign with relish.

My god, Kerry IS like JFK - in more ways than we apparently know.

I can only see it if somehow the girl was richer than Heinz, and, well, downright funky.

Any record of Paris Hilton ever working his office?

Hey, I don't know about Democratic Underground, but Hesiod over at Counterspin is already blaming Bush Stand in awe of his logic:

It was Bush. And we know it was Bush for the simple reason that the President was having a very, very bad week with this whole AWOL thing. And they desperately wanted to change the subject. Everything else they tried didn't work. So, voila!

Bush only puts "bad things" in his own orifices. He is not knowing for putting them in the orifices of others.

Besides, I thought Bush was too dumb to hatch such a deviois plot. He's supposed to be functionally illiterate.

Not that I support Bush. Or Kerry. Or any of those damn wastes of biomass inside the beltway.

Damn it all, I mispelled devious. That was a typo because I have an energetic intern under my desk who was distracting me.

Damn it all, I misspelled misspelled. I wish I had been born blind and with no sense of touch. Get away from me you evil intern. You're ruining my credibility!

You are all welcome to drop by and read about how the Bush campaign did the exact same thing in 1992 to Bill Clinton.

They accused Clinton of having an affair with an AP reporter covering his campaign.

Turned out to be a bunch of B.S. But since Clinton alreay had a reputation, it was potentially very damaging.

Pulitzer Prize winning AP political reporter, Walter Mears called it a slanderous lie.

eh, so many targets w/him, so little time.

Let's see...

Clark supposedly leaked this.
Clark drops out of race.
Clark endorsed Kerry.

Something isn't right.

I contend that this is an inside job.

Hillary. Brokered Convention.

The Professor's reporting that this was leaked 2/6 and TIME was going to print it next week.

It'll be Hillary & Richardson if Bush is toast and Gephardt & what difference does it make if Bush is a sho-in. I'll stand by that prediction made last summer.

This thought is just too icky to keep to myself: Does Hillary have any interns?

I can see his pick-up line:

"Hey, baby. I can do it 57 ways."

Shell,

I'm sure she does have interns. I just don't know what the morals of those girls are though.

Has Clark officially endorsed Kerry? Last I saw WaPo was quoting unnamed sources as saying he plans to endorse Kerry on Friday. That could easily be delayed.

I agree with Mike M. If true, Kerry is cooked. His whole attraction to Dem primary voters is his supposed electability (brilliant strategic thinking that, given the high rate of success of northern liberal Prez candidates since about 1965). Any shadow cast over his electability will send primary voters scrambling for someone else. It can't be overcome they way Clinton did with that 60 Minutes appearance with Hillary (drop the Rodham) Clinton in 1992, given his subsequent (and previous, and continuous) behavior.

I have thought all along that Edward would be the tougher opponent, and if this stories hits the major media with a shred of credibility I think Edwards will get the nod.

Drudge also says (quoting Congressional Quarterly) that Gore knew about this, so it's not new. However it also says it continued until 2002 just before announcing for Prez. I can't imagine anyone choosing to run for Prez. with something like this in his background. Morality aside it shows egotism and stupidity beyond description... if true.

While Clark made comments about this before, I think you can look to someone in his camp doing the actually leaking.

But as for me, I'm ready to "move on" already! ;)

Oh yeah... and all of you are welcome to stop by and see how Hillary is behind all of this. As you know, she was having a bad week and thought she would increase her chances of getting the nomination this year. It's true! Pulitzer prize winning reporter Walter Duranty said so!!

If the 22-year-old model that Mickey Kaus mentioned today is the woman in question, then the real story here is "Where are the nude jpg files?"

Here's a problem for the speechwriters: How does Kerry deny without using the words "I" "did" "not" "have" "sexual" "relations" "with" "that" "woman"?

Actually Jackal,

Kerry's pickup line is: "Do you know who I am?"

argh...

Serious question: why should anyone care enough about this to have it affect their vote?

This is all the Clintons. They want a brokered convention, hoping that Bush will waste a lot of his $$$ advantage thinking it's someone else. One thing: What is it about campaign finance rules: If you opt out, you can spend as much as you want up until the convention, but have limits after right? If that is true, then I really think my own theory has credence.

"argh...

Serious question: why should anyone care enough about this to have it affect their vote? "

Don't worry, b-psycho, I wasn't going to vote for Kerry. Or Bush.

Neither am I. That was pretty much determined a long time ago.

