[Newspoetry] Flowers: Deflowered or Floured Over?

[Donald L Emerick]

Gennifer Flowers Sues Hilary Clinton and Aides

She sues her and them for slander and libel,
because she (GF) had claimed that she had
an illicit affair with the Big Cheesy Chief himself,
and that HC et.al. slandered and libeled her
by saying that she (GF) had not had relations,
not sexual relations anyway, with that "Man of Mine",
though fish gotta swim and birds gotta fly,
and Bill's gotta love 'em until they die.

Now, the fact that GF self-publicizes
her illicit affair would seem to do injury
to her own reputation, except for the possibility
that she is, perhaps, like a strumpet-sounding whore,
who sells herself most when her carnal self
is commonly known to be commonly available.

So, how could GF be injured by HCetal?
Well, GF says they lied and denied
her illicitous affair claim --
which, when the BCC lied, he said it was
(or, at that time, "is" -- which has a technical meaning
that is (excuse me) known only to the cognoscenti)
for the sake of the sensibilities of others,
for the good-old country-boys,
that he lied, his little white-boy lies,
to save his little white-ass as of Span-King
by the wagging and swinging tongues,
that he only wanted to kiss or lick his ass.

So, GF claims she was injured
when HCetal lied to defend her (GF) honor,
which she did not want to have defended,
nor did she want have it virginally saved.

The trial judge saw this GF suit,
or lack of suit, for it was a birthday suit,
naked as it could be about naked lies,
about what the naked eye could see,
if discovering minds are just smutty enough
to want to see, smitten by smut-throwings,
as extortionately lacking in any merits,
and dismissed the case on such grounds
(for technical statute of limitations, too),
but the three-judge appeals court thinks
we need a good scandal to make our days
take on a special glow of self-righteousness,
and re-instated the suit, to depositions,
for the fun of seeing who will swear to what.

(Link to underlying story omitted,
because the pretext lacks the merit
of speaking to boundless paradox --
or else -- what do the facts matter
when a good time by all is to be had,
except for the contesting victims?)

Thanks for listening,
Donald L Emerick

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/newspoetry/attachments/20021114/14cc58af/attachment.html