Your friend Jim George thinks you'd be a great addition to Ricochet, so we'd like to offer you a special deal: You can become a member for no initial charge for one month!
Ricochet is a community of like-minded people who enjoy writing about and discussing politics (usually of the center-right nature), culture, sports, history, and just about every other topic under the sun in a fully moderated environment. We’re so sure you’ll like Ricochet, we’ll let you join and get your first month for free. Kick the tires: read the always eclectic member feed, write some posts, join discussions, participate in a live chat or two, and listen to a few of our over 50 (free) podcasts on every conceivable topic, hosted by some of the biggest names on the right, for 30 days on us. We’re confident you’re gonna love it.
Monica Lewinsky has reemerged to claim the spotlight. She
Great Post! Well worth thinking about.
I second that.
Your summary is better than anything else I’ve read on this horrible chapter in American history.
I cannot for the life of me figure out why anyone takes the Clintons seriously.
Lowlife of the century.
And I feel as if I’ve only scratched the surface. Remember being afraid to listen to AM radio in the presence of children, because the news reports were R-rated (or at least PG-13)? Remember the dismissals of the relationship as “consensual sex”, as if Paula Jones or Juanita Broaddrick or Hillary Clinton had consented in their respective cases? Remember the squad that managed the “bimbo eruptions” — James Carville, Paul Begala, Hillary Clinton…? The one good thing I can think of with regard to the Clinton years is that the unending lies and corruption turned me from a liberal to a centrist and finally into a conservative.
The worst week of my life. I was around young kids all the time. I thought I would be sick.
All I could think was, “Why doesn’t someone just get him out of the presidency?”
It’s a bit scary how much of a role model the POTUS is, if subliminally, for the American public. I’ve always thought Clinton’s cheery dismissals of his exploits, and the way they were catalogued in the news, gave a kind of permission to other lowlifes to be unashamed of their sins. Likewise Obama, whose arrogance and ignorance of past protocol makes it easier for incompetents to bluster their way through failure after failure.
It’s one very strong reason I wish Romney would have won. He would have made mistakes, to be sure, but he would have been a sterling role model of behavior, which the country really needs.
I understand now Clinton got away with it because of the media? Newt diddling his administrative assistant while going after Clinton had nothing to do with it?
Well said. Maybe it’s too bad we didn’t have the new definition of rape back when Clinton was plying his trade. Might have given lefties some second thoughts about that.
Funny story. My daughter Rachel met Clinton when she went to Girl’s Nation in 1997. We have a photo of her shaking his hand. There was a guard in the photo that I photoshopped out, but when the Monica Lewinsky thing happened, my Mom told me that we needed to reinstate the guard.
So the internet is the villain in this story, and Clinton is . . . just another victim?
Poor woman. She probably still thinks he loved her.
Perhaps this will sound harsh, but one thing I find missing from this account, and too many others like it, is any sense of her own culpability. She just “happened” to “fall in love,” as if it were inevitable, and nothing about the fact that he was not just the president but a married president. This is not to deny the almost overwhelming power-of-attraction the President held in the situation, nor the disgusting treatment she received, especially from the Clintons and their minions, nor the understandable sense that her role was insignificant when weighed against the President’s actions, but I believe it still takes two to tango. A cautionary tale on many levels.
I long for the days when a politician with a scandal like Clintons would have had the decency to retire to his study with a brandy and a revolver. But then again “Clinton” and “decency” don’t belong in the same sentence….
She is a victim of nothing more than her own poor decisions. She chose to mess around with a married man, let alone the President, and everything subsequent stemmed from that decision. She’s being disingenuous to cry, “Oh, poor me” without acknowledging her own responsibility in how her life turned out.
liberal Jim, Newt and Bill Clinton were both equally guilty, weren’t they? Or at least darn close. But the media loved Newt so much that they protected him. That’s obvious.
That is not “harsh”. The fact is, the best way to avoid being called a tramp, slut, or whore is to not act like a tramp, slut, or whore
You could write a 600-page book on this subject and never fully cover it. There is something in the psychology of human beings that makes this kind of stuff inevitable.
Bill Clinton (and millions of others like him) have that roguish charm that many women find alluring. Couple that with political power and you have trouble, right here in River City. With a capital T, and that rhymes with P, and that stands for… well, it ain’t “pool.”
When you introduce that charm to people who are consumed by ideology you get a disconnect, a cognitive dissonance that can’t be reconciled.
An ideologue might say she wouldn’t want her daughter interning for Clinton but, like former Time reporter Nina Burleigh she might also say, “I would be happy to give him a blowjob just to thank him for keeping abortion legal. I think American women should be lining up with their Presidential kneepads on to show their gratitude for keeping the theocracy off our backs.”
That sentence is totally irreconcilable with their stated beliefs of patriarchy, power and exploitation. But Burleigh, and millions like her, are happy to make their deal with the devil. (It’s compounded when you’re a militant atheist like Burleigh you don’t even have the moral compass to realize you’re doing it.)
There is also a weird leftist culture with age. Clinton and Obama were celebrated for their JFK-like “youthful vig-ah.” Reagan and Bush 41 were derided as “old white guys.” But when you see everything through an ideological lens, wisdom only comes with age when you’re black or brown.
Boffing every woman in sight is celebrated as “youthful vig-ah” unless it’s a conservative. Then it would be a sign that they are a perverted hypocrite. (Their logic: We don’t give a damn about your morality so our cheating and whoring is “sincere.”)
Brilliant, EJ, and thanks, I guess, for reminding us of Burleigh. I recall the New Left (nothing new about it) being none-too-gallant around their own women, and the Kennedys. Well, you just have to say the name. Anyone who hasn’t read Michael Kelly’s piece on Teddy should run right to Google. The Left loves power (okay, it ain’t alone in that) and is adept at justifying anything and everything.
