Skip to comments.How Clinton exploited Oklahoma City for political gain
Posted on 04/18/2010 11:12:04 AM PDT by dr_who
With the 15th anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing Monday, former President Bill Clinton is playing a starring role in the liberal effort to draw what the New York Times calls "parallels between the antigovernment tone that preceded that devastating attack and the political tumult of today." The short version of the narrative is: Today's Tea Partiers are tomorrow's right-wing bombers.
On Friday, Clinton spoke at a symposium on the bombing organized by the liberal think tank Center for American Progress, founded and run by John Podesta, the former Clinton White House chief of staff who also directed the Obama transition. The theme of Clinton's remarks was that movements like the Tea Party, characterized by extreme right-wing rhetoric, could lead to political violence. In the last few days, news accounts in the Times ("Recalling '95 Bombing, Clinton Sees Parallels"), Newsweek ("Hate: Antigovernment extremists are on the rise -- and on the march"), and ABC News ("Watch your words") drove home Clinton's point. "This is a legitimate thing to do," the former president said, "drawing parallels to the time running up to Oklahoma City and a lot of the political discord that exists in our country today."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Maybe my memory fails me. I thought that was CIA/FBI and their ilk.
You’re probably right. I was thinking of Ruby Ridge.
President Bill Clinton spoke at a nationally televised memorial service in Oklahoma City a few days after the attack. In the wake of the 1994 midterm elections—when Republicans gained a majority in Congress—the Democratic President’s national popularity had sunk to an all-time low.
However, Clinton’s emotional meeting with the victims’ families in Oklahoma City and his moving speech at the memorial service won praise throughout the country.
Following the attack, the spectre of homegrown, antigovernment extremists also cast scrutiny on the partisan rhetoric of House Speaker Newt Gingrich and members of the Republican Congress who spoke bluntly about the dangers of a large federal government.
Gingrich’s popularity began a long decline that ultimately led to his forced resignation as House Speaker in November 1998. In contrast, after the Oklahoma City speech, Clinton’s popularity grew rapidly, and in 1996 he won reelection to a second term as president.
Clinton: “To all my fellow Americans beyond this hall, I say, one thing we owe those who have sacrificed is the duty to purge ourselves of the dark forces which gave rise to this evil. They are forces that threaten our common peace, our freedom, our way of life.”
Yep they only borrowed the Tanks they used, to make sure not one person survived.
Thank you for that ,Exactly Right
The good thing now is that rats don’t want to run against the Second Amendment.
The fact that Slick the Unspeakable found it necessary to assert that it is a "legitimate" thing to do, reveals mens rea on his part, and admits of the probability that it is in fact not a legitimate thing to do, but instead is wholly a smear, a canard, and a witting political roorback.
Sure, but if he can get away with calling it “legitimate”, he can get away with calling it “legitimate”. Even better for him if the GOP can get bogged down challenging the “legitimacy” of all of it instead of calling a spade a spade.