Transterrestrial Musings  


Amazon Honor System Click Here to Pay

Space
Alan Boyle (MSNBC)
Space Politics (Jeff Foust)
Space Transport News (Clark Lindsey)
NASA Watch
NASA Space Flight
Hobby Space
A Voyage To Arcturus (Jay Manifold)
Dispatches From The Final Frontier (Michael Belfiore)
Personal Spaceflight (Jeff Foust)
Mars Blog
The Flame Trench (Florida Today)
Space Cynic
Rocket Forge (Michael Mealing)
COTS Watch (Michael Mealing)
Curmudgeon's Corner (Mark Whittington)
Selenian Boondocks
Tales of the Heliosphere
Out Of The Cradle
Space For Commerce (Brian Dunbar)
True Anomaly
Kevin Parkin
The Speculist (Phil Bowermaster)
Spacecraft (Chris Hall)
Space Pragmatism (Dan Schrimpsher)
Eternal Golden Braid (Fred Kiesche)
Carried Away (Dan Schmelzer)
Laughing Wolf (C. Blake Powers)
Chair Force Engineer (Air Force Procurement)
Spacearium
Saturn Follies
JesusPhreaks (Scott Bell)
Journoblogs
The Ombudsgod
Cut On The Bias (Susanna Cornett)
Joanne Jacobs


Site designed by


Powered by
Movable Type
Biting Commentary about Infinity, and Beyond!

« Demonstrating Their Priorities | Main | Doing Well By Doing Good »

Way Off Base

Whenever I read anything like this rewriting of history, it makes it hard to take anything else that person says seriously. It tells me that that person is living in some kind of Clinton-spun dreamworld:

As to Bill Clinton not being the focus of right wing hatred, I disagree strongly. For years, I would see bumper stickers around town that said, "Don't Blame Me, I Voted for Bush." The right wing-funded litigation was going after Bill, not Hillary. Ken Starr persecuted [literally] Bill, not Hillary. And, the Republican Congress impeached and tried the President -- not the First Lady -- for no other reason than he was unfaithful to his wife, and in the face of a 65% approval rating. No, they were after Bill, because they just couldn't bear to have been beaten by a Democrat. Especially a Democrat that they had targeted, on which they had attempted political homicide, and who just wouldn't go away when a lesser man would have quit. Clinton's perserverence [sic], and the continuing efforts by the Right to downplay his two Administrations, simply reinforce my theory that the Republicans will do anything -- anything -- to win.

Emphasis mine. Not only were there several other reasons, but that wasn't even one of them. I know that you'll be shocked to learn that none of the articles of impeachment mentioned his wife, or his fidelity to her. He was impeached for things that are federal crimes. Worse ones, in fact, than the one for which Scooter Libby is currently having a jury deliberate, because they included not just lying under oath, but witness intimidation and bribery, and subornation of perjury from others. And Libby hadn't taken an oath in front of the American people to see that the law of the land was properly executed.

And he can't even keep his false story straight, because in the very next sentence, he says that he was impeached because he'd won an election (funny, how they've never done that with any other Democrat president).

And this guy's supposed to be a lawyer?

This is the kind of fantastic denial about the nature of the Clintons among Democrats that I wrote about the other day.

Posted by Rand Simberg at February 28, 2007 12:02 PM
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.transterrestrial.com/mt-diagnostics.cgi/7046

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference this post from Transterrestrial Musings.
Comments

So why wasn't Clinton Indicted then?

Posted by anonymous at February 28, 2007 02:06 PM

Anonymous Moron, you've asked that question before, and it's been answered several times. Your continual repetition of it is why almost everyone here thinks you a moron.

Posted by Rand Simberg at February 28, 2007 02:08 PM

An impeachment is an indictment.

A J-H, read the Constitution, it explains it.

Posted by Mike Puckett at February 28, 2007 02:12 PM

"Anonymous's" comments is very typical of the liberal mentality in that they believe that it is not necessary to understand something in order to comment on it. Liberals, by and large, tend to be intellectually lazy.

I believe this is a result of the public school system that places higher priority on "self-esteem" than on the importance of actual learning.

Posted by Kurt9 at February 28, 2007 03:40 PM

It's revealing that a key argument (for this author) against Clinton's impeachment is his 65% approval rating at the time.

Posted by SDN at February 28, 2007 04:21 PM

And in Clinton's case, unlike Libby's, there really was an underlying crime.

Posted by abe at February 28, 2007 06:17 PM

anonymous,

Yes, although impeachment is at least analogous to indictment, Clinton wasn't indicted by the normal process to which we all (including him) are subject. But this was not because he was innocent or could not be found guilty. On the contrary, he admitted misleading the court, and was disbarred for 5 years and had to resign from the bar of the Supreme Court.

In short, it is asinine to think that the "why wasn't he indicted?" rhetorical question is useful to a Clinton-backer's argument. It's like complaining there was no trial, when that's because your man has plead guilty.

Posted by David Pittelli at February 28, 2007 07:30 PM

Clinton was not indicted because Starr decided it was not good for the country to have a political trial despite Clinton's violation of the law. He referred matter to Congress

Posted by Paul at February 28, 2007 08:04 PM

Clinton was not indicted because Starr decided it was not good for the country to have a political trial despite Clinton's violation of the law. He refered matter to Congress

Posted by Paul at February 28, 2007 08:05 PM

I wonder how well the phrase "not good for the country to have a political trial" would have gone over in 1973...

Posted by Alan K. Henderson at February 28, 2007 09:30 PM


Bill Clinton is the only democratic president with a republican
congress since Truman.

Posted by anonymous at February 28, 2007 09:40 PM

For years, I would see bumper stickers around town that said, "Don't Blame Me, I Voted for Bush."

This is an example of "hatred?" I hope that writer realizes those bumper stickers took their inspiration from a Watergate-era bumper sticker that said, "Don't Blame Me, I Voted for McGovern." Was that Nixon-hatred?

Posted by McGehee at March 1, 2007 07:59 AM

Bill Clinton is the only democratic president with a republican congress since Truman.

A Republican Congress elected in no small part due to Clinton's own actions during 1993 and 1994, lest we forget. And sustained in 1996 and 1998 because of Clinton's actions throughout his presidency.

Posted by McGehee at March 1, 2007 08:02 AM

McGehee:

Remember, if you criticize a Leftist, you're oppressing them.

If you disagree with a Leftist, you're censoring them.

So, if you mount a bumpersticker that disagrees w/ a Leftist, it's hate speech.

Posted by Lurking Observer at March 1, 2007 08:41 AM


Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments: