Quote:
Originally posted by Superbelt
You and I both know, with common sense that Clinton , in effect, lied. But when it comes to perjury that is a much dicier subject. From what I have read it is an extremely flimsy argument and unlikely to succeed if Clinton were tried for Perjury. Finally, He wasn't tried for perjury.
But that was good enough for the Republicans who took an issue from a CIVIL trial and brought it to further national attention.
So, are you saying that Republicans were just responding to the press coverage of Clinton? That they couldn't resist because the press just kept it in their faces? It shows how childish they are then that they were so easily manipulated then by the media? No, I don’t believe that. There was intense hatred by republicans for Clinton. Much past anything we can muster up for Bush I believe.
Hell in addition to the Blowjob, and Whitewater in which they used a vehmenently partisan prosecutor to go over every inch of his life and put together a report that read like pornography. There were allegations of Clinton being a rapist and murderer. His wife being a lesbian. His friends were arrested to intimidate them into incriminating Clinton. And those are only the ones that became mainstream attacks against Clinton.
Finally Clinton’s personal approval ratings did slip during all the mudslinging, that is to be expected because of the sheer volume and pitch of it. So what you are saying is the Republicans were feeding off their own scandalous press? But Clinton’s job approval ratings soared There was nothing the Republicans could accuse Clinton of that could even dent that. In fact the ‘pub attacks only seemed to bolster his ratings. People didn’t distrust Clinton. My grandmother for instance thought it was stupid that Clinton finally gave the Republicans something to attack him with, but she realized just how petty and horrible the constant attacks were. She doesn’t like Kerry but she said she will never be able to bring herself to vote for a Republican because of how they slandered Clinton. And she would have voted for Bush this election otherwise. She is pretty socially conservative and agrees with him on abortion and gay marriage. She hates that they weakened this country by diverting our leaders attention from important issues with petty bullshit that had no bearing on how he performed his job.
The way I see it, at least the anti-Bush people are going after Bush for the way he is running the country. For the decisions he is making. The Clenis haters were attacking Clinton for who and what he was.
|
First and foremost, it was perjury. No doubt about it. He was disbarred because of it.
Politicians constantly try to push the stories that will help their cause. This isn't new and it certainly isn't confined to "conservatives". The vast majority of these stories never take off because the public doesn't care about them. Clinton lying under oath about an affair, an alleged pattern of harrassment, etc, etc, etc was a story that the public ate up. Just because they didn't punish Clinton for it, doesn't mean they didn't relish the stories.
Whether they liked it or not everyone had an opinion on the subject and politicians are loathe to offer opinions that would alienate their voters. Dems couldn't push their belief that Clinton did nothing wrong (in terms of perjury) because everyone, as you say, knew he lied.
Certainly the Republicans didn't control the media's coverage of the stories and if there was no public interest in it the "scandal" would have died out. If the story about Cheney's dealings with Haliburton took off with the public do you not think the Dems would be pushing it like mad? Hell they're pushing it like mad without public interest right now. From the very outset the story about a President screwing an intern generates interest. The Republicans didn't force Clinton to do it and he damn well knew that if it got out he'd have issues. His opponents simply made use of the interest just as the Democrats have done and will do again.
The attacks on Bush go far beyond just how he's running the country. Military service from decades ago. Accusations of being a liar for everything he says. Attacks on his privileged upbringing. His business ownership. His performance while in school. Falling off a bike, the segway, choking on a pretzel, etc,etc, etc have what exactly to do with running the country?
I agree that a fair number of the attacks against Clinton were inappropriate but there were several that are entirely justified. Just as investigations into some aspects of the Bush administration are appropriate. But to say that he is not being attacked with ANY inappropriateness is untrue.