Skip to comments.Clinton's womanizing: Why it still matters
Posted on 05/28/2005 10:47:13 AM PDT by Albion Wilde
Shocking new expose covers Bill and Hillary's intimidation machine
What injustices did women who got tied up with Bill Clinton suffer? What kind of tactics were used against them? What really happened between Clinton and the many women whose names have hit the media in the last 15 years?
Those questions and more are answered in clear detail in Candice E. Jackson's new book, "Their Lives: The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine," which covers many of Clinton's "womanizing" cases and explains why, with his wife eyeing the White House, we should still care about them.
Said Kathleen Willey: "Candice E. Jackson's rendition of my story is the most accurate portrayal of my experience with Bill Clinton that has yet been published. I appreciate her painstaking attempt to express the true nightmare Bill and Hillary put me through."
Added Juanita Broaddrick, whose story is told in an excerpt on WND: "Candice E. Jackson presents a complete chronological account of the events surrounding Bill Clinton's violent assault on me. People need to remember this side of Clinton before writing him up as a hero for women."
In a groundbreaking examination of the accounts of seven women, Jackson, who describes herself as a libertarian feminist, examines how the former president and his inner circle wielded vast power to discredit and destroy the former objects of his desire. Instead of passing moral judgment on Clinton, Jackson relies on extensive research and firsthand interviews to document the intimidation and harassment unleashed on these individuals.
Jackson, a victim of rape herself, uses her own experience to analyze that of Broaddrick and others.
She also presents a cogent rebuke of modern-day liberalism and explains why it enables men in high places to abuse their power.
States promotional material for "Their Lives": "The pattern of threats, bribes, and coercion that this book uncovers reveals not only a cold-blooded willingness on the part of Clinton, his wife and their inner circle to maintain power at any cost, but it also exposes the undeniable connection between Clinton's misogynist tendencies and his liberal agenda. 'Their Lives' is a wake-up call to women everywhere to re-evaluate this ruthless man and to come together to prevent Hillary Clinton, a willing partner in her husband's attacks, from returning to the White House."
Read Chapter 8 of Jackson's expose.
The average American voter is as dumb as a turkey dropping.
Because obsessing about it can be used to defeat Republicans for the next hundred years?
...Which brings to mind that Lindsay (ey?) dude... That guy with the shady eyes who was always at Bill's side. I always wondered what dirty secrets he carried. Talk about a book...
If he ever decided to talk, he'd bring down that corrupt Klinton machine in a nanosecond!
yeah , ... and Bubba's back in Sri Lanka , ... he is feelin' their , um , feelin' their [pain??]
ping to self for pingout?
I don't mean to trivialize it, but this womanizing thing pales in comparison to what Clinton did WRT Chinagate, Vincent Foster, etc.
More supreme court Judges such as Ruth Bader Ginsberg, anyone?
Maybe it is because they have no morals, just like him.
The writer nails it. As usual, laws and rules simply don't apply to liberals like Clinton and his wife and their supporters, enablers, the movers and shakers, Hollywood's 'beautiful' people, just to the rest of us in flyover country.
ROTFLMAO!!! That would have carried me through the 90s if only you had posted it then.
And where was NOW and other feminazis? Showing wide support for clintoon even now while denigrating these women. Bah!
Yeah but sex sells out there - anything else is just too complicated for the average democrat voter to grasp.
"How people ... democrats could have overlooked this behavior ..."
The same way they will "overlook" all of Hillary's corruption and complicity with her husband's corruption, and try to elect her to the WH - it's called POWER.
"The average American voter is as dumb as a turkey dropping."
Not so much dumb as selectively unconcerned and focused on self, not nation in political matters. The self-sacrifice that was so much a part of Christian instruction and the entire tradition of English chivalries and courtesies that informed so many of the Founders is missing today. Our educational system has become a cult of narcissism that is destroying our civic life -- but that's just what the Marxists and ACLU want.
"I know some very intelligent people who are still defending him and will vote for his wife if she runs, therefore, putting HIM back into the WH as well. Unfreaking believable!"
