Willey vs. Willie
Commentary by Phil Valentine  / March, 1998

As I sat there watching the Kathleen Willey interview on 60 Minutes I turned to my wife, as I've
done on many other occasions, and announced that this was going to be the one that gets the
president. The contest between Kathleen Willey and Slick Willie for America's confidence had
begun. Lo and behold, despite a candid story from a credible witness with no political axe to grind, the poll numbers came out the week after and he's still riding high! What's the deal? Aren't the American people paying attention? Don't they care? Those of us who follow politics this closely have to, at times, step back and look at the issues like the average, casually-attentive American citizen. Sure, she was quite believable and the most credible witness to date but The White House was quick to launch a smear campaign against her, as is their MO with anyone who dares cross them. They produced some letters written by Willey after the incident which seem to contradict her contention that she was upset by the incident just outside the Oval Office. Many Americans began to question Willey's credibility. (It's amazing that they could find those letters among the millions sent to the president and they can never find the papers that Ken Starr wants to see.)

There are those of us who asked the question of Anita Hill: If you were sexually harassed by
Clarence Thomas, why did you follow him to another job and wait years before coming forward? Like the feminists who have refused to pile on the president, we Anita Hill doubters seem to find ourselves in the same quandary. Or do we?

I have a good friend, a female, who once had her breasts groped by a superior in her office in an attempt to tell the punchline of a tasteless joke. It was a stupid move on his part and greatly
disturbed my friend. She was shocked, hurt and disappointed that this man she so admired had done such a thing. She never felt quite the same about him although, to this day, she still has a special place in her heart for him. He was a good friend who just did something stupid. She never mentioned the incident to anyone higher up, she never sued. She wrote it off to bad judgement and went on with her life. I asked her to imagine this same man being accused by other women of sexual assault then seeing their good names dragged through the mud while he denied ever being anything but a perfect gentleman. Would that change her opinion of him? Would she feel compelled to come forward? Without hesitation, she responded, "absolutely." Like Kathy Willey, when you see a pattern of this kind of behavior, it's no longer an isolated incident, a lapse in judgement. It's a sexual predator who needs to be stopped. When asked why she decided to tell her story on 60 Minutes, she said she was "tired of the lies and seeing people's lives ruined." My discussion with my friend instantly opened her eyes to why Willey behaved as she did after the Oval Office incident.

Now, back to Anita Hill. Is my faith in Kathy Willey's story and lack of it in Anita Hill's a
contradiction. No. Unlike President Clinton, with Clarence Thomas, there was no pattern of
behavior. No one before or since Anita Hill has ever accused him of sexual harassment. There were no other lives being ruined. Thomas wasn't telling lies about other women, compelling Hill to come forward. (By the way, I joined in the chorus of people wanting to see Bob Packwood go, wising he'd take Teddy Kennedy with him.) And why is it no one in the media questioned Hill's credibility when she was brought to Washington to testify by ultra-left-wing feminists? Where were the accusations of a LEFT-wing conspiracy? Remember, too, the allegations. The worst Justice Thomas was accused of was inviting Hill back to his place to watch an adult video. President Clinton is accused of sexually assaulting at least two women! So where does this leave us? Well, it would seem that the sexual assaulting of our mothers, daughters and sisters is still considered a despicable act, that is unless the perpetrator champions the correct political agenda, in which case, all is forgiven.