I was reading the Associated Press account of Hillary Clinton's NBC "Today Show" interview.

In it, she put forth the single most glaring deflection of responsibility in the history of the modern world.

She claims that all her and Bill's troubles are the result of a "vast right-wing conspiracy."

Now, I am always in favor of listening to a good conspiracy theory. Especially one in which I play a role. You see, everyone who is conservative must be part of the conspiracy.

Hillary is certainly entitled to her opinions and perceptions. And her perceptions may even be reality. It's tough for a dumb Hoosier like me to get the inside scoop on the Washington elite.

So let's assume for a moment that Hillary is right, that she and Bill are innocent victims of a massive conspiracy.

That being the case, I have several questions I would like to pose to the First Lady.

For purpose of brevity, the acronym RWC will be used hereupon to stand for "right-wing conspirator."

Which RWC was it that enticed Charlie Trie, James Riady and Johnny Huang to haul truckloads of foreign money to the Democratic National Committee?

Which RWC denied ever having an affair with Gennifer Flowers?

Which RWC called Gennifer Flowers and, in Bill Clinton's voice, told her to deny they had an affair?

Which RWC was it that got Webb Hubbell to cop a plea?

Which RWC was it that got Webb Hubbell a job?

Which RWC was it that convicted Jim McDougall?

Which RWC was it that convicted David Hale?

Which RWC forced Al Gore to use the phrases "donor maintenance event" and "no controlling legal authority."

Which RWC planted all those FBI files in the White House?

Which RWC removed all those files from Vince Foster's office after he committed suicide?

There must be a few RWCs in the Justice Department, because it continues to investigate Al Gore, Secretary of Interior Bruce Babbitt and ex-energy secretary Hazel O'Leary.

And the RWCs must have somehow infiltrated the grand jury that indicted Charlie Trie and his associate earlier this week.

Ex-housing secretary Henry Cisneros and ex-agriculture secretary Mike Espy surely also are hapless victims of RWCs because they are both charged and awaiting court dates.

And concerning the escapades at the White House, I would like to know:

Who is the RWC who convinced Kathleen Willey to testify in a deposition that Bill Clinton fondled her breast, tried to kiss her and placed her hand on his genitals?

That was a real coup for the RWCs because Willey was a friend of the Clintons and actually worked for Hillary for a while.

Which RWC hired Monica Lewinsky as a White House intern?

Which RWC forced Monica's parents to contribute to the Democratic Party?

Which RWC afforded this obviously delusional intern close access to the president of the United States?

Which RWC bought presents and sent them to this delusional, deranged intern?

Which RWC telephoned this delusional, immature intern from the White House?

Which RWC got this delusional, deranged, immature intern job interviews with Revlon, the Pentagon and Bill Richardson himself at the United Nations?

Which RWC convinced Vernon Jordan to hustle the intern all over town?

Which RWC conned this intern into making up all those lies about the president and then telling them to Linda Trip so she could tape them?

Of course the Washington Post, ABC News and L.A. Times must be part of the right-wing conspiracy because they broke the Lewsinsky story. (Now, I would call those monsters of the news lots of things. But right-wing?)

And what about Janet Reno, a Democratic appointee of President Clinton's. She gave Kenneth Starr the green light to expand his investigation into the Lewinsky allegations. Maybe Reno is really a RWC.

OK, enough is enough. And this is just the short list. There's lots more.

Sure, there are some whackos out there who think Hillary shot Vince Foster in the head. Nobody takes those people seriously.

But for Hillary to lump all the Clintons' woes into one big right-wing conspiracy is simply ludicrous.

Her assertions are intellectually flawed and patently false.

There's more than smoke. There's a raging inferno of impropriety in this administration. Some of which might be criminal.

But what can I say, I'm just another one of those whacko RWCs.

And by the way, remember when Bob Packwood kissed a couple staffers and got drummed out of the U.S. Senate?

NOW was all over that guy. I agreed with NOW. Packwood was out of line.

But NOW has been amazingly silent on the Clinton problems.

It took more than a week for NOW president Patricia Ireland to come out with a statement.

And frankly, I was pleasantly surprised at what she had to say. Although she said it much less emphatically than when it was Bob Packwood on the hot seat. They were calling for his hide.

Basically, she said that if Clinton did what he's accused of, it's an abuse of power and shouldn't be tolerated.

She also said that the White House attempt to tarnish Lewinsky's reputation is wrong.

She's right.

The White House is employing the "nuts or slut" defense. That's where they try to assassinate the character of the person making the accusation.

They say she lies, she's obsessed, she's promiscuous, she's had other affairs, blah, blah, blah.

This is supposed to help convince us that nothing happened between her and the president. And in the event that she can prove something did happen, well, then it was all her fault. She asked for it.

But for me, all the "nuts or slut" defense does is reinforce the probability that she was fooling around. They're unwittingly convincing me that she's the type of person who would do that.

It also makes the White House look a little silly. I mean, why would they give a deranged little trollop like her such close access to the president anyway?

I know. She was planted by a RWC. [[In-content Ad]]