Wednesday, April 16, 2008



It's been about a decade and a half since I started getting tossed from talk shows and treated as pariah by my liberal friends for suggesting that the Clintons weren't quite what they made themselves out to be. Now, according to the latest Washington Post poll it turns out that I'm in the mainstream, uncomfortable as that feels: 58% of voters think Hillary Clinton isn't honest.

And it doesn't stop there. If you check out the unfavorables among the four biggest names in politics, the two Clintons lead McCain and Obama in dislikelihood by 11-14 points.

Further, contrary to the media and liberal myth, it's not new. As far back as August 1998, Clinton had an unfavorable rating of 57%. You just weren't to mention it and so when Gore lost in 2000, it was naturally all Ralph Nader's fault.

But wait, here is some hippie Nader nut who'd like to disagree with that:

"By any fair analysis, Gore did win in 2000 and the only reason he didn't win more handily was because of the Monica Lewinsky scandal. I don't think there's any doubt about that. The election wouldn't have even been close."

Excuse me, but getting back in the mainstream is kind of confusing. That wasn't a Naderite after all, but Mark Fabiani, deputy campaign manager for Gore-Lieberman and former special counsel to President Clinton.


At April 17, 2008 2:44 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Perhaps now, during your victory lap, you'll be able to tell us what exactly it was during their money-losing investment in Whitewater that the Clintons did that was illegal. And why was Jim McDougal's wife kept in prison without charges for years?

If you did you would be ahead of the New York Times and the Washington Post, as well as Ken Starr. 80 million bucks for some super-secret soft porn, suitable for the moral outrage of the likes of Congress, upright men like Larry Craig, Lindsay Graham and David Vitter.

Still, as you've said, your idee fixe on smearing the Clintons by any means possible is "not as bad as Auschwitz," and that is a compliment I'm sure all of us can agree your work deserves.

At April 17, 2008 10:19 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

What did the Clintons do that wasn't illegal in those days? Get a clue. All politicians and other members of the wealthy elite break economic laws as often as necessary to further their greed and lust for power. The trick has always been getting one's hands on the proof.

The problem, Ken Starr faced, of course, was that far too many of the most egregious crimes of the Clintons were committed in support of illegal activities being carried out by the FBI and CIA.


Post a Comment

<< Home