Political attack dog James Carvill and his buddy, filthmonger Larry Flynt, are doing their part to perpetuate the myth that the Clinton trial is about sex.

There's no proof, of course, that Flynt and Carvill are in league. I'm just putting two and two together. Two Carvill promises a "scorched earth" policy if the impeachment movement continues; two the impeachment movement continues and Flynt begins to scorch the earth; Four Carvill and Flynt are working together. Seems logical to me.

It also seems logical that Republican-haters should grudgingly admit that those with skeletons in their closets have at least shown the courage of their convictions by going forward with impeachment, knowing that those skeletons are going to be "outed."

Then we have the amazing spectacle of a White House official referring to Hustler magazine as a news magazine, while Democrats seize every opportunity, and every microphone, to screech that the Starr report is disgusting, filthy pornography. Did somebody dump hallucinogens into the Perrier supply?

But, putting aside the fact that Flynt has no credibility and should be afforded none, this latest outburst of insanity deserves a closer look.

During water cooler talk, a friend and coworker made a passionate and, in many ways, logical case for the belief that Flynt, in digging up sexual sin allegations against Republicans, is doing something that, if not noble in its intent, is at least beneficial in its effect.

With apologies and the knowledge that he will set me straight if I slip up, I'll try to state his argument in a nutshell:

We in this country have an annoying habit of attacking our political foes based on moral deficiencies, perceived or real, even though we all know that no one is without sin. In other words, we're hypocrites. Even though the president's troubles are due to commission of crimes, perjury and obstruction of justice, the temptation to commit such crimes would never have occurred if this hypocritical politics of personal destruction had not existed. Exposure of as many of the hypocrites' private sins by a guy like Larry Flynt will make politicians think twice before engaging in personal destruction in the future.

There's merit to that way of viewing the situation, certainly. I doubt Flynt has the mental capacity to come up with such an approach to the task at hand. I think his intent is to harm the president's enemies any way he can, and to simultaneously intimidate any possible future enemies.

But the question we're dealing with here is whether his strategy will turn out to be a good thing in the long run if indeed it encourages kinder, gentler politics from now on.

But here are a few observations:

First, if those who are digging up dirt on politicians are the culprits, Flynt has gone after the wrong bunch. The culprits are folks like me... reporters.

It was news people, not politicians, who sneaked up on Gary Hart and his lover in a hotel and exposed his affair. It was reporters who brought us Genifer Flowers, Paula Jones, et al.

Second, President William Jefferson Clinton's sexual sin has not harmed his political career at all. Reporters dug the stuff up, and he was elected anyway. So my friend's ideal world in which politicians need not fear political consequences for immorality already exists.

Third, not one single political enemy has ever suggested that Clinton's sex addiction was grounds for any sort of tax-supported investigation. Only when Paula Jones brought suit for sexual harassment and Clinton was caught lying under oath did Republicans begin to suggest that there was something that needed judicial attention.

Apologists for Clinton like to rant about "$40 million and six years of investigation," but most of that money was spent investigating a fraud case. And though the president was not prosecuted in the end of that case, many people were, and much justice was done.

The Monica Lewinsky investigation started just about a year ago, and it has centered on determining whether the president lied under oath and whether he used his office to cover up the lie and to put down an embarrassing lawsuit. There are no facts whatsoever to support the constant liberal breast-beating over spending public funds to investigate private shenanigans.

So we are back to Larry Flynt's smut war, and I think anyone can see that its result will be the same as its intent revenge and intimidation.