The haunting echoes. . .

. . .of Pardongate are stirring in the blogosphere as Mickey Kaus rattles chains in the attic of the Clinton library. He makes some very apt observations, and asks a question that is as pointed as it is illustrative as we witness the political flaying Bernard Kerik.

"But if reporters had been more irresponsible in reporting on Clinton's personal life--and less cowed by the Stephanopouloses and Carvilles--actual voters would have had this highly relevant information in real time when they made their decision in 1992. ... P.S.: Do Democrats really want to elect the woman who let all this happen under her nose? Just asking! ..."

Indeed, just how is it that the President and Rudy Giuliani can be held culpable for Bernard Kerik's dalliances while Bill Clinton is given a pass that would make the security guys at the Playboy mansion envious? And, if this is going to tar the President and Hizzoner for merely not knowing, just how can Hillary Clinton be seriously considered for the highest office in the nation?

It's about damn time someone started asking these questions, and I most heartily tip my hat to Kausfiles for doing it.

Hella-hat-tip!

UPDATE: An equally hella-hat-tip to Lucianne.com, where I found this particular Kausfile.