While the substance of what Clinton lied about was sex, the underlying principle was much more serious: a man who took an oath to uphold the Constitutional principles upon which the country was founded turned those principles inside out in order to avoid the full penalty of law.
Nixon tried this as well and was drumemd out of office. Clinton could get away with it because he and his minions were every bit as comfortable about lying and the exercise of raw power as Nixon was, with one notable exception: People disliked Nixon in a way they could never dislike Clinton.
Additionally, the general public of our day is less judgemental, more self-centered and measurably less intelligent and principled then those Nixon had to deal with. Most people in this country have an attention span measured in MPH, and if it doesn't explode or have breasts, we quickly lose interest. Give people a choice between thinking and reacting, and most would simply react because thinking is beyond their capacity. Add to this a friendly press (say what you will, Clinton's escapades sold papers and airtime) and media, and it's amazing that Clinton's name hasn't been sent to the Vatican for beatification.
Only hindsight and the ex-President's belated, weaselly semi-admission gave people reason to think twice. Otherwise, as long as the 401(k) was making a few bucks and no one was being blown up on American soil by hijacked airliners, no one cared who Bill was mnaking the beats with two backs with.
The real Clinton record was always much eaiser to lay out, but was obfuscated by all the salacious details and innuendo. On Clinton's watch:
1. Americans were killed in record numbers in terrorist attacks in Africa and the Middle East. The president's only response was to bomb empty buildings. When the President did use American force, it was in the interests of the "international community" (i.e the UN), as in Somalia and Bosnia. Both were dismal failures. US forces left Somalia after a shocking reversal of fortune and Bosnia is permanently guarded by US forces for the foreeable future, despite the fact that it is a European problem, with no vital US interest attached. The USS Cole was attacked in a Middle Eastern port and no action was taken wqhatsoever. Osama Bin Laden's head was offfered to President Clinton on three occasions,and he did not take the opportunity to rid the world of the Middle Eastern Doctor No. The Oklahoma City bombing trial was a farce and Tim McVeigh was executed so quickly that we may never know just what his involvement was and who else was involved with him. What MCVeigh knew and who backed him are questions left completely unanswered. We still do not know for sure what happened to TWA 800, other than a government explantion which while believable, does not address serious contradictions in eyewitness and scientific evidence.
2. Americans were subjected to two obvious and raw abuses of federal power in the seige at Waco and the forced re-patriation of Elian Gonzolez. One was presented as the government doing it's duty to protect it's citizens from a whacky religious fringe and other as a custody battle. In these contexts, Americans were more than willing to let Janet Reno run roughshod over Constitutional protections. Only after 51 days of seige at Waco did Janet Reno finally address the allegations of child abuse within the Davidian compound, and then, somehow, it was necessary to burn the children in order to save them.
3. The abuse of government departments such as the ATF, FBI,IRS, INS, Commerce and Agricultural Departments to either crush Clinton's political opposition or enrich his campaign contributors and cronies. Using the Justice Department to sue Microsoft for the benefit of Clinton contributors had a nasty effect on the US economy, which was exacerbated by 9/11, and is still being felt today.
4. The abuse of the FBI, which was used as a clearing house for dirty laundry on political opponents. Filegate had obvious political overtones and paid dividends during the Impeachment process when many opposition politicians (prime among them Bob Barr) were threatened with public exposure of their own dirty laundry. In the meantime, we still have not had any explanation as to how 900+ sensitive FBI files wound up in the White House in the hands of an ex-bar bouncer, whom no one remembers hiring.
5. Not much mention has been made of the so-called "Clinton Card" which utilized "confidential" INS files which was utilized to present non-citizens with an official-looking voter registration document which was intended to flood the polling places with illegal voters in a shallow attempt to help Al Gore in 2000. To my knowledge, Congress has not investigated this very thoroughly, if at all.
6. Democratic and especially Mrs. Clinton's ranting and raving over the Patriot Act do not assure me that she is a defender of individual rights: it al gives me the impression that demoicrats are merely telling us what THEY would do with that kind of power. The opposition to the Act is and was centered upon Bush and John Ashcroft. I'd bet my home that there is not a democrat in Washington that wouldn't love to have the Patriot Act on their side.
It is my opinion that should Mrs. Clinton run, she should be clobbered with these points on a daily basis, and forced to explain to the American public why her husband would do or sign off on these things and why she would not. Either she speaks up or her husband comes out to defend her, but either way, we get some answers to these questions.
In the meantime, as I have stressed seevral times in the last few weeks in these forums, Klien's book is not going to win a republican the White House in 2008. It willmerely be a rehashing of what we know already: Mrs. Clinton and CO are slimy. Barring some egregious criminal action or a bombshell revelation that casts Mrs. Clinton in a new light, simply recycling the same old innuendo will not work against her. She's made of teflon, thanks to her press --- she's simultaneously "the smartest woman in the world" and a "victim of her husband and a vast right-wing conspiracy".
The only way to beat Hillary Clinton is to put her on the spot every day -- ask her to explain her positions, to give details of her proposals, to make her talk constantly. The more she talks, the less attractive she becomes as a candidate and the greater chance that she'll trip herself up.
We should alls top this fantasy that some journalist is going to stop a Hillary candidacy cold.
I'm going make a point-by-point reply but please look at it as an inquiry rather than a rebuttal, a request for clarification.
1. Lying about one's sexual activities, even if it is a President doing so, is much easier to excuse than lying about misuse of public trust and power, or about public or private theft (not, of course, about sexual crimes).
2. I agree that more popularity means less accountability.
3. I agree that the general public is more a rabble than in Nixon's day...except that the Internet has created a very large minority of very interested, intelligent, aware, and activist citizens. Far more than existed in 1974. Clinton's Presidency falls in the transition.
4. In hindsight, Clinton's response to Middle-Eastern terrorism looks weak...but only in hindsight. Without 911, President Bush wouldn't have, and wouldn't have been able to have, done much better. The American public is as stolidly against "foreign adventure" as it always has been. That's why all our great war Presidents have truly had to lead and why I've been so solidly behind Bush's willingness to do whatever had to be done to respond forcefully in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere. As for Waco and so on - there are always questions about such events. The truth about Sacco and Vanzetti didn't come out for a half century.
5. Don't know much about Waco and Elian but I suspect that no matter what was done a large part of the public would have been upset.
6. Don't know anything about Clinton's misuse of the FBI etc. for partisan advantage but that kind of abuse is one of the worst sins of government. Same with corrupting the voting process. It's always a problem.
7. The Left, the Democratic core, is thoroughly rotten these days - corrupted by political correctness and unexamined anti-war and anti-government ideas left over from the '60s. But Clinton cannot be blamed for that.