“Hillary sucks but not like Monica,” was apparently one of the tee shirts that was being sold at the Republican convention. It’s a free country and no one is going to get too far with a liability suit, particular public figures. What would the charge actually be anyway? When you say someone sucks it generally means that you don’t approve of them and that's not something for which any jury is going to offer an award. Sucking of course can also refer to oral sex, but is it really libelous to accuse either Hillary or Monica Lewinsky of having oral sex? Oral sex was up until 2003 still illegal in many states but in Lawrence v. Texas the Supreme Court ruled against sodomy laws. So saying that someone sucks is not accusing them of an illegal act. In fact to say that a woman or man sucks in our current climate is generally considered to be flattering as it means that they would make an excellent sexual partner. Those people whose opposition to Hillary Clinton is reflected in the former meaning of the word would in fact probably not go along with the notion that Hillary sucks like Monica since that would be too flattering to her and as for Monica the latter use of the term is just like adding another notch to her belt. So what is all the fuss about? Using two meanings of the word "sucks" in a sentence that contains the name of the Democratic nominee for president and the woman with whom her husband cheated on her is clever and the writer may be applauded for his or her turn of phrase. But at the end of the day, is anyone going to wear this shirt?