From: puccio@media.mit.edu (Jim Puccio)
Subject: Re: Candidates and their women
Organization: M.I.T. Media Laboratory
	<1992Aug5.144408.16209@news.columbia.edu> <4274@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP>
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 17:42:33 GMT

In article <4274@blue.cis.pitt.edu.UUCP> psg+@pitt.edu (Paul S Galvanek) writes:

> In article <1992Aug5.144408.16209@news.columbia.edu> rl24@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Robert Lamoureux) writes:

>> Hmmm...this oversimplifies things just a wee bit.  For a more complete
>> answer, I suggest you consult the July issue of "Spy" magazine, in which
>> they spend a little more time on the question of Bush's marital

> Ah yes a man to take advice from.  He gets his inuendo and rumor on which to
> make vital choices on such matters as who to vote for President of the United
> States from that paragon of media integrity, none other than the most
> reputable "Spy magazine"

> I suggest you look at that source you quote and see that it speaks volumes 
> as to just how much bull dung the story, or more accurately rumor reporting,
> really is.

Have you read this article?  I suggest you do, before impugning it with the
"damning" observation that it was printed in Spy.

Readers of Spy know that the wonderful thing about that magazine, which sets
them apart from the humor mags that have gone before, is that they delight in
skewering famous people with their own real behavior.  More than satire, they
love to catch the "upper crust" with its pants down, and write it up.

It seems that Spy was the only publication with the guts to open up this issue.
My guess is that we will see more attention payed to it in the near term, as
was indicated by last night's "Dateline" interview.

Bush (and his apologists) are perfectly happy dishing it out, but they just
can't take it.

+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  "Certainly it's past time for American politics to grow up and reach a    |
|  point where stories about our leaders' sex lives are treated as the       |
|  titillating, perhaps largely irrelevant trivia they perhaps are.  But     |
|  that maturity will never be achieved as long as the public is permitted   |
|  to see the messy human truth only about Democrats, while Republicans are  |
|  displayed inside a bubble of happy, wholesome illusion.                   |
|                                                                            |
|  "If that bubble is at long last pierced by a rude question sometime this  |
|  year, the reporter who finally descides to ask the president about        |
|  adultery should know that George Bush has been ready to answer for a long |
|  time.  Back during the 1988 campaign, as he prepped for the Iowa          |
|  caucuses, his aides staged a mock debate in which his Labor secretary-to- |
|  be, Lynn Martin, put the issue to him directly:  'Yes or no -- have you   |
|  ever committed adultery?                                                  |
|                                                                            |
|  "The answer he gave then, and the answer he has been prepared to give     |
|  ever since, and in fact the only public answer he has ever given          |
|  directly, was one that now seems to echo Bill Clinton and Gary Hart:      |
|  'None of your damn business!'"                                            |
|      -- Joe Conason, Spy Magazine, July/August 1992                        |
+----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.elections,alt.fan.dan-quayle