“You Think You’re So Clever…”
Everybody else has weighed in on the Clinton blow-up in his Sunday interview with Chris Wallace on Fox News, so why not me? Well, although I think it’s received exhaustive coverage elsewhere, what are a few more sentences driving the point home, right?
I certainly can say this. I feel vindicated. College sort of breeds a distrust for authority (reinforced by most professors). Governmental authority, specifically, is looked upon negatively. Interestingly, the professors never seemed to include themselves. Perhaps they should’ve. With George HW Bush, I found myself looking at a near Rockefeller Republican, an old New England liberal, trying to play at being conservative. He failed, but he also failed to convince the liberals he was one of them. Perhaps the Gulf War didn’t help. I didn’t like his endorsement of taxes and his social agenda left much to be desired. I found no shortage of support in my discontent with his Presidency on campus. When Clinton took office, though, that discontent vanished. Everyone acted as if we were living in Camelot.
Within a year or two, the “New Democrat” from Arkansas proved to be more liberal than any New England Democrat could have hoped to be. He also proved to be more lacking in ethics or ability to efficiently run government and hopelessly corrupt regarding monetary contributions and the running of the White House. Not a peep echoed from the hallowed halls of academia that I walked. The only opposition voice I heard was mine. The same people who were telling me to “Question Authority” one minute were praising our great new President the next. Didn’t seem right then and it still doesn’t.
With people of quantifiable integrity like Barbara Olsen and Gary Aldrich weighing in on the Clinton White House and the real scandalous behavior, the travesty he had made of the office, and the utter failure in foreign policy, I found it impossible to understand why the mainstream media of the day wasn’t putting these stories up nightly. Clinton was so protected from any negative press, it was ridiculous. He didn’t get hard questions, not about his foreign and domestic policies. Only when the cheap and tawdry scandal of sex with an intern was broached, something no media pundit worth his Harvard diploma could ignore, were questions asked, and then they STILL ignored his failed foreign policy.
His domestic policy didn’t help either. Waco, Ruby Ridge, Oklahoma City, Mogadishu, the first WTC bombing, Khobar Towers, the Tanzania and Kenya embassy bombings, the Chinese Army/Intel campaign contributions, the attack on the U.S.S. Cole and the complete failure of this weak man to LEAD his government went on virtually ignored. When his administration was confronted with even the hint of impropriety in these matters, well, someone else was always to blame. Clinton came to personify the “always the victim” mentality of the 90’s. The guy was practically its poster child and the mainstream media was his nursemaid.
Ever since 1999, his same aggressive crew has done everything in their power to reshape history and try and build a fake legacy out of even more fake history by again blaming everyone but Clinton for the failures of his administration. More felons came out of his administration than Nixon’s, but we’re supposed to believe even now that overall he wasn’t so bad? Even his own National Security Advisor, Sandy “Pants” Berger, was convicted of stealing documents that could have made Clinton look bad regarding his handling of the terrorist threat from the National Archives. Frankly, as an aside, I think anyone who destroys anything kept at the National Archives should be shot, burned, and hung from the Washington Monument as an example to other Vandals of history, and not necessarily in that order.
Back to Clinton, though. Somehow, the former President has managed to avoid any tough questions since 9/11 on how royally he screwed the pooch on his watch. Hmm…I’m not even sure that’s just a metaphor. Regardless, that he finally got confronted with even a simple question from Chris Wallace, that inquired as to what Clinton thought of those who said he failed in Somalia, especially bin Laden himself, who saw it as a sign that America could be beaten, was a magical moment for me. That he couldn’t help but explode, showing a fraction of that rumored temper his aides have always tried to deny was even more priceless. And that all he could do was lie repeatedly, even about the one source, Richard Clarke’s book on the subject, was even more telling of the moral vacuity of the man.
His use of phrases like “little conservative hit piece” and “you’ve got that little smirk on your face…you think you’re so clever…” and my favorite “You did Fox’s bidding on this show” are phrases I would’ve expected from a fifth grader who got caught peaking into the girl’s locker room, not of a former President. The man wasn’t worthy to be President or even shine the President’s shoes and he sure as hell didn’t do our country any good while he played pretend at the job. Even with this little schoolyard tantrum, the Left can’t help but hold this up as an example of how they should “fight back” when challenged by the Right. Yes, don’t stand on the merits of your arguments or beliefs. Throw a tantrum and almost physically assault the person who questions you. Act like a big ass baby and then people will really take you seriously.
This is the best the Left can do these days? This is still their standard bearer? I can plainly say that I’m glad I was around to see it, and I’m even more glad that he has continued to show, even more openly than before, what a pathetic excuse of a man he is and the real legacy of his pretend Presidency. Thank God for small favors.