I truly believe they are unelectable, for all the right reasons, including the new media's popularity and the old media's insularity. But it will be a wild ride if she is nominated, and there will be more of the kind of vicious anti-Constitutional and anti-Christian behavior that we have seen since '00. Even Nixon had the good grace to concede without a court fight for the sake of the country when Kennedy's operatives outflanked him in election manipulation. Not this group.
"this womanizing thing pales in comparison to what Clinton did WRT Chinagate, Vincent Foster, etc."
Couldn't agree more. It was distasteful to witness from a distance and destructive to our youth and the general morale, but it was only the skin on the issues that will be uncovered and held up to the light if Ms Clinton is nominated.
"...the thought of the likes of Albright, Burglar, and assorted other losers back in power ought to be a wake up call for America. More supreme court Judges such as Ruth Bader Ginsberg, anyone?"
The greater problem now, IMHO, is not what she will do, but the fact that the populace has been so seduced by the Democrat entitlement mentality and abandoned by the decadence in the culture and convoluted education that tries to eliminate God and morality, that real confusion is setting in. Real distortions of the Constitution are getting set in stone, like the First Amendment backwards interpretations and the war against freedoms of religion, speech and association being waged by the ACLU.
When children can't legally be taught the true story of our founding and what it stood for, when the literal meaning of words is twisted to mean the opposite of everything they have meant since time immemorial, when the mounting evidence that society is breaking down and no one is safe in their homes, cars, or when they open their mouth to speak fails to convince the Left that they are on the wrong track, this is what you get.
Even Reagan appointees like O'Connor haven't performed as he would certainly have wished. Reagan himself made many liberal mistakes due to having been drenched in Hollywood culture, such as signing the first abortion bill in California, and the first "no-fault" divorce law, both of which he deeply regretted.
But God has promised that if enough of us appeal to Him, He will heal our land. So get praying, Freepers! Pray without ceasing!
"And where was NOW and other feminazis? Showing wide support for clintoon even now while denigrating these women. Bah!"
It's so revolting, isn't it? But remember, this is a transition from leftist extremism, so the fact that they have turned on all their constituencies -- the working poor, blacks, women, Catholics -- must be painfully obvious to more and more people. The Internet is allowing even private citizens to assemble dossiers of contradictory statements by the betrayers of truth. Thanks, Algore!
None of the women that became involved with Clinton, a married man, were victims. They made a choice and there is a price to be paid for every choice we make. This is not to be construed as an apology for his behavior; just pointing out that we all pack our own parachutes....
Huh? Are you saying that
a) If the republican candidate wins the white house against Hillary in 2008 by election fraud she won't have the good grace to concede? OR
b) If Hillary wins the white house by election fraud the republican candidate should not have the good grace to concede due to the repugnancy of the candidate? OR
c) If the election is a narrow republican victory over Hillary she won't concede?
The book "Rainbow Party" says it all for me.
"None of the women that became involved with Clinton, a married man, were victims. They made a choice..."
Actually, if you read the accounts, some of these situations were credibly described as out-and-out rape, aided and abetted by his posse when he was governor.
And then the political ravishments of other individuals....
Explain to me how you think this applies to the two women named in the article (i.e., Kathleen Willey and Jaunita Broaddrick).
LOL!! I think all bets are off now. The '00 election "enabled" a new low in candidate behavior by the loser. And given the NeoLeft's penchant for astonishing, outrageous, bald-faced 180-degree lies backed up by litigation, our system may never recover the "gentlemanly" conduct once expected of presidential candidates.
"The book "Rainbow Party" says it all for me.
By that you mean it expresses the new low our society has sunk to? If so, I agree.
it did not matter to most americans in 1992 and it will not in 2008.
"Explain to me how you think this applies to the two women named in the article (i.e., Kathleen Willey and Jaunita Broaddrick)."
I haven't read the book yet, but I have read past accounts of the behavior. It frankly doesn't matter much to me whether it was consensual serial promiscuity or rape in terms of the man's credibility as a mature adult leading his political party to make decisions regarding marriage, sexual behavior, abortion and the like.
What also matters is the coverups and smears and the sense of entitlement to this trooper- and Secret Service-assisted sexual addiction and then lie about it -- and trash the people involved in it.
