Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format |
Celtic Radio Community > Politics & Current Events > Clinton's Presidency |
Posted by: Fiddler 26-Nov-2005, 06:22 AM |
I apologize for the long post but I would like some opinions on a "letter to the editor" I found in our local, small town, paper. TIME FOR CLINTON'S NAME TO BE REDEEMED To the Editor: It's time for the name of Bill Clinton to be redeemed. It's time to honor and respect those who have served our nation with loyalty and devotion. This president has worked nobly for that redemption and his policies and his presidency and it's accomplishments have always deserved our admiration and respect. This is a man who stood for fiscal responsibility and conservative and prudent actions in the world which brought honor and prestige to our nation. President Clinton has always been admired for his intellect and his sage wisdom on matters of public policy. His compassion and wise counsel, his knowledge and experience can offer Americans guidance and bring unity to our nation in this time of need. Bill Clintons passion to establish equality and build esteem for all races, colors and creeds, to rid the world of racial injustice has brought an admiration and respect for this president worldwide. He sought to relieve injustice in our nation and to better the lives of all by instituting polices which accomplish those ends. His words were not empty promises but fulfilled by the actions of his administration and his party. Bill Clinton has suffered the vilification from those who have no value for the principles and values for which he worked. He has long ago paid more than enough for his transgressions. In the eyes of the one who truly mattered- his wife hillary- he has long been forgiven. So let's stop allowing the loud few who will never forgive and begin to speak quietly but effectively on the the things we know to be true. This is one: Bill Clinton did not lie to the American people in matters of public policy. We knew that we could depend on the word of a man who was wholly competent and honest in public office. The personal character and charisma of Bill Clinton far outweighed the personal peccadilloes which those few loud voices on the right chose to emphasize, those who were never able to look at - and see - the powerful positive aspect of the character of Bill Clinton. He deserved to be admired for incredible competence - his prestigious and balanced use of Americas power, for his perseverance and endurance under extreme duress, his achievements and accomplishments- for the forward progress of our nation- for the immense stature and prestige we enjoyed in the world under his administration. Surely we- the majority of Americans- who now look with longing and nostalgia to those years in which he held office can now give our voices to uphold and honor one who so richly deserves that honor, admiration and respect. Cornelia Ga What do you think folks? |
Posted by: Shadows 26-Nov-2005, 06:59 AM |
I think they are right! Clinton screwed one person, not the whole country.... |
Posted by: MacEoghainn 26-Nov-2005, 10:29 AM |
I think that Democrats have as much right to send letters to the editor as anyone else. Of course I also think: "The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant: It's just that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan |
Posted by: Fiddler 26-Nov-2005, 12:17 PM |
Thanks Shadows and MacEoghainn for your prompt reply, I was hoping for a more in depth critique of the various positions taken by the letter writer. Shadows, Would it have still been ok if there had been more than one indiscretion? What about his position as commander and chief while the military prosecuted personnel for the same indiscretions? Mac, Blanket statements do not cover the individual positions taken by this lady. Did he truly stand for fiscal responsibility? I think I remember him saying something about not needing to balance the budget. More meat and less potatos is what I am hoping for here. |
Posted by: MacEoghainn 26-Nov-2005, 12:56 PM | ||
Brother Fiddler, I thought about doing a detailed dissection of the letter and then it occurred to me: Why beat a dead horse? But since you requested more I'll go back to the drawing board and see what I can come up with. It may take a few days (and if anyone else was going to take their shot at this please don't wait for me). MacE |
Posted by: stevenpd 26-Nov-2005, 02:50 PM |
He was impeached, not because of his trist with an intern, but because he lied to a Grand Jury. The only reason that he did not do more was because Congress didn't let him, and by extension, Hillary, i.e. National Health. He went into Kosovo, not because it was the right thing to do, but to divert attention from himself and his actions. |
Posted by: Fiddler 26-Nov-2005, 04:08 PM |
I too remember the reason for the impeachment but there are those who will say he was just trying to protect the honor of Monica and avoid the wrath of his wife. Is that enough to justify lying? I also remember some republicans who lost their positions because they were guilty of the same basic conduct. Double standard? Mac, I just watched a cspan program on the Clinton presidency. I believe there is an organized movement to rewrite history just at the time we are all distracted by the war in Iraq. . A panel of Clinton experts and prominent democrats presented their views. The interesting thing to me was the sparse audience. A fairly large conference room with maybe twenty people present. Everyone understands the spin involved in every political debate but the truth will always be the truth. If we occasionally review the Clinton presidency perhaps the real Bill Clinton will not escape the truth. |
Posted by: Swanny 26-Nov-2005, 04:44 PM |
President Clinton signed both NAFTA and GATT, sending millions of American jobs overseas. President Clinton's responses to terrorism, either bombing aspirin factories or doing nothing at all, certainly contributed to the current state of world affairs. Let's not forget President Clinton's sweetheart deals with China. Remember "Blackhawk Down" and the debacle of Somalia? Remember President Clinton's response to third world warloads dragging the bodies of our troops through the streets? He cut and ran. In spite of many far greater sins, his legacy remains a semen stain on a little blue dress. Swanny |
Posted by: Fiddler 27-Nov-2005, 05:55 AM |