Everybody else has weighed in on the Clinton blow-up in his Sunday interview with Chris Wallace on Fox News, so why not me? Well, although I think it’s received exhaustive coverage elsewhere, what are a few more sentences driving the point home, right?
I certainly can say this. I feel vindicated. College sort of breeds a distrust for authority (reinforced by most professors). Governmental authority, specifically, is looked upon negatively. Interestingly, the professors never seemed to include themselves. Perhaps they should’ve. With George HW Bush, I found myself looking at a near Rockefeller Republican, an old New England liberal, trying to play at being conservative. He failed, but he also failed to convince the liberals he was one of them. Perhaps the Gulf War didn’t help. I didn’t like his endorsement of taxes and his social agenda left much to be desired. I found no shortage of support in my discontent with his Presidency on campus. When Clinton took office, though, that discontent vanished. Everyone acted as if we were living in Camelot.
Within a year or two, the “New Democrat” from Arkansas proved to be more liberal than any New England Democrat could have hoped to be. He also proved to be more lacking in ethics or ability to efficiently run government and hopelessly corrupt regarding monetary contributions and the running of the White House. Not a peep echoed from the hallowed halls of academia that I walked. The only opposition voice I heard was mine. The same people who were telling me to “Question Authority” one minute were praising our great new President the next. Didn’t seem right then and it still doesn’t.
With people of quantifiable integrity like Barbara Olsen and Gary Aldrich weighing in on the Clinton White House and the real scandalous behavior, the travesty he had made of the office, and the utter failure in foreign policy, I found it impossible to understand why the mainstream media of the day wasn’t putting these stories up nightly. Clinton was so protected from any negative press, it was ridiculous. He didn’t get hard questions, not about his foreign and domestic policies. Only when the cheap and tawdry scandal of sex with an intern was broached, something no media pundit worth his Harvard diploma could ignore, were questions asked, and then they STILL ignored his failed foreign policy.
His domestic policy didn’t help either. Waco, Ruby Ridge, Oklahoma City, Mogadishu, the first WTC bombing, Khobar Towers, the Tanzania and Kenya embassy bombings, the Chinese Army/Intel campaign contributions, the attack on the U.S.S. Cole and the complete failure of this weak man to LEAD his government went on virtually ignored. When his administration was confronted with even the hint of impropriety in these matters, well, someone else was always to blame. Clinton came to personify the “always the victim” mentality of the 90’s. The guy was practically its poster child and the mainstream media was his nursemaid.
Ever since 1999, his same aggressive crew has done everything in their power to reshape history and try and build a fake legacy out of even more fake history by again blaming everyone but Clinton for the failures of his administration. More felons came out of his administration than Nixon’s, but we’re supposed to believe even now that overall he wasn’t so bad? Even his own National Security Advisor, Sandy “Pants” Berger, was convicted of stealing documents that could have made Clinton look bad regarding his handling of the terrorist threat from the National Archives. Frankly, as an aside, I think anyone who destroys anything kept at the National Archives should be shot, burned, and hung from the Washington Monument as an example to other Vandals of history, and not necessarily in that order.
Back to Clinton, though. Somehow, the former President has managed to avoid any tough questions since 9/11 on how royally he screwed the pooch on his watch. Hmm…I’m not even sure that’s just a metaphor. Regardless, that he finally got confronted with even a simple question from Chris Wallace, that inquired as to what Clinton thought of those who said he failed in Somalia, especially bin Laden himself, who saw it as a sign that America could be beaten, was a magical moment for me. That he couldn’t help but explode, showing a fraction of that rumored temper his aides have always tried to deny was even more priceless. And that all he could do was lie repeatedly, even about the one source, Richard Clarke’s book on the subject, was even more telling of the moral vacuity of the man.
His use of phrases like “little conservative hit piece” and “you’ve got that little smirk on your face…you think you’re so clever…” and my favorite “You did Fox’s bidding on this show” are phrases I would’ve expected from a fifth grader who got caught peaking into the girl’s locker room, not of a former President. The man wasn’t worthy to be President or even shine the President’s shoes and he sure as hell didn’t do our country any good while he played pretend at the job. Even with this little schoolyard tantrum, the Left can’t help but hold this up as an example of how they should “fight back” when challenged by the Right. Yes, don’t stand on the merits of your arguments or beliefs. Throw a tantrum and almost physically assault the person who questions you. Act like a big ass baby and then people will really take you seriously.
This is the best the Left can do these days? This is still their standard bearer? I can plainly say that I’m glad I was around to see it, and I’m even more glad that he has continued to show, even more openly than before, what a pathetic excuse of a man he is and the real legacy of his pretend Presidency. Thank God for small favors.
posted by Rob Beck | 6:35 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home