Words do matter. Yet, the former President - who still hasn't had the good grace to fade away with Presidential dignity - presents us with his own specious logic. I don't necessarily disagree with the basic tenet but his analogies ring hollow.
Attempting to connect Rush Limbaugh and/or the Tea Party movement to radical domestic terrorism is quite an assertion to make without a shred of evidence. Especially coming from a politician who capitalized politically on the tragedy of Oklahoma tragedy. Clinton can't protect his legacy forever from the "vast right-wing conspiracy." And more here.//volokh.com/2010/04/19/the-clinton-terror-bill/#comments
Of course, this argument works in reverse. The right shouldn't play similar games.
Here in Quebec politicians have become artistically adept - wittingly or otherwise - at saying one thing but winking at the same time. They'll say stuff like, "We believe in a tolerant and pluralist society" on one side but then they turn around and hire more OLF inspectors to harrass businesses for breaking draconian language laws. "There's too much English indeed" is the signal it sends. Therefore, it negates the original assertion of claiming to be "tolerant."
Clinton is not helping matters by coyly summarizing neatly a logical position with what is in fact a smear by painting one person or persons with one huge brush.
We see a lot of that on both sides of the ideological divide.
Yes indeed. The uni-bomber, SLA and a few others could merit the same for the left.
ReplyDeleteClinton was, is, remains, a fantastic bullshiter and a liar. He could spin any garbage and get devoted followers and smiles. He obviously still has some of his old ruffian magic about him.