"...it did not matter to most americans in 1992 and it will not in 2008."
Respectfully disagree. Again, I don't think the voters really cared about the sex, and I don't think the point of the book review was about the sex, but about the arrogance and destruction of the reputations of others in order to maintain the out-sized entitlements.
Amen, Stellar Dendrite! Focused on all the wrong things!
In post #26, you made the blanket statement that the women bear some responsibility for what happened to them because they chose to have a "relationship" with Clinton, a married man. Niether Willey or Broaddrick chose to have a "relationship".
You don't need to read the book to be familiar with the stories of these two women.
Post #26 was sent to me from Wage Slave, so that opinion was Wage Slave's, not mine. Hope this clears it up!
Here's more detail about one of the alleged incidents, from another article dealing with the same book review:
I was separating the instances of rape from the "mere" womanizing. Although the article indicates that Juanita Broaddrick was possibly a cheating spouse and admitted to lying under oath, and I do not find her credible because of that, in no way am I apologizing for Clinton's behavior.
I am not saying that Clinton has a right to rape, just that a woman has all the information she needs about a man's character if she knows he is married but willing to become involved with another woman. If she is willing to become involved with him, they are both "bad guys," not just the cheating husband, and she has to face the consequences just like he does.
On the other hand, she is not responsible for his actions and of course he should pay the price for his own behaviors or crimes. The full price. Clinton will not, but the women will. That's the way the world goes round.
"I am not saying that Clinton has a right to rape, just that ... if she knows he is married but willing to become involved with another woman. If she is willing to become involved with him, they are both "bad guys," not just the cheating husband, and she has to face the consequences just like he does. "
I certainly agree with you on that. But there is something very dangerous about a POTUS engaging in illicit behavior requiring a coverup by his staff. It leaves him open to blackmail or even grave physical harm from an infiltrator. The idea that a young woman could enter the Oval office by flashing her thong at him just makes me weep for the chances he took with the security of our country. The responsibilities of the office of the President should weigh heavier on him than on a garden-variety cheater, man or woman.
On the other hand, her behavior in attempting to seduce a president should also be regarded as a reprehensible security breach.
Personally, I feel these seven words bottomline it all:
IT'S JUST EASIER TO BE A LIBERAL....
It just is... I'm 37 yrs. old, and my generation as well as my dad's generation seem to be "the shortcut generations". The "I want it now", "If it feels good, it's fine" generations, and unfortunately if that type of thinking and acting become the majority in this country again, it will be VERY hard to turn that around.
It's harder to do the right thing... It's harder to talk to your kids about "right morals" than it is to "hope" the schools do it for you. It's harder to actually get a job and work for a living, than it is to pop kids out like a Pez dispenser and continue to get handouts from your government.
It's harder to stand your ground in the face of adversity and unpopular opinion and send good men into battle, battle that many will not return home from, than it is to say "This war is unjust, our President can't "feel the pain" of the families who've lost loved one's in Iraq... We need to exit Iraq now and bring our troops home..." It's harder to look at other nation's leaders and say "F U", we don't care about permission, we are doing this because it is for THE GREATER GOOD!!! And you're just to ignorant to see it..."
It's harder to make decisions that you know may be unpopular with your kids, your friends and peers, your constituents or your nation, but we Republicans will do it anyway because it's the right thing to do.
It's just easier to be a liberal...
bump for later. got half way thru chapter 8. must read
"IT'S JUST EASIER TO BE A LIBERAL.... "
Brilliantly said. Thank you. May I send it to my personal friends via e-mail?
of course, thank you for the compliment...
Perfect Point!! Monsoor Ijaz's information regarding the offers made to Clinton regarding Bin Laden would've been shouted from the rooftops if it was a Republican in office at the time that offer was made.... and subsequently refused...
If the media wasn't so pro Dem and anti-Bush....more attention would have been given to Clinton's 'sins of omission' regarding the terrorist threat.
For example....most Americans don't know that Clinton never came to NYC after the 1993 bombing of the WTC. The domestic terrorist threat was kept very quiet during the Clinton years.
Bubba treated the WH like the Plyboy Mansion while the Jhadists plotted & bided their time for the WTC 9-11-01 attack.