Quick Quiz: Who wrote the book published in January 1994 for children entitled"It Takes A Village"?
"It is time to put this matter behind us - once and for all - and move forward with the business of the Chine-- I mean, the American people."
RE-ELECT THE COMEBACK KID!
"It's nobody's business but ours." With a little tinkering from an experienced publisher, those words would make a great title for a book. They're also a direct quote from President Bill Clinton, the greatest president this country has ever known, and, based on his extraordinary leadership, the first deserving of a third term since Franklin Delano Roosevelt. In a heartfelt, eloquent, and surprisingly short speech which contained approximately twelve "truths", six lies, one "no duh", 3 back-handed displacements of blame, and only one reference to the millennium, the president made a strong stand for personal privacy. With a great majority of Americans in support of the president, they proudly reiterated the moving sentiments expressed by their glorious leader: "It is time to stop the pursuit of personal destruction and the prying into private lives." (They didn't reiterate the part about "repair the fabric of our national discourse" because nobody understood what the hell that meant.)
And so history will record, as the sun rose on Washington, DC on Tuesday, August 18, 1998, that a new day of freedom would dawn in the greatest nation on Earth as, with the mandate of the people, and armed with a new understanding of people wishing to live their private lives free of authoritarian intrusion, the president of the United States would, for the first time in his career, dispense with the status quo and take on the monumental, but imminently moral task of pardoning every American in prison who was persecuted for how they chose to conduct their private business and what they chose to do in the privacy of their own home.
Well, OK, maybe that's too much to expect. That would be a logistical nightmare. How about just ending the war on drugs, the war on religion, the war on free speech, the war on economic choice, and the war on sex between consenting adults.
Well, all right, what about the war on medical choice. The majority of the American people polled are willing to show compassion to an adulterous, dishonest world leader. The majority of Californians were willing to show compassion to people suffering from AIDS and cancer. How about it Mr. President? How about it, "sir?" How about it, you lying, cheating, thieving, bought-and-paid-for-ten-times-over, corrupt, fascist, communist, socialist, government-loving career-politician sorry excuse for a man...
Go to top or indulge in MORE RANTING that takes advantage of Peter's misfortune to make a point. (if you haven't already. Starting to get dizzy, going around in a loop?)
So now we're expected to buy that, up until the week the President went before the grand jury, Hillary Clinton didn't know her marriage was a sham. I'm afraid that's going to be harder to swallow than--well, (these are getting too easy) [insert your own cheap shot here].
back to top
Quick Quiz: Who wrote the book published in January 1994 for children entitled
"It Takes A Village"?
Did President Clinton "sign the death warrants" of the men, women, and children of Mt. Carmel who were gassed, shot at, and buried under their burning home. Yes.
Did President Clinton condone illegal fund-raising and electioneering by his Vice-President and loyal partner in crime, Al Gore? It's undeniably implausible that he didn't.
Did President Clinton accept bribes--I mean, campaign contributions--from Indonesia and then return the favor with an IMF bailout. Yes. He did it in broad daylight. (But, hey, Bob Dole would have done it for free.)
President Clinton is a career politician and a particularly criminal one. The occurences of bribes, payoffs, and the buying and selling of favors is just part of the Clinton routine. Bill and Hillary practiced their corrupt brand of politics early and often with crooked land deals, government contract payoffs, and commodities brokerage account slush funds and "We, the President" have continued the dishonesty and abuse of power without missing a beat. When confronted with their crimes, the denials, lies, and excuses begin to flow like blood out of the wound from a sniper's bullet.
Does President Clinton DESERVE to be impeached? Yes. Ken Starr might even have enough in his report to prove it (but I wouldn't bet on it). But should he be impeached?
Consider this.
Government doesn't work. When government tries to solve a problem it makes it worse. Shall I go through the litany? Healthcare. Education. Crime. Government flushes trillions down the toilet, asks us to trade our liberty for security and consistently fails to deliver on its socialist utopian promises. If you want to make a problem worse, ask government to do something about it. While it's bad enough that Al Gore is favored to win the Presidency in 2000, an impeachment of Clinton guarantees his ascension. (Though Gore also should be removed and probably put in jail, the investigation into his crimes has only just begun and indictments, at best, will not come in time to prevent him from entering the Oval Office.) The Vice-President wants to save the planet. As a private citizen, fine, more power to him. But, as President, he will use the full force of government to further his cause. Therefore, this planet is in serious jeopardy. Think that arguement is facetious? I refer you to the first sentence of this paragraph: Government DOES NOT WORK!
So, we must swallow our pride, and accept (as a "lesser of two evils") the idea of this reprehensible man finishing out his term. Maybe we can take some comfort in the hope that (with a cloud over his administration) the President's socialist agenda may advance at a slow crawl.
However, if it turns out that, in addition to his other crimes, the President is guilty of giving missile technology to Communist China, thus discounting once and for all the concept that trading liberty for security is a good deal (shall we give him the benefit of the doubt?), then Clinton must be removed and given a sentence appropriate to the crime of treason. Then we will just have to take our chances with Mr. Gore and deal with that problem in turn.
PS ...speaking of Gore, don't forget Tipper... shhh... 
Though you can say that the Clinton's agenda is a socialist one (Hillary wrote the book), mostly they are just criminals. When a criminal--er, politician--comes into your home to sell you on some socialist program, he or she usually starts with the line "Children are the future" and then explains with a smile how irresponsible it would be for you to pass on this opportunity to mortgage your children's future and sell them into slavery. Remember, when a politician says something that you may believe in but he doesn't, it's the same as a lie. (See "Read my lips" and "The era of big government is over.") Don't buy what they're selling. When the socialist salesman sticks his foot in the door, stomp on his toe. In Russia they are still suffering from the corruption and damage done by 70 years of a government that required loyal subservience from its citizens. Are you in such a hurry for the dollar to be worth as much as the ruble? Barney Frank would have you believe that the one admitted socialist in Congress is not a Soviet-style or Communist Chinese-style socialist but is more in the model of a Swedish socialist. Who cares? What we don't need is any more American socialists. Are we so arrogant, now that the Iron Curtain has fallen, that we feel obligated to pick up the standard of nationalist socialism and prove America can make it work? "Hey, we're Americans! We can make socialism work!" Why bother? Why waste our time? Why waste another second on trying to make big government work? Why not make freedom work? At best or (as it works out more often in practice) at its worst, what government has to offer can't touch what freedom can offer.
Why not make Freedom work? Now that's a worthwhile goal for America. To lead the whole world by example into the next century* by choosing freedom, by choosing freedom over the failed statist practices of the past century. The President of the United States (whether we depend on him to do so or not) is supposed to be at the forefront of that cause. But as long as this country continues to settle for someone like Bill Clinton, who wants privacy for himself and government intrusion into every aspect of a person's life for everyone else; as long as America continues to accept the hypocrite who can speak wistfully about liberty and forgiveness and then cheerfully enjoy the spoils of an expanding, ever more oppressive, unforgiving state; the position of Leader of the Free World will remain unfilled.
*My apologies for mentioning the millennium.
back to top
Scrolled down, wondering where Leader Schmeader is? It's at the top of the Free Peter page.