Ideally, whoever had the lack of scruples necessary to get anywhere in running for office would be automatically disqualified. The type of people that want this type of power tend to be the worst possible to allow to hold it.

Mrs. Kerry: "Of course I believe you didn't do it John. Are you going to sleep now?"

Mr. Kerry. "Uh, I have a lot of campaining to do. I'd better get to it." He then leaves the room quickly, hand protecting the boys, mumbling something about "Bobbit".

Eh, dammit, didn't even read the 3:21pm entry first. Oh well.

My theory

1. Chris Lehane was behind this.

2. Lehane put this out weeks ago, but the press sat on it (liberal bias and all).

3. Given it didn't break when they needed it to (during the post Dean "I have a scream" speach) when Clark could have capitalized as a front runner, the Clark camp advised Clark to bail from the race before it broke to preserve a chance at VEEP.

4. The Clark endorsement was likewise calculated by the Clark camp to (a) deflect responsibility for the story toward Rove and the republicans; and (b) garner favor with Kerry by level best diffusing the story and, again, working for a veep position.

5. If this has "legs" it won't be the affari that nails Kerry in the public eye. Rather his "electibility" quotient will dive because of the "ship the lass out of the country" -- e.g., very Clintonesque, cover up.

I'm done.

people have already beaten me to the "Hillary/Clark knifed him" spin, the "he's a democrat so it won't matter" spin and the "if he'd risk the Heinz 57 fortune for this he's too stupid to be President" spin, so here's my new wrinkle:

It was done by Democrats to help Kerry.

Think about it, Kerry's got a lot of ugly issues on the horizon, between the photos with Hanoi Jane, the anti-military voting record and the number one with a bullet on special interest money, that Bush and the Repubs didn't need an affair to sink him. McAuliffe saw all this on the horizon, with no way to change it and no way to change the candidate, he arranges to have a sex scandal thrown in the mix so Kerry can duck it the same way Clinton ducked all his problems, "GOP are out to get Kerry, it's just about sex, why are they obsessed with sex," etc... Meanwhile, the press can sell papers with scandalous stories of an affair while simultaneously arguing that it doesn't affect his ability to be President. The more they can talk about Sex, the less they have to talk about National Security and special interest money.

Gonzo:

Interesting. But, keep in mind that "Clark" means Clinton. So, we have to analyze this from the standpoint of why the Clinton/DLC cartel would do this (see below).

MarkD:

But why would they let this filter out BEFORE super Tuesday? If it's simply a giant flanking maneuver to try to spin the news coverage away from Kerry's horrific voting record and horrific post-combat behaviour, they would have broke it in mid-March, no? That would have been after the nomination was wrapped up, but well enough before the convention so that buyer's remore, on this particular issue, could have been avoided. Also, breaking this out in mid-March would have coincided with the likely date the GOP guns would have started to fire at Kerry.
And, finally, the national liberal media won't report any of Kerry's vast shortcomings in any event; or, at the minimum, they'll spin them to lessen the impact.

I've batted this around mentally all day. My opinion: Hillary will run this year.

Clinton/DLC obviously were the ones who took down Dean. And now they're gong to take down Kerry. The delegates will be split up. The need for a brokered convention will arise. Hillary will "reluctantly" ride to the rescue as the Party's White Knight and accept the nomination by acclamation in Boston.

Why?

It's too big of a risk for her just to sit around waiting for the fight with Guiliani in 2006. She very well could lose that race. In that event, her career is over.

On the other hand, a last-minute entry into this year's Presidential race (even if she loses - as expected): (1) allows her to claim total control of the party apparatus; (2) gives her an excuse to drop out of the Senate (where, as a junior Senator in the minority party, she does not have the kind of clout or exposure she wants); (3) generates momentum for 2008 (think Reagan in 1976, using that failed primary run to take over in 1980); and (4) keeps Howard Dean from being relevant, even for the next election.

There's an old saying about Democrats standing in a circle when they form a firing squad. Well, I think we're seeing that in real time. The deadly specter of Dean turning into the Party's Ross Perot and the risk of Guiliani beating Hillary in 2006 have accelerated the timing for the blood letting.

One thing's for sure: this will get real interesting. Real soon.

Best,

J.

