Sid's Id - Blumenthal on the Clintons [Andrew Sullivan ain't no conservative, folks]

The New York Observer via andrewsullivan.com ^ | May 15, 2003 | Andrew Sullivan

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Cute sarcasm. But let's face it: stretching your party platform to include a tiny (<1%) minority of the electorate, whose main consideration is anti-thetical to the conviction of your base, does NOT guarantee victory!

All it does is pi$$ off your core voters so they'll stay home, and hand victory to your opponents.

I trust Carl Rove's political senses more than yours, no offense intended. If the base practices "Hate the sin but love the sinner", as Rick Santorom expressed, then the inclusion of a minority of those sinners will not hurt us. However, it does disarm the attacks against us as racists, sexists, and homophobes. The appeal, rightly or wrongly, of politicians to the malleable middle will take away a reason of these wishy-washy folks to oppose us and help our chances.

[Gritty]

One may as well be reading a book from a sychophantic author who worked for Joe Stalin who was writing about Stalin's character and enlightened regime, while Stalin was still alive!

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Another well written article. However, as well written as it is, I think it is based on a false premise.

I'm glad Ken Starr failed in his quest. Had he succeeded, Clinton would have resigned. Al Gore would have become President sometime in 1999,.....

Clinton would never have resigned. He is without shame, is amoral, and you could not have beat him with a big enough stick to make him give up power, Air Force One, and center stage. However, had Starr succeeded, that implies that he would have been removed from office by the Senate so the point is moot.

I don't think it is certain that Gore would have succeeded either. As close as that crooked election was (whew) and with all the advantages of an incumbent, I think Gore would have lost convincingly, or maybe he wouldn't have even run, having been shamed (?) out of office before that or impeached also.

Remember, the thing that sidetracked Starr's investigation was his strict adherence to his charter as an independent investigator. He was mandated to bring charges as soon as he uncovered an impeachable offense. As David Schippers said, the most damning evidence was the INS scandal of which Gore was in charge. Had the investigation continued there is likely to have been much more uncovered such as the campaign scandal involving Communist China, etc. Gore was up to his eyeballs in all of that.

Unfortunately, because of Lucy Anne Goldgerg's and Linda Tripp's decisions, and their timing, it became obvious that Clinton had committed perjury in a federal court - an impeachable offense. Therefore, Starr had to present it and the sensationalism of that overshadowed everything else. It also gave the Dems, and Specter, the guy from Scotland, a way out. That is why they absolutely refused to go to the evidence room and look at anything else before they voted.

In summary, had Starr succeeded, the Speaker of the House (can't remember who it was at that particular time as they were being outed so fast) may have been president. We still have all that ammo when Hillary of Gore raise their heads again.

[section9]

Equality before the law is meaningless if the mob wants its Hillbilly Fuhrer to remain in power. That's the way things were in 1998. The people associated Bill Clinton with Good Times. Little did they know that there would be a terrible price that was paid.

Yes, sure, it would be nice if Clinton was jailed, but only after his term was up. The Paula Jones thing was a civil suit. It should not have been brought against a sitting President. Otherwise, if we are to allow civil suits to proceed, could not Michael Moore compel the President to be deposed during some jumped-up lawsuit?

What you don't appear to understand is that the shoe is firmly on the other foot, now, and the Democrats are filled with the kind of people who took flight of reason in 1998. People are running around screaming "no blood for oil" and still believing that Bush and Rove had Wellstone's plane sabotaged. Things worked out for the best.

Call it Clintonian all you want. It worked out for the best, and the right man is in the White House.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[Mia T]

YOO-HOO Sid…
It won't s-p-i-n 

All the fuss over the spread-eagle pose and the tie pointing to nothing much.

I think the great untold story of that photo is the scary fisheye distortion of his hands, monstrous rapist's hands, hands that held down Juanita, hands that only underscore his congenital smallness...

It is as though the photographer was saying, "You small - - - - -. I believe Juanita."

 

GORE ON CLINTON RAPES-THE VIDEO

YOO-HOO missus clinton:
THE CLINTON RAPES ARE

"UNBECOMING"

Aside: Isn't it interesting how the clintons, how this "brilliant man" and this "smart" woman, (as Estrich is wont to describe them these days) -- ("the smartest woman in the world" according to the clinton version always careful not to preclude the possibility of smarter men) -- isn't it interesting how these two veritable geniuses never fail to fall for the artiste's inside joke?

bushwhacked by tailhook: the real reason

Reciprocal Intern-Exploitation-Purgation Attempt at JFK Library
"I knew Jack Kennedy. Jack Kennedy was a friend of mine...."

Are Susan Estrich, Al From and The Times on the same "Get the clintons off the stage!" page?...
(Desperately seeking Susan.... Who spiked her, anyway?)

Democratic Party's Problem Transcends Its Anti-War Contingent
CLINTON-WAS-AN-UTTER-FAILURE Containment Team Scheme _{FICTIONAL TRILOGY}
Q ERTY8^PING

The REAL "Living History" -- clintoplasmodial slime

[section9]

Had Bill Clinton been stripped of power by the Senate, as you correctly point out, Gore still would have acceeded to the Presidency. I have every reason to believe that the Senate Republicans, then under the leadership of Trent "Vacant" Lott would choose to "spare the country" from another scandal. Gore would have remained President, and Bush would have remained in Austin, a victim of circumstances beyond his control.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[Mind-numbed Robot]

I have every reason to believe that the Senate Republicans, then under the leadership of Trent "Vacant" Lott would choose to "spare the country" from another scandal.

To assume Starr's success with Clinton you would have to assume that Lott had already been transformed and no longer vacant. Add to that the evidence of Gore's involvement every step of the way with Clinton in the other scandals and you come to my conclusion rather than yours. (This is all based on my comments about the premature introduction of the Lewinsky matter which forestalled consideration of the other stuff. That, in turn, is to doubt your scenario of a Clinton resignation and a Gore ascension.)

[section9]

No, MNR, I didn't make myself clear. It was I who made the mistake in assuming that Clinton would resign. He would have had to have been removed.

So in that regard, you are correct. Nevertheless, even upon removal, Gore would have ascended to the Presidency. I regret that given the character of the American electorate in 2000, the only way a President Al Gore could have lost to then-Governor Bush is for President Gore to be caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy.

Remeber, even after the Monks, even after the Chernomyrdin Affair, Gore still won the popular vote when he manifestly should not have.

Remember how many freaking idiots ended up voting for Gore because of the DUI leak? That's how Gore got his "majority".

Sheesh.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[Mind-numbed Robot]

Nevertheless, even upon removal, Gore would have ascended to the Presidency.

Of course we are both indulging in conjecture so this is just for conversation purposes but my point is that Gore would have been tarred with the same brush as Clinton, therefore just as guilty, so that if Clinton had been removed, after all he was impeached but accepted it as a badge of honor, but if he had been removed, Gore would have been forced to resign or face the same fate.

I have enjoyed our exchange but we will neither ever know.

[section9]

Well put.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[dirtboy]

And in a contest between the duplicitous Clinton and the puritanical Starr, the country and the Senate were absolutely right to back Mr. Clinton.

The law Paula Jones used against Clinton, namely allowing expanded discovery in sexual harrasment suits, had been supported by Clinton and signed into law by Clinton. The Office of Independent Counsel had been re-authorized by ... Bill Clinton. Sullivan is wildly off-target with his attack on Starr her - Starr's office and the lawbreaking he was investigating was created by Clinton himself, who never envisioned that the laws would actually apply to HIM...