Have you heard the joke about why the blonde climbed the chain link fence?

Why is it that blonde jokes are acceptable, but others that ridicule a certain class of people aren’t?

Is it because only blondes have a sense of humor and are secure in their identity? Or is it that they are the only fair game in town and we need some scapegoat to pin these funny jokes on?

But what is interesting, is that blondes know the joke is really on everyone else.

Take the First Lady . . . Hillary Clinton for example. She is blonde, but she is the one having the last laugh on the entire state of New York.

She has convinced them that even though she has never lived there, bought groceries, sent kids to school, voted, held office, held a job, or paid taxes, in that state, that she, above anyone else from that state, would best represent them.

So a blonde is finally having the last laugh at the expense of everyone else.

She, single-handedly has changed the paradigm for all blondes and hopefully we will see an end to these very extremist, bigoted, hateful, blondophobish jokes. Or not.

By the way . . . the blonde climbed the chain link fence to see what was on the other side.

There are a lot of rumors circulating about Senator John McCain’s temper. But if character doesn’t count, as we are reminded by the media every time President Clinton shows none, then why should anyone care about this character flaw?  And if he does have a temper, he has earned the right to show it.

He has the right to be angry at every draft dodger who slipped quietly away to Canada . . . or England, while he was a prisoner of war, for over five years, being tortured for believing in something greater than himself.

But what people are really overlooking, in this frantic effort to pin some flaw on yet another presidential hopeful, is why he has risen in the poles.

The political pundits are looking at the wrong “extremes” to determine the outcome of the election. It will not be the left vs. the right. It will be the courageous vs. the cowards, the people who believe in absolutes and integrity vs. those who believe in moral relativism.

The polsters should not be shocked that the natural backlash against Clinton is someone who embodies values, integrity, honesty, and guts . . . character traits we never saw in him.

I was so amused to see that Al Gore had to hire a woman to tell him how to be a man. Not because of the squirming and confirming, justifying and denying . . . but because he paid too much.

I would gladly give him advice for free, as I am sure millions of other women will when they vote.

But let’s look at what this female consultant believes, other than unrestrained sexual pleasure for the masses.

She liked the way Bill Clinton took his mistress, Gennifer Flowers, seriously.  She was convinced that Clinton respects women more than most male politicians.

Does that include his wife and daughter who he has repeatedly humiliated in front of the world? Does it include Paula Jones who was flashed, propositioned and then denied her day in court too? Does it include Monica Lewinsky that he used as a service stop and then abandoned her in her greatest hour of need?

So this is what we are to admire in our leaders . . . men who “take their mistresses seriously.” I’m sure with advisors like this, every wife in America is going to feel real comfortable voting for Al Gore.

It is very interesting that President Clinton said congress displayed reckless partisan politics when they didn’t ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty.

He thinks we should blindly trust countries who support terrorism, build nuclear weapons on the side, and test without verification, even though they have promised they won’t.

But that is odd coming from a man who shook his finger in the face of America and SWORE he did not have sex with “that” woman.

He taught us not to trust political leaders. He is one who promised he would not raise taxes when he ran for office. He taught us not to believe in promises. He declared he was a common man, not part of the elite like his opponent, yet he sent his daughter to a very expensive private school.

He swore on national TV that he had never had an affair with Genifer Flowers but later admitted it.

He gave us reason to doubt everything he says. And now we are supposed to trust countries and leaders we did not elect and we know have repeatedly lifted their hand against us?

He taught us all that your word is not worth the paper it is printed on if you don’t intend to keep it.

Thank goodness, Congress learns quickly.

An Air Force Captain is being court-martialed for his relationship with his wife . . . before they were married.  He could face up to 28 years in prison if convicted of all nine counts against him.

He broke the rules saying you can’t date or have sexual relations with any enlisted person. He admits his actions were wrong and believes his military career is over.

His wife served fifty days in jail for lying about her relationship with her husband . . . and disobeyed orders to stay away from him.

She was demoted and is expected to be discharged. The obvious question here is, why are the standards so much higher for people in the military, and not for the Commander in Chief . . . the President?

If an enlisted person can spend 50 days in jail for lying, why isn’t her Commander in Chief held to the same standards? It would be interesting to see what type of punishment this enlisted woman would have received if it had been the Commander in Chief she had been having an affair with.

Would she still have spent 50 days in jail . . . and would he be facing 28 years in prison for lying?

This is Nina May, just curious as to how blind justice really is.

There are flaws in Hillary’s theory about why Bill Clinton does what he does.

She claims that because of the conflicts between the mother and grandmother that he has a great need to make everyone happy.

If that is the case, he would not veto the tax cut bill and give everyone back their hard earned money . . . that would make everyone happy. Start telling the truth to the American people . . . that would make everyone happy.

But the other part of the theory is that he is addicted to sex because of the same reason. But how would Hillary know that?

She denied Jennifer Flower’s allegations on national T.V. She claimed the Lewinsky scandal was part of a vast right wing conspiracy . . . she has refused to acknowledge or give credence to any other claim brought by the myriad of other women against her husband . . . so now he’s the sex addict?

What made a believer out of her? Or did she just happen to know it all along, but now it is politically expedient to abandon loyalty. But if all of this is true and he legitimately has a psychological problem… should the American people have been shown his medical records, or is all of this still no one’s business?

It is not hard to understand why Bill Clinton believes that the extra money the government extracted from the citizens should go to pay debts he has incurred.

It is easy for him to refer to a $792 billion tax cut as “reckless”, because it isn’t his money. He didn’t cut corners on his family budget to make sure his taxes were paid. He didn’t forego the purchase of another car, or the dream vacation, or private schooling and expensive college . . . because the government took too much of his hard-earned money.

In fact he just spent a weekend with people who have contributed over $50,000 to his political party, and at the same time is telling people who don’t make that much annually, that they should stop being selfish about wanting “their” money back.

If it is reckless to return money to the taxpayers . . . is it not equally as reckless to spend money on wasteful projects?

The answer to paying down the debt . . . is to stop spending money that increases it. . .

And if a person is given $10 for a $5 item, they are expected to give the $5 back in change . . . or its called theft. So, Mr. President, who is being reckless again?

Some very interesting news has just been revealed that should be a great relief to President Clinton. Osama bin Laden has moved his base.

Inspite of all the money we spend on surveillance, espionage, and intelligence gathering, the location of his new camp was discovered by someone from the London Observer.

They report that a couple of months ago bin Laden moved into an old collective farm in the village of Farmihadda, a few miles south of Jalalabad in eastern Afghanistan, on the Pakistan border.

This should be great news for President Clinton who felt so compelled to find him and avenge the bombings of the American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, that he insisted these missions take place on the day his impeachment trial was to begin. Well . . . bin Laden is still at large . . . he’s still the guy who claimed responsibility for the bombings . . . and now we know where he is.

If President Clinton is as concerned about seeing justice done now, as he was last year, why isn’t he trying to take him out? And if the London Observer knows where he is . . . certainly our military intelligence does too.