Posted on 06/27/2004 10:50:56 AM PDT by woofie
Edited on 06/27/2004 12:09:44 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
I hate to wade back into the culture wars forced upon us by Bill Clinton's unjustified impeachment, but since many right-wingers have leapt to pummel the former president on his book tour, those of us not blinded by hate, ideology and a lust for power should at least pitch in with a rebuttal. To that end, here's a short list of better ways to think about Clinton's tenure. Post it on the fridge for handy reference.
Start with his record.Twenty-two million jobs, longest postwar boom, a shift from record deficits to record surpluses, welfare reform, a big boost in wage subsidies for poor workers. What's more, since Clinton had only two years on "offense" followed by six years on "defense" (after the GOP took the Congress in 1994), Clinton had limited scope to aim higher. But at least Clinton lost in 1994 while trying valiantly to extend health coverage to every American, and because he led his party to cast tough votes on deficit reduction that cured the problem, sparked a record expansion, yet cost some Democrats in Congress their careers.
Now, to Monica. The proper reason for Clinton supporters to be angry with him over Monica was always simple. The presidency is a trusteeship; tens of millions people had a stake in Clinton's agenda. Clinton had it right long ago. Someone in a position to lift the minimum wage for millions, or extend health coverage, or boost education, has a duty to maintain his "political viability." Knowing how the Washington game is played, Clinton had a duty not to squander his power for something so trivial. Period.
Ohhhhh brother.
Delusional
I would like not to think of Clinton at all.
Huntress wrote:
I would like not to think of Clinton at all.
In dire need of a "Mega Barf Fantasyland" alert.
a better way to think about Clinton
The Best thing about the Clinton Presidency
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1161174/posts
yeah, ain't fixated projection grotesque?
Hasn't Matt Miller beein paying attention? Is he under the impression that Monica lied on her OWN?
Has he forgotten that the ONLY reason Ken Starr was involved was because Bill Clinton told Monica Lewinsky to get Linda Tripp to lie in HER affadavit/testimony to so that SHE wouldn't expose THEIR lies!
He didn't do it because of chivalry; he did it because HE (and his "detectives" organized the entire "Jane Doe" affadavits scam, where they all lied; if he had told the truth, he would have CONFIRMED what they, in fact, did; lie in the depositions!
That's subjorning perjury; and the fact that Clinton tried to get Monica and Tripp to lie is obstruction of justice -- and proof, in my mind, that he KNEW he was breaking the law!
I hate these SOBs.
Prefer to forget him...........
If Monica gets mad enough perhaps she will tell the truth
She should sell those tapes to the highest bidder. What does she have to lose now?
You mean the tapes arent in the Clinton Lirary?
Yes, the ones she has of his phone messages to her.
I mean Lierary or Lie bary .. I dont know how to spell it
Murders.
Rape.
100 FBI files copied.
Travelgate.
Chinagate (military tech for campaign cash).
Smear Teams.
Whitewater.
Coverups.
Intimidation of a hundred critics.
Waco.
Elian.
Theft of White House treasures.
no, it's hardly "just about sex".
Sorry, I dropped a zero: 1000 FBI copies !
Sounds like pure unadulterated horse manure, doesn't it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.