The Democratic Party has paid a terrible price for its embrace of Bill and Hillary Clinton, a duo of egomaniacs who will go down in history alongside the crazed Emperors Caligula and Nero of the late Roman Empire.
The latest such price is Bill Clinton’s use of racial polarization in the current race for president. To help his wife win, Arkansan Clinton has implied that her strongest opponent, Senator Barack Obama, is an “uppity black.”
Bill Clinton used the racist epithet “boy” to refer to Obama; compared the Illinois Senator to discredