Things I’d Like to Post About Today ….. (122008, Morning)
….. But I Don’t Have Any Time For:
- ARIFPOTUS (Accused Rapist and Impeached Former President of the United States Bill Clinton) was impeached 10 years ago yesterday. Go to Gateway Pundit (Warning: R-Rated) to get a partial, video-delivered understanding of why. The fundamental truth remains — “he was charged with lying under oath, and at the time there were people in jail for that, so we did what we had to do.” No rational observer can dispute that Clinton actually did lie under oath. If I have time, I’ll remind readers how Clinton brought this on himself when he thought he was in the clear.
- Buckeye State media reaction to the Northeast Ohio raid on the Manna Storehouse has been virtual silence. What has appeared is almost sympathetic with the storm troopers, er, cops who conducted the raid. The Buckeye Institute has gotten involved in the Stocker family’s defense. Won’t anyone ask Ted Strickland whether the Ohio Department of Agriculture’s sanctioned SWAT team tactics were out of line? And what about the bigger question of whether private citizens can sell food to each other without the heavy-handed intervention of the state? I doubt that a GOP governor would not at least be asked what he knew and when he knew it. What’s next, guys, shutting down roadside corn stands? (HT to Ohio Republic)
- I have a NewsBusters post up on the AP’s failure to name the party of a Democratic politician in trouble in Massachusetts. Before you say “of course if it’s Massachusetts, he’s a Democrat,” recall that the GOP held the governorship there for 16 years (1991-2007).
- Cynicism redefined, at the New York Times, as a dunderheaded writer in his early 40s comments on “It’s a Wonderful Life” — “Here’s the thing about Pottersville that struck me when I was 15: It looks like much more fun than stultifying Bedford Falls — the women are hot, the music swings, and the fun times go on all night. If anything, Pottersville captures just the type of excitement George (Bailey) had long been seeking.” He still feels that way now, and is proud of it. The suggestion that writer Wendell Jamieson consider becoming an adult comes to mind. I hope I get around to commenting more on this. Update, Dec. 21 — Here it is (also at NewsBusters).
- TaxMan Blog has a list of Bernard Madoff’s political contributions. Guess which party?
- Caroline Kennedy hasn’t voted about half the time. Given her predictable liberalism, if we’re lucky, she’ll miss about the same percentage of US Senate votes.
So today is the 10th ‘anniversary’ of the ‘impeachment’ of Clinton. Wow! Wasn’t that some farce?? That angry knot of Republicans were so frustrated by Clinton that they had to use the power of impeachment to retaliate against him. Historians have already looked at this political-impeachment with disdain and future historians will surely chastise the entire lot as nincompoops filled with hate.
Tell me, Mr. Blumer, were you excited too when the Republicans began this hoax? I’m betting that you were.
Comment by mud_rake — December 20, 2008 @ 10:01 am
#1, it was yesterday.
Objective historians recognize seven fundamental truths about Clinton and his impeachment:
1. He lied under oath about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Clinton even paid a fine and lost his Arkansas law license for having done so.
2. He lied when he said he did not have a years-long affair with Gennifer Flowers in the 1980s during the 1992 primaries and presidential campaign. He admitted to having an affair with Flowers during the course of his Paula Jones deposition. Had the public known the truth about Clinton-Flowers, which Clinton and the iron-grip, pre-Internet media chose to cover up despite taped evidence that the affair was real, the outcome of the 1992 primaries and/or presidential campaign would very likely have been different.
3. Clinton sexually harassed Paula Jones essentially as Paula Jones described it, forcing him into an out-of-court settlement of $700,000 or so after years of saying he would fight the charges tooth and nail.
4. The Paula Jones suit established an important legal principle, affirmed by the Supreme Court unanimously, that presidents can be sued while in office for actions that took place before they took office.
5. Bill Clinton raped Juannita Broadderick in the late 1970s. He had many opportunities to deny that he did so, and any man who hadn’t done it would have denied it. But he never did, because he knew he could be sued civilly and open up the entire incident to the public if he did.
6. The House managers were carrying out their sworn duty to uphold the law and the constitution when they wrote up articles of impeachment based on Clinton’s self-evident perjury. The House was correct in impeaching Clinton on two of four counts, and probably should have impeached him on a third.
7. The Senate did not carry out its constitutional duty to hold a trial with appropriately presented evidence, and failed to do what the known and available evidence demanded it do. There is not a planet on which perjury is not a “high crime,” regardless of the subject matter.
There’s not a whiff of “hoax” in any of the above seven points. The truth of the above assertions is not arguable, which is why objective history will eventually get it right, despite what today’s whiners and weasels who pass for historians say.
More generally (and this is the short list), Clinton’s obsessive behavior prevented him from accomplishing anything meaningful during his two terms in office, besides NAFTA, presiding over an economy the GOP Congress (finally) set on the right course in 1995-1996, giving in to the GOP on welfare reform in 1996, and agreeing to a capital gains tax cut in 1997 that accelerated growth further. He failed to address Social Security and Medicare reform, during the period that may have represented the last best chance to do so without inflicting a lot of pain on the nation. He and his SEC allowed companies of no substance to go public, leading to the dot-com bubble in 1999-2001. Finally, he failed to heed multiple warnings that Islamic terrorism was a growing threat (all the way back to the first WTC bombings in 1993), leading terrorists to believe in 2001 that they could fly planes into the WTC without suffering recriminations.
Fortunately, the most important legacy of Clinton’s impeachment is that, even in a strong economy, it made a successful challenge against Vice President Al Gore plausible, even by a less than charismatic candidate. Clinton’s disastrous first two years in office led to his party’s loss of Congress in 1994. His impeachment led to his party’s loss of the presidency in 2000. That meant that when the WTC attacks occurred, someone who would respond appropriately to terrorism up to and including victory in Iraq, and who would do everything he could to prevent another attack on American soil for the next seven years was at the helm.
Comment by TBlumer — December 20, 2008 @ 8:09 pm
Oh, lord, another Bush apologist! Luckily the number of Bush apologists are waning with each passing day [and revelation]. I wonder what life is like in LaLaLand? I must laugh out loud at the statement that ‘he kept us safe for the next 7 years.’ So did Eisenhower, Kennedy, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush and Clinton. The foolishness of that concept is humorous at best as is the line about ‘victory in Iraq.’ Pray tell, sir, what is ‘victory’ and how will we and the Iraqis know when that victory is upon them?
Comment by mud_rake — December 21, 2008 @ 7:52 am
#3, re victory if you can bear to have your worldview shaken, read the linked piece in #2 and this (the whole thing). We (and that includes you, whether you like it or not, have victory, right now, whether you choose to recognize it or not.
Sorry you’ve missed it up to this point.
PS. I noted how you slid away from impeachment once the irrefutable, inarguable assertions were rubbed in your face. Good decision; that argument’s over.
Comment by TBlumer — December 21, 2008 @ 9:37 am
#4, I noticed that as well in #3’s response. Familiar, stark and expected is the “bait & switch” skill of all Clinton loyalists/apologists and why not…he was the master at it.
Game, set & match to Blumer…and wow, by a flipping mile. How about making that response part of the post?
Comment by Rose — December 21, 2008 @ 10:17 am
PS. I noted how you slid away from impeachment once the irrefutable, inarguable assertions were rubbed in your face. Good decision; that argument’s over.
On the contrary, sir, the now infamous ‘impeachment’ was nothing more than a Republican attempt to derail one of the most popular U.S. presidents. Politics pure and simple. Imagine if you will how pale all of that nonsense is in comparison to the lies which led us into a pre-emptive war and the loss of 4000 of our servicemen and women.
But, of course, as a good Bush-apologist, you are unable to see that Constitutional failure at all. You are blinded by politics, sir, pure and simple.
Comment by mud_rake — December 21, 2008 @ 6:06 pm
#6, your non-argument tacitly acknowledges obviously immature beliefs that ….
- lying to get elected doesn’t matter.
- perjury doesn’t matter.
- rape doesn’t matter.
- failing to do one’s duty to keep the country safe beyond one’s term in office doesn’t matter.
…. as long as you supposedly have the “correct” political positions on issues.
Thank you for clarifying those beliefs for readers here.
As to the responsibility for 4,000 deaths, it’s actually more like 8,000. Clinton’s negligence as Commander in chief led to roughly 500 deaths in various embassy bombings and attacks on our troops (Khobar Towers, USS Cole) while he was president, to the deaths of almost 3,000 on 9/11, and to roughly 4,500 or so US troop deaths in the two wars that became necessary. Thankfully, a mature adult had the leadership and courage to do what had to be done to successfully clean up Clinton’s mess by deposing Saddam Hussein and achieving victory in Iraq, while getting Afghanistan to the point where it’s Obama’s to lose.
As to the supposed “lies” about Iraq (which aren’t), I’m on that too:
“The Sixteen Words” were correct —
- HERE
- HERE
- HERE
The Left’s “No WMDs Were Found” Lie –
- HERE
- HERE
- HERE
You’ve picked the wrong place to peddle your pack of lies; perhaps they might work elsewhere, but not here.
Comment by TBlumer — December 21, 2008 @ 7:56 pm
I will leave you in political LaLaLand, sir. I’ve met several like you who are so hate-filled that they will not see the truth. Enjoy your insulated life.
Comment by mud_rake — December 22, 2008 @ 11:00 am
#8, Ah yes, immature name-calling …. the 21st century’s last refuge of someone argued under the table.
Comment by TBlumer — December 22, 2008 @ 3:08 pm