Thanks for your contributions Swanny, Do you think the NAFTA and GATT deals were something Mr. C. really believed in or were they a calculated political move to the right at a time when the polls favored the more centrist position? I Wonder if his responses to terrorism were a result of listening to his closest advisors or did he make decisions contrary to their advise. Many of the movers and shakers in the democratic party today were around to advise Clinton then. Would we see the same kinds of responses today if the democrats were in power? What about the use of his pardon powers for financial gain? Is that a regular practice for out-going presidents or was his actions another reflection of a flawed moral character? |
Posted by: Shadows 27-Nov-2005, 06:48 AM |
To forcibly remove a politician from office, one has to meet a much higher standard of dishonesty. -- Michael Cooney, Santa Barbara attorney I think this goes without saying ... to all sides of the isle. |
Posted by: Swanny 27-Nov-2005, 06:54 AM | ||
Well, I'm not a very good mind reader. It's possible that signing NAFTA may have been a calculated political part, but President Clinton lead the charge for GATT. As to his motives???? Only he knows for sure. Regarding his pardons, at least in terms of numbers President Clinton used his right to issue pardons relatively sparingly compared to other modern presidents. Of presidents who have been in office during my lifetime, the breakdown is as follows: Harry S. Truman 2044 Dwight D. Eisenhower 1157 John F. Kennedy 575 Lyndon B. Johnson 1187 Richard Nixon 926 Gerald Ford 409 Jimmy Carter 566 Ronald Reagan 406 George Bush 77 Bill Clinton 456 [Source = http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/pardonspres1.htm) As far as the motives behind any of these pardons, I can't speak. I have no idea what the motives of the various presidents may have been, although I think it's reasonable to presume that all had least some political motives for their decisions. Swanny |
Posted by: MacEoghainn 27-Nov-2005, 08:07 AM | ||||||||||||||||||
I suspect that if others start seeing this letter (or similar) to the editor in their local paper it will be a sign that the Clinton Propaganda Machine is in full swing to redeem Bill so as to help Hillary in 2008.
Generally, Presidents are judged in the light of history, by historians, a number of years after their administration has ended (and usually after they're dead). I would suggest a former President who goes around the world making speeches that criticizes the current government is not acting nobly?.
This person has got to be kidding!
There would be about a million Rwandans, uncounted Somalis, and numerous Iraqis and Afghans throughout the world that would give you an argument on this one (if they were still alive) It always amazes me how a good ole boy from Arkansas like Billy Clinton and his Vice President, Al Gore (a good ole boy from Tennessee), can be considered such paragons of virtue when it comes to race relations, when both Bill Clinton's political mentor, Senator J. William Fullbright of Arkansas, and Al Gore's father, Senator Albert Gore Sr. of Tennessee, were Dixiecrats who participated in both a filibuster and vote against, the 1964 Civil Rights Act (if you don't think the attitudes of Fullbright and Gore Sr. were shared by little Billy and Al Jr. I've got a bridge in New York I'll sell you). As far as I can tell, with the exception of being hailed the "First Black President" by a sycophantic press, Bill Clinton's great race relations consisted mainly of smoke and mirrors. Note to all liberals and Democrats: It was a Republican who signed the Emancipation Proclamation, Republicans who pushed through the 13th. 14th, and 15th Amendments to Constitution, and Republicans that assured the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.
Exactly what are Bill Clinton's principals? They seem to vary with which way the political winds are blowing at any given time. When and how exactly did he pay for his transgressions (It would appear "Crime Pays" is more applicable). Hillary forgave Bill? It was reported as recently as last week, by former Clinton buddy and political guru, Dick Morris, that Bill was going to divorce Hilary a couple of years before the 92 election, but they came to an understanding so he could run for President (and the only reason they remain married is to improve her chances in 2008). Never lied on public Policy? How long were US troops going to be in Bosnia? The Aspirin Factory?
Who wrote this? Bill himself? Last time I checked people of good personal character don?t run around on their spouse, commit perjury, parse words ?it depends on what the definition of is is?, and sexual harass (or is it assault) people in their employ.
Exactly who was it that refused to take Osama Bin Ladin from the Sudan, who was it that cut and ran in Somalia, who appointed George Tenant head of the CIA (anybody remember who told President Bush ?it was a slam dunk? on WMDs), who?s administration was in charge for 8 years of apparent CIA incompetence, who let one million Rwandans die and did nothing, who was president when the federal government killed 80 of our fellow citizens in Waco Texas, (this list can go on for quite a while longer)......
This person needs to learn how to count. Last time I checked Bill Clinton never received any more than simple plurality during either Presidential election, he was never the majority's choice for president.
Clinton's DNA (and fingerprints) is on more than just a dark blue dress. Can anyone say: "Bimbo Eruptions"! |
Posted by: Fiddler 29-Nov-2005, 03:54 PM |
Sorry for taking so long to answer; I had trouble connecting with celticradio yesterday. Swanny, It would be interesting to compare financial gain to quantity of pardons by the last four presidents. I think big Bill's would out shine them all. His presidential library gained considerable revenue from some of those pardons. Mac, I can always count on you to get right to the point. Your observations are on the money. What makes people believe the spin doctors rather than the true facts? I have been around a while but I do not recall ever hearing a past president question a sitting presidents decisions. |
Posted by: SCShamrock 07-Dec-2005, 08:12 AM | ||||||||
I know this is a little late, but during the time this post was originally made, there was the problem with the server and a lot of posts were wiped out. I thought this was one of them. Now I get to say....................... Steve!!!! |