I wouldn’t say Newt had “nothing to do with it”, but I also wouldn’t assign him primary culpability. Newt’s sins would not have carried so much weight with the public if the media hadn’t already established their spin that, “It’s just about sex” (or even the more nuanced, “It’s just lying about sex, which is something anyone would do”). Kenneth Starr also made a tactical error when he focused his report on the scandal with the most evidence, rather than the scandals with the most serious implications, or the pattern of scandals itself. Sen. Joe Lieberman gave Clinton the moral backing he needed at the right time. But stepping back, I still think that the fundamental reason Clinton got away with all he did was because the press, collectively, placed partisan loyalties ahead of their jobs. They were content to amplify the Clinton machine’s spin because it allowed them to continue their illusion that Democrats are the good guys.
One cannot help but wonder if Monica’s new job with Vanity Fair isn’t just another way the Clintons are holding her hostage to the harassment she was subjected to so many years ago. It’s so easy to manipulate her this way too because the “evil conservatives” are more than happy to call Monica a slut and allow Clinton to deflect blame from himself to his victim.
We don’t need to long for honor suicides do we? We can still find him despicable without wishing death upon him can’t we?
I for one am simply tired.
I’m tired of the bad behavior that the left allows its representatives to do. I’m tired that rational conclusions about character are no longer “allowed” to enter into debate. I’m tired of the open, obvious, hypocritical positions politicians take, say, and do, to get elected (note the recent performance of Shahene in NH).
And I am MOST CERTAINLY tired of any discussion of Monica Lewinsky. Had she actually had any real realization of the extent of misbehavior, on both her and Clinton’s parts, she would not be seeking public stage to utter platitudes about her behavior (“it happened” ?Really. We had no idea!) but would have quietly retired to a life of taking care of her OWN business. Our media is still complicit; she should never have gotten the media stage for this “episode”. It should have been looked at embarrassingly as further bad decisions, no longer excusable by being a 22-year old.
I remember a related issue. A woman was convicted of perjury, and she questioned why she was going to jail when the president did the same thing and did not go to jail. It was then and is now a perfectly relevant question: Why didn’t Clinton go to jail for perjury?
That speaks to every senator who voted not to impeach Clinton, including the Republicans who failed to uphold the law.
Bill Clinton, the patron saint of liars and those that seek inspiration in their justification for committing perjury. Let us not forget Sandy Berger the patron saint of shoplifters and those who have no intention of returning library books, or even checking them out.
I was working at the schools as a full-time volunteer–I had my own mailbox at the administration offices!–at the time the scandal broke. I was surrounded by Democrats, and the men were really angry at Clinton. The superintendent of our school district literally had a tear running down his face when I saw him the morning the scandal was first reported on the news. Another friend, a principal, was angry for days about it. He couldn’t even speak about it, he was so enraged. The young orchestra conductor who was coming to the Cape from New York once a week said to me angrily, “The president is held to the highest standard. He is setting an example for the kids in this country.” He became a Republican because of it. He was truly embarrassed to be a Democrat because of Clinton’s behavior.
I wondered at the time and ever since if the congressional Republicans did the right thing in bringing Clinton’s behavior public. Clinton was guilty of so many things. For the sake of the kids and families in this country, couldn’t they have found some other way? Use something else to get rid of him? And why weren’t they ever able to get rid of him? He was guilty of so many things. Using this particular charge against him made him seem to be a victim to the sympathetic women in his party. We should have seen that effect coming.
And because they didn’t make this charge stick, Clinton is still around today, and we’re paying him a pension. And his wife is now running for president. Which puts Bill back in the White House. Wonderful.
When the doctor prescribes an antibiotic, he or she goes to great lengths to explain that the patient must take all of it and leave not trace of a germ because the infection will come back if there is even a tiny bit of it left. This is how we should have treated the Clintons. :)
While we lament the incompletness of the impeachment of Bill Clinton just keep repeating to yourself, “On 9/11, President Gore…”
Thank you for this.
I say to people constantly, I don’t care what he did or didn’t do as president. He saved this country from Al Gore and John Kerry. The rest was up to us!
Since we are playing counterfactuals, a President Al Gore might have authorized elimination of Osama Bin Laden prior to 9/11 (choices that President Bill Clinton was presented with several times).
It may be a stretch to imagine, but it’s also unknowable.
Stacy McCain makes an important point: Monica Lewinsky perjured herself when she signed the Clinton procured false affidavit – signed it knowing it to be false – that was part of the conspiracy to obstruct justice in the Paula Jones case.
Lied in defense of the very people who were vilifying her to the press. She’s still in the tank for the Party today. But let’s blame Drudge.
I disagree. Algore almost won the presidency as an unknown-potential POTUS. Had he been POTUS for a year or three prior to the 2000 election, he might’ve lost convincingly, or at least by enough that there’d’ve been no Florida chad debacle in our past. Bush’s presidency might’ve been viewed as completely legitimate by the country, instead of as illegitimate by half of America then and still as illegitimate today by a substantial minority of Americans.
No, I’m not convinced that not convicting and removing Clinton had a silver lining.
Dittoheadadt – Recent history would argue with you. As bad as Clinton was, as bad as Obama IS they both won re-election. Al Gore, running as an incumbent would probably have managed to win his home state AND Florida quite handily.
Part of Gore’s problem was Clinton fatigue. Add the power of incumbency and Bush 43 is only remembered as the former governor of Texas.
….and Jeb might be in a better position to capture the Republican nomination.
Heh.