sheesh. i work in a library. i see a lot of newspapers when i work. ive noticed that theyve started printing pictures of monica lewinsky in a cleavage-revealing dress. mmhmm. this is legitimate journalism, hmm? what was wrong with the (slightly frightening, what with those krill-straining gums there) head shot?  not slutty enough? did the media need to show some flesh to make some more money? sheesh. out of curiosity (and JUST out of curiosity.  i have strange tastes but this wacky bitch isnt one of them), i went to yahoo and typed in "monica lewinsky pictures" guess what?  theres already two fan clubs and one "photo gallery" i went to alta vista. i counted at least five sites claiming to have photos of her nekkid, and doing some depraved sexual acts. i roll my eyes, shake my head, make sure my brain is aligned, and look again. yup. five sites. 5. at least. i didnt have the patience to weed through the 20,000 sites it collected for me. probably about 300+ will be around before this thing goes away. seems if ANYTHING female gets massive (media) exposure, lots and lots of 300 pound flakes want nudes of 'em. i just collect jpgs of actresses, i dunno. at least im almost normal. now, as far as my opinion of this bullshit? i really could care less. and so do most of the people ive talked to. nobody CARES! HEAR THAT MEDIA?  NO ONE CARES! almost makes me wish theyd print the late diana's pictures every day again. oh wait they havent stopped on that yet either. sheesh. and in other news.... the iraq thing. i agree with tom's answer. i think we should just nuke the crap out of that place and forget about it. the world would run a lot smoother if they just made me emperor...   still february 3rd, 1998 94 days left.