<One is, why would anyone pay much attention to the foreign press' view of internal American politics?

In most cases, you'd be correct. However, I have found that the British press has often been willing to look at aspects of many political stories that for one reason or another--none sinister--have not made the newpapers in this country.

The other: every president has his feet of clay exploited by comedians. If you think this should stop for GW's sake, then you are asking for very special treatment, indeed.

You're right: being abused by comedians is part of the game. At least they tend to be equal opportunity razzers, nailing Democrats and Republicans fairly equally. They do tend to pick up on any political hogpile, and it does get a little irritating when they are working from ideas that have no basis in reality, but obviously no one could, or would want to, put a muzzle on them.

Lastly: nice non sequiter filth at the end of your post.

Filth, maybe. Non sequitor, definitely not.

To reiterate: my posts describe the destruction of Republican politicians for crimes such as lousing up a sentence, not being as adroit as they might be, or mispelling potato. The implication made by the destroyers is that men with such awful traits are obviously completely unfit for political leadership.

On the other hand, I had to endure month after month of hearing from every possible liberal and Democratic source, over and over, that Clinton's behavior with his interns and his lying had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with his job as the most powerful leader in the world.

I find this double standard a little ironic. Sorry if I was a little blunt.