Who cares re: the politics of it all? I want to know which one he was boinking!
My favorite candidate would be the blonde on the right of the 2nd picture down, also on the right.
While not the original JFK's MM, sure beats Monica.
http://www.johnkerry.com/communities/women/campaign.html

jtj is right...the popular thinking is that Hillary waits out a Bush win and runs in '08, but Guliani would simply slaughter her in 2006 if he runs: game over for Hillary.

This isn't good for Kerry. This isn't part of some slick bait and switch scheme to blame Republicans for another smear. The Dems are in CHAOS and the fur is flying. Clinton/McAuliffe is picking off the Dem frontrunners like a sniper, and their whole primary season is going to turn into a bloody mess as soon as the redfaced media sucks it up and catches up with Drudge.

I predict Bad Things are going to happen to the Democratic party before the election. Seismic, schismatic events that we haven't seen in a political party in this country for a long time.

jtj,

Brilliant! A Hillary run also explains Clark bowing out BEFORE the story broke. He can be "above the fray" and then waltz in as HER veep.

I tell ya what, though. The "grassroots" "Deaniebaby" dems aren't as stupid as everyone thinks. If the scuttlebut traces this back to the Clintonistas (as the attack adds against Dean originating from Torricelli, now a Clintonista Clark advisor, did), then I wouldn't put it past Dean to run Green Party and royally f*ck the "estab" dems.

We may be seeing the death throes of a political party here, ala the whigs.

Wow. Just wow.

Mike Daley, thanks for the link! But doncha think it could be one of the two in third picture down on the left? The one that's captioned, "Policy wonks making a difference"?

Mike Daley,

Thanks for the link! We note in passing that one of the pictures there was captioned It's never too early to change the world -- women interns are our future!.

How true.

Drudge is reporting that she went to Africa and he's getting ready w/a response.

However, she has said she wouldn't run. Let's see if she breaks her promise.

Gonzo:

We may be seeing the death throes of a political party here, ala the whigs.

I still want to see the pictures.

I've seen remarked that Clark's actions don't quite add up: Identify issue, quit race, plan to endorse Kerry. However they may make sense if you view step 1 as inserting the knife and step 3 as giving a sharp twist. Step two, dropping out, is required for step 3.

So why act to endorse? Well, when all this hits the papers tomorrow, they can add "Clark, who planned to endorse Kerry, withheld his endorsement upon learning of the scandal." Ouch. Complete BS, but ouch.

One note - while all the Hillary stuff is a bit fun, it is no more responsible than blaming Bush. If she does swoop in, though, then this will all look bad from inside the beltway. I thought she was angling for 2008 but if she's watching polls she might think Bush is weak for 2004 and get herself in.

In other words overplay her hand. What was all that about Bush and poker?

Word to the Dems: Better poker than "poke her". OUT

Damien

jtj -

Wow. Hillary doing this in support of her 08 bid? I hadn't thought of that, but it's pretty cool.

What had bugged me about the Clinton angle was that I couldn't see where she would have a serious chance of winning this year. After all, a Clinton on the ticket immediately electrifies the Republican base and lets Dubya go after the swing vote with abandon. Proven war leader and compassionate conservative vs. HillaryCare. No real contest. But if she is actually looking to consolidate her control of the Dems early on in prep for the next round, it makes a lot more sense.

Do I really believe any of this? Well, not much. But boy is it fun to speculate.

After

Damien,

Man, that's vicious. I love it. If future events prove you right, it shows that The General is indeed learning the game fast.
Not fast enough for this year, but still.

It was Clark(D) and (D) hitman Chris Lehane that leaked the story... most certainly so that Hillary can ride to the rescue in 2008 after Kerry's humiliaton.

If JFKerry wins Hillary will be too old in 2016 to run.

Well I am pretty sure that it wasn't the Republicans. Why?

A political hit job like this has to be something that a politician's base cares about. Claiming Kerry is an adulterer has no effect on Republican votes, they weren't going to vote for him anyway. Democrats stood by Clinton, and the vaste middle did to.

Tempest, your teacup is calling.

McAuliffe saw all this on the horizon, with no way to change it and no way to change the candidate, he arranges to have a sex scandal thrown in the mix so Kerry can duck it the same way Clinton ducked all his problems

That would assume that McAulliffe had a brain. Clearly this is not the case.

Reporter: Is it true you've had relations with a senatorial intern?

Senator: Relations? Son, I banged the bitch. Porked her till her brains fell out. Little lady had three abortions and gave up two for adoption while we were together. And you're askin' about a 'relation'. God you're a schmuck.

