1/2/99
How does he do it? How can Bill Clinton keep a straight face
when he condemns "the politics of personal
destruction"?
As fellow Democrat Sen. Bob Kerrey has observed, Bubba Clinton is
an extraordinarily gifted liar.
After all, Clinton is the guy who rented out the Lincoln bedroom
to finance a multi-million dollar TV ad campaign that falsely
accused Republicans of plotting to slash Medicare and Social
Security, poison the air and water, and take food from the mouths
of hungry children. He presides over a party apparatus that just
two months ago engaged in a most despicable form of race-baiting
demagoguery: radio ads warning blacks that voting Republican
would result in more church burnings and more violence against
minorities. And his former advisor and confidante, pond scum Dick
Morris, has in recent months convincingly chronicled the
"secret police" operation the White House employs to
destroy its critics.
Closer to home, how can the Bangor Daily News expect to be taken
seriously when it functions largely as a Clintonista propaganda
organ? The paper's editorials habitually paint Clinton as the
victim of a vast right-wing conspiracy, all the while giving him
a pass on his long history as a ruthless practitioner of
slash-and-burn politics.
The operative principle of Clinton and his defenders is to always
accuse your adversary of the offense you are most guilty of.
Make no mistake: our state and nation are in the midst of a
"culture war." The editorial board at the Bangor Daily
News is engaged as a combatant on the same side with Bill and
Hillary Clinton, Larry Flynt, Alan Dershowitz, and Jerry
Springer. No issue has brought this conflict of values into
sharper focus than the impeachment of President William Jefferson
Clinton on December 19, 1998.
BDN says it's a GOP witch hunt
The venomous hatred displayed toward conservatives and
conservatism, and the embarrassingly shallow apologetics for Sick
Willie, are enough to make reasonable people surmise that James
"Serpenthead" Carville is writing the editorials at 491
Main Street in Bangor. Certainly the BDN is more than comfortable
with the hate-mongering style of discourse dished out by
Clinton's snarling pack of rabid attack dogs.
A recent editorial, ominously titled "Payback time,"
instructed us that the impeachment proceedings in the House were
a GOP-inspired "witch hunt." The editorial concluded
with a plea that the Senate end the nightmare started by the
House with a censure resolution that demonstrates
"understanding and forgiveness" toward a President who
did nothing more than tell a sex lie.
Where to begin in unpacking this revisionist drivel?
A little history is in order.
The assertion that House Republicans initiated a "witch
hunt" against this President defies the historical record
leading up to the impeachment vote. Let's be clear about where
this started.
In 1994, President Clinton signed into law a strengthened
Independent Counsel Act, the federal law which authorizes an
Office of Independent Counsel to investigate allegations of
criminal wrong-doing by members of the executive branch. What's
more, Clinton himself requested the appointment of an independent
counsel to look into the Clintons' Whitewater land dealings in
Arkansas. A panel of three federal judges appointed former
solicitor general Kenneth Starr to conduct the investigation.
On Jan. 16, 1998, Attorney General Janet Reno, a Clinton
appointee, approved an expansion of the investigation into
allegations that Clinton and his pal Vernon Jordan had conspired
to buy the silence of witnesses, including Monica Lewinsky. The
three-judge panel granted Starr authority to investigate these
matters.
Every single one of the subpoenas requested by Starr's office had
to be approved by a federal district court judge before being
served.
At any point in this chronology of events, Clinton could have
fired Ken Starr, with or without cause.
Does this sound like a "vast right-wing conspiracy" or
a GOP "witch hunt"?
Caligula of the Ozarks
When Bill Clinton and Dick Gephardt call for an end to the
politics of personal destruction, their words should be taken as
a threat. These folks and their allies in the establishment media
have perfected the art of character assassination against anyone
who might effectively challenge the radical Left's
take-no-prisoners campaign to deconstruct American values and
institutions -- the public-policy equivalent of ethnic cleansing.
Recall the leftist-inspired lynch mobs who trashed Robert Bork's
Supreme Court nomination -- our own shamelessly partisan George
Mitchell among them. The same people who now moan about the
violation of Bill Clinton's "privacy" by Ken Starr had
no qualms about disclosing the records of Judge Bork's video-tape
rentals. And they were gleeful at the prospect of destroying the
reputation of Clarence Thomas, based on nothing more substantial
than the uncorroborated "he said, she said" allegations
of a disgruntled feminist academic.
The vindictive fury of the Far Left was directed at these men
because they represent a threat to the virulently anti-family
social policy agenda championed by the likes of Ted Kennedy,
Barney Frank, and Maxine Waters: unrestricted, taxpayer-funded
abortion-on-demand through all nine months of pregnancy, for any
reason or no reason; rainbow curricula in the schools; same-sex
"marriage"; no-fault divorce; preferential treatment
for minorities; and minority-equivalent status based on nothing
more than a claim to a particular "sexual orientation."
Showdown in the Senate: will Snowe & Collins make Mainers proud?
The academic and media elites in the vanguard of this war of
attrition -- including the self-styled intelligentsia at the BDN
-- are willing to countenance a sociopathic lecher and liar in
the Oval Office, a Caligula from the Ozarks, because he shares
their commitment to deconstructing all social institutions that
stand in the way of the messianic state. As David Horowitz has
observed, "the family is the last bulwark against the power
of the state. And thus, in the malicious syllogism at the heart
of the Left's strategy, the family is the enemy of progress and
progressives everywhere."
(Horowitz's brilliant essay, "It's a war, stupid!" is
available from the Center for the
Study of Popular Culture. Check it out at ).
For those who doubt the validity of the "culture war"
analysis, don't take my word for it. Here's what Harvard Law
professor and Clinton defender Alan Dershowitz has to say about
what's at stake:
" A vote against impeachment is not a vote for Bill Clinton. It is a vote
against bigotry. It's a vote against fundamentalism. It's a vote against
anti-environmentalism. It's a vote against the right-to-life movement. It's
a vote against the radical right. This is truly the first battle in a great
culture war. And if this president is impeached, it will be a great victory
for the forces of evil, evil, genuine evil. People like Congressman Barr,
Sen. Trent Lott, Sen. Jesse Helms, who support white supremacist
organizations, will claim victory over decency and decent people. And I
hope that moderates out there realize, even if they don't like Bill
Clinton, to vote for impeachment is to vote to give their party over to the
mad dogs of radicalism."
As Maine Goes subscribers are urged to communicate their views
to Senators Snowe and Collins (email addresses: Olympia@snowe.senate.gov
and senator@collins.senate.gov
). And if you're so inclined, you can contact BDN editorial page
editor Todd Benoit at bdnmail@bangornews.infi.net
.
Best wishes for a healthy and happy New Year.
Lawrence Lockman is chairman of Concerned Maine Families. His email address is ldlockman@telplus.net |