The Beanstalk


by David N. Townsend


February 16, 1998
5:00 PM


It's true. This is not some vicious rumor started by Right Wing conspiratortionists, but a true fact, that is corroborated by numerous reliable sources!

And yes, Special Prosecutor Kenneth Starr is fully aware of this situation, as well. Even more stunning, it would appear that Monica Lewinsky even knows, and knew at the time that she allegedly had alleged sexual relations allegedly with the President. In fact, the whole Washington establishment must know, and the media, too, but nobody seems to be making a big deal out of it.

You don't believe me? You think I'm a sensationalist muckraker? Well that just shows how much you know. It's common knowledge that the President has Aids. One of them testified before the Grand Jury the other day. Besides, you don't suppose he makes all his travel arrangements by himself, do you? And who do you think signs all those Thank You cards when he gets fan mail? Actually, Monica Lewinsky herself was one of his Aids, when you think about it.

(Am I spelling that right?)

This column, I predict, will soon become my most "accessed" ever. The conspiracy lovers and Clinton haters, who search the Net constantly for trickles of tabloid-level rumors, will come across it, by deliberately searching for any link between the name Clinton and AIDS. In fact, I think I'll do the same thing now, and see what else is out there...

...Okay, I'm back, and to my amazement, the following passage is the only one on the entire World Wide Web (according to Infoseek) containing any variation on the phrase "Clinton has AIDS":

Ed Colbert, a McDonnell-Douglas 80 captain who lives in Arlington, said the injection of Congress and Clinton has "aided and abetted" AMR Chief Executive Robert Crandall, who wants to settle the issue with arbitration. (

This being the case, you can now be certain that, when the rumor surfaces in a few weeks on CNN, this very Beanstalk column will have been its origin! In fact, maybe you want to start spreading it yourselves, now, just to see how fast this stuff catches fire these days.

Anyway, if you're waiting for my insightful commentary on the CRISIS IN THE WHITE HOUSE!!!, the reason I've held back is partly because it's such an easy target, and partly because I'm not sure I want to delve into political baloney in this column just yet. I sort of want to start at the beginning, with a little statement of philosophy and perspective, and then proceed to provide regular commentary on various events as they unfold. That way, you'll always know where I'm coming from, which may be slightly confusing at this point. Let's make that a project for March, still long enough before the '98 midterm elections kick into gear, so there'll be plenty of opportunity for laughs yet ahead.

Meanwhile, as far as this particular hot issue is concerned, I'm also hesitant to spit in my two cents because things change so fast, and by the time most of you read this, it will be entirely out of date. We do know, however, that there is a finite set of options as to the TRUTH that may eventually be revealed:

  1. He did.
  2. He didn't.

There are no in-betweens, maybes, or half-ways, no matter what your dirty little mind may imagine. Even at this late date, with all that's been written, said, and revealed, each of those options remains plausible. We can only hope and anticipate that, before terribly long, we will have convincing enough information to support one of the choices satisfactorily for the general public. (Granted, some people still think Nixon was framed, and others still think Roosevelt bombed Pearl Harbor, but those are the people we like to make fun of.)

The outcome of either option is also relatively clear. If (1), then Mr. Clinton is history, one way or another. If (2), then Mr. Starr is history. No ambiguities there, either; that's the political reality of "proof" in either direction.

Also, by the way, we should point out that Ms. Lewinsky now resides in a sort of temporarily fortuitous limbo, in anticipation of the next stage of developments. As long as we don't precisely know what she did or didn't do, and whom she told what, and how truthful or fanciful it was, she remains somewhat shadowy, unclear, even a celebrity, since she holds the key to the mystery. She will undoubtedly turn this situation into a nice 7-figure royalty check in the near future, as will her mother, her father, her lawyer, and the lovely and charming Ms. Tripp, along with any busboy, garbage collector, or pedicurist who came within 20 yards of any of the above in the past 10 years.

Nevertheless, once the story is sufficiently out, the consequences for Ms. Lewinsky's, shall we say, reputation, will be pretty much the same regardless of what happens to Bill or Ken. The choices are:

  1. She's an outrageous slut;
  2. She's an outrageous liar; or possibly,
  3. She's an outrageous lying slut.

If you've been following this story much, then you know that the odds are already pretty heavily favoring #3.

P.S. Sorry for the long delay between columns... got a bit of a life there for awhile. Count on greater frequency from now on.


1998 David N. Townsend

The Beanstalk grows out of my head, so to speak, but I welcome
any seeds that readers may wish to plant.  Just as long as you don't use
too much fertilizer.  Send me your comments, ideas, drool, at
and I'll occasionally respond to, publish, or otherwise dispose of them.

Need more?  In addition to the rich and growing archives of this column,
you might want to visit
The Site itself, and any of my other collections, on
Communication, Baseball, Rock 'n' Roll, or Travel.