Jump To » Mobile / Confirm Them / Right Shelf / Sports / State Blogs / About / Contact / Help / Posting Rules / Conservative Book Club / Human Events
Bill Clinton's sad hubris
Dems to repudiate the Clinton '90s
By Mark Kilmer Posted in 2008 | Bill Clinton | Hubris | rejection — Comments (10) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The 1990s (1992-2000) were great and exciting years of spectacular progress! History was made! Lives were changed forever during this momentous decade which will be forever remembered as better-than-JFK!
"You can trust me." [bites lip]
So says Bill Clinton when attacking Barack Obama:
You have one candidate who's made the explicit argument that the only way we can change America is to move into a post-partisan future and therefore we have to eliminate from consideration for the presidency anybody who made good things happen in the '90s or stopped bad things from happening in this decade," said Clinton, who was winding up a day of East Texas campaign appearances for his wife, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.
I emphasized what I did not because it is more important; rather, it is more infuriating than irritating. In the 1990's, Bill Clinton's appeasement of terrorists – strike us at will! – certainly built the idea in the minds of al Qaeda that the United States was a "paper tiger" which would disintegrate when they brought down the towers. We were under new management when they got around to attacking, and their plan didn't work as they willed it, but for Clinton (Bill) to argue that he stopped bad things from happening in this decade when he clearly gave false hope to those who perpetrated the acts of 9-11 is galling hubris.
Read More…
Aside from that, Clinton (Bill) offers us more a banal, garden-variety hubris. What was accomplished in the 1990s? What did Clinton (Bill) do? For what, besides impeachment, can his Presidency be remembered?
If Obama wants to change things to hope, or hope things to change, or whatever. The Democratic Party has to get over its fixation on the 1990s as something it was not.
Oh, but they are. They are rejecting the politics of the 1990s. They are rejecting Clinton (Bill) and Clinton (Hillary). For as much as I think John McCain would fare more easily against the dated Clintons, part of me is pulling for Barry to finish this thing off. I want to see the Clintons' politics, policies, and personalities spat onto the political tarmac by the very people they believed they controlled: the Dem rank-and-file and the Dem establishment.
« Did anybody... *talk* to anybody else before they decided on this Obama stadium thing? — Comments (9) | For Those Who Believe The Race For The Democratic Nomination Is Over . . . — Comments (4) »
Bill Clinton's sad hubris 10 Comments (0 topical, 10 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Republicans have earned that privilege many times over. Whats more I am in no rush. Having Hillary use her talons to hang on as long as possible is a thought that fills me with joy.
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
I wonder if Bill is really talking
by The Rebel
about Hillary, here, and not himself? Perhaps her Senate policies stopped bad things from happening in this decade. Not!!!!
That's possible, I suppose.
by Mark Kilmer
Bill could be arguing that Hillary fought against this or that which would have been a disaster. I'm not sure what, though. The biggest disaster of the decade, to the American left, is the liberation of Iraq, and Hillary voted in support of that. (And she gave the right reasons!)
It could still be, though, that Bill is arguing that his policies in the '90s prevented the Martians from invading in 2005. It's difficult to prove that this is not true, other than to argue that there are no Martians. But how do we know this? They could be an advanced civilization who knows how to send false signals to our rudimentary, earthling scientific equipment. I mean, these are Dems, and we just don't know.
IMO, Clinton's "stopping bad things from happening" = "we kept those wascally Wepublicans fwum whoooinning the World!!!"
Democrats don't consider matters like national security to be of importance. Stopping the Republicans is of importance. Note they use almost all of their time and energy contemplating ways to defeat Republicans and not defeating the enemies of America.
Of course, they think their fellow Americans in the Republican Party are a greater threat to America than Al Qaeda anyhow, so I'm repeating myself, unintentionally.
The Clinton's
by Stencew
This is too rich....Bill continues to try to craft some type of acceptable legacy and Hillary thinks she is the most qualified person in this country to be President....give me a break, talk about fairy tales!!
If it were not for her marriage to Bill, Hillary would be a single line item in the Wellesley alumni directory.
but not the kind you can talk about at the dinner table. But if good things did happen to him than in the wreckage that is the remains of his mind it had to be a good decade for the rest of the nation.
"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville
He's kind of a neo-Vaudeville performer now.
by jonlester
Lately, you never know what will come out of his mouth from one event to another. He's given us his share of entertainment value in this campaign.
blog advertising is good for you
Human Events
Recent comments
Done
by smagarSpecific Program for the Aged
by Rod PatrickSquandering People's Money
by Rod PatrickLIES OF THE DEVIL
by Rod PatrickMaybe not a Typical Politician
by MikeOYou haven't made your case, I'm afraid
by civil truthObama, c'est un poseur!
by streetwiseGore does claim the earth will be destroyed if
by streetwiseI appreciate it though
by Darin HNow that's a definition of genius. What an ear. n/t
by bantamwaitYes, but McCain's war, while genuinely heroic,
by bantamwaitA shorter way
by simpson316Good point, boychik!
by bantamwaitMass produced thin film
by moderichGotcha. Thanks.
by simpson316Actually, he was just lashing out.
by Moe LaneHow did I not figure this out??
by bantamwaitCatsandbeer may have been here for less than a week, but
by bantamwaitThat's a plan right there
by E Pluribus Unum
blog advertising is good for you
get your job site
at simplyhired.com
Unfortunately, neither Bill nor Hillary Clinton read Redstate, so they'll never know the error of their ways. They are not interested in the factual recollection of the 90s (e.g. embassy bombings, the Cole, the internet bubble was an absolute blast, not to mention the thousands of people that bought into the hype)happened all by itself). No, they prefer to recall it as just one happy time, where everyone loved everybody, and now they have to come back and rescue us again. The trouble with this is he and she can talk and alter the facts about anything they want, and it's sent over the airwaves as historical fact. Talk about unabated manipulation.