Liberals Right for Wrong Reason

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Unk's Wild Wild West : One Thread

The Link to the story here

Liberals Right for Wrong Reason

John L. Perry Feb. 23, 2001

The American left has arrived where it should have been years ago: Clintonism is indefensible. But not because it's "bad for business" (the liberal agenda).

What Bill-and-Hillary stand for today is what the Clintons have stood for all along. Their one virtue may be their persistent consistency.

They did not suddenly, just since Inaugural Day, Jan. 20, 2001, become indefensible.

If what they stand for today is indefensible – and, God knows it is – then what they stood for since their very entry into the public arena years ago is indefensible, and for the same reason.

Clintonism is, always has been, and always will be wrong for so long as these benighted scoundrels continue to engage in their habitual practice of personal and political sonofabitchery.

It is wrong for the same, simple reason that wrong is always wrong.

But the bloated left, which had managed with the Clintons' crafty help to capture the once-proud Democratic Party, could never get that. And it still doesn't get it.

What the nation is now receiving an earful of from nearly every notable Democrat able to speak above a whisper is a common chorus of denunciation and rejection of the Clintons.

They are right of course.

But alas there are two gaping holes in their recent righteousness.

First, they have come so everlastingly late to the altar rail. In terms of practical politics for even years to come, their lateness may prove to be entirely too late.

Take former President Jimmy Carter, probably the best foot, ethically speaking, that the Democratic Party has to put forward, a decent, honorable, honest man. Now he's speaking out against the corruptness of Clintonism.

Now Carter is speaking out – for the first time!

Confound it, Jimmy, in the name of all that's decent, honorable and honest, where have you been for the past eight years? Where were you when the country needed you to step up and speak out? Why did the cat have your tongue all this time?

And the same goes for Ham Jordan, the horse you rode in on.

To pick at random the familiar names of just a few of the many Democrats who never before seemed too shy to pop up in public:

Where was Sam Nunn? Where was Al Gore? Where was Daniel Patrick Moynihan? Where was Tom Daschle? Where was Dick Gephardt?

Where was John Kerry? Where was Barney Frank? ? Where was George Mitchell? Where was Joe Lieberman? Where was Tom Lantos?

Where was Tom Harkin? Where was Chuckie Schumer? Where was George McGovern? Where was Patrick Leahy? Where was Rick Boucher?

Where was Bob Graham? Where was David Bonier? Where was Fritz Hollings? Where was John Conyers? Where was Joe Biden?

Where was Jerrold Nadler? Where was Chris Dodd? Where was Charlie Rangel? Where was Chuck Robb? Where was Lee Hamilton?

Where was Bill Bradley? Where was Patrick Kennedy? Where was Teddy . . . oh, never mind. Where was Maxine Waters? Well, that really is asking too much. Come to think of it, where was Hillary Clinton?

And don't forget everyone's all-time favorites, the leftist pompon wavers for the Clintons in the elitist media. A few examples:

Al Hunt, Nina Totenberg, Mark Shields, Dan Rather, Mara Liasson, Tony Lewis and a whole flock of others too numerous to bother with, including the fearless, anonymous editorial writers for the New York Times and Washington Post and . . . and . . . and . . . .

And on and on could drone the roll call of those Democrats and other assorted Clinton apologists, in and out of public office, who never made headlines when it counted by standing up and saying:

"Stop! This is enough. There's no place for the likes of you in the Democratic Party – or any other party."

Yet now, there is a list at least that long of Democrats who are lined up taking turns at the mikes and before the cameras to disassociate themselves from what the Clintons represent.

Which opens wide that second big chasm in their righteousness-come-lately.

Why are they doing this now?

They're doing this now for two reasons:

• Now the stench has gotten so rotten even they can't stand it anymore and

• Because it is making it almost impossible for the Democratic Party to get its liberal agenda across to the American people.

That's the real one, that last one.

What it says is, Clintonism has become "bad for business." That and that only is what makes it wrong in their eyes.

They still just don't get it: Wrong is wrong because wrong isn't right, and that's all the reason there ever has to be.

Until the liberal-agenda-driven Democrats get a morality check and wake up and smell their accountability, no amount of long-after-the-fact washing their hands of Clintonism is going to redeem them politically.

These are the people who could have stopped Clintonism in its tracks, and didn't lift a finger to do so.

It is they – not the Clintons, sorry as they are – who have cost the Democratic Party its moral authority to lead America.

Conservatives may celebrate this if they like, but while doing so they need to remember that what goes around can, indeed, come around.

And in this perilous world it is a dangerous thing for this nation if either of its great political parties is rolled off the field in a condition of terminal amorality.

-- Uncle Bob (unclb0b@aol.com), February 26, 2001

Moderation questions? read the FAQ