-----
If you can't persuade, outrage.

Lots of interesting theories circulating here. Here's my take:

This just makes an already weak democratic field look even weaker. My perspective here is pretty objective, as a Republican who is none to enchanted with Bush (fiscal profligacy and all) - I actually wish there were a viable Democratic candidate in the race. But Clark is out and was never that viable to begin with, Dean's a joke, Kerry is currently winning because of this elusive "electability" factor everyone keeps talking about, and Edwards, while charismatic, probably doesn't have the clout to beat Bush. If Kerry were more of a Clinton (ie., a politician who really inspires loyalty in his base) I would say this wouldn't really hurt him (after all, it didn't really hurt Clinton, and he actually perjured himself, which is illegal, while "merely" breaking one's marriage vows, while immoral, is not illegal). But Kerry's no Clinton, as others here have said. People have been supporting him because he looks safe and innocuous, not because they actually like him too much. Now he looks less safe.

As a result, no matter what happens on the Republican side, minus a HUGE scandal or serious deterioration of the situation in Iraq or something, NONE of these candidates could beat Bush. Hillary to the rescue? Interesting theory, I don't know. (Not that I'd be inclined to vote for her either, but she could actually have a shot.) Implosion of the Democratic party? Also an interesting theory, one my Dad and I have tossed around, but only a good thing if something more worthwhile arises to take its place, because I would hate to see the current Republican party rise to "sole superpower" status (in fact as a libertarian-leaning Republican it would be my worst nightmare - spend, spend, spend, the FMA, God help us!). I hope something dramatic happens between now and the election though, because otherwise it's going to be a foregone conclusion and a very boring election season. Besides, the current political landscape is in desperate need of a shakeup.

FYI: It's about 9:00 AM EST and big media is finally taking their foot every so slowly off the clutch on this story...stay tuned. ABC news over the radio is my source.

Mike, Don Imus (Imus in the Morning) flat out asked Kerry if he was having an affair, 'bout an hour into the show.

Kerry's reply?

"No."

Actually, Imus did NOT ask him if he was having an affair--he asked him if there was "anything that could possibly come out that would change my mind about endorsing you".

Kerry didn't deny an affair at all--he very cleverly (a la Clinton) said that "there's nothing to talk about".

He did say "no", but not in response to "did you have an affair". He said "no" in response to the question about whether anything would come out to shake Imus' silly (and tongue-in-cheek) support for Kerry.

In other words, he denied nothing.

But... but.. I thought that's what interns were for!

Oh dear. I'm going to have to think about politics again.

People need to remember that Clinton *survived* the Monica imbroglio from the White House. As a candidate, a scandal is a lot different. People haven't really invested in Kerry yet - there is no reason to defend him when Edwards or Dean are still around. Clinton could unify his party, but Kerry is an injured leader of the pack - there are other wolves ready to take him down the second he shows blood.

Clinton did survive Gennifer Flowers, but that's why he's Slick Willy. Does anyone think Kerry is as slick? Especially now that everyone has wised up after being made fools by Clinton (those who defended him, that is). Clinton was Fool Me Once - shame on him. No one wants Fool Me Twice.

The main issue is, is it true? If they had an affair, he is toast. The overwhelming majority of delegates remain available, so a big win on Super Tuesday - or even a tie - by Dean or Edwards would completely deflate Kerry.

If it isn't true, then it shouldn't be hard to defang. All they need to do is FLY THE WOMAN BACK FROM AFRICA where she is busily HIDING the fact that they DIDN'T HAVE AN AFFAIR. Right?

Damien

This story apparently came out of the failed Wessley Clark camp, but Dems are blaming the GOP. I hope that the Bush camp is too smart for this. (This is much too early.)

Unfortunately, it appears to be perfectly in character with Kerry, who apparently had numerous affairs while still married to his first wife.

The bad news is that if Kerry's famed electability is damaged, then his bubble will burst, and the last man standing is Edwards.

Oh, Lord, please save our Republic from the slimy trial lawyer.

Kathleen, you're not into subtext, are you?

Final Resolution: This whole thing is a Botox test. If Kerry doesn't show some forehead wrinkles over this one, he's toast!

But looking at the Daily News photos, he may be in luck. I think I see a wrinkle, although he appears to be concealing it with his long twiny fingers.

That's his Botox strategy? Obfuscation? Let's see him debate with his hand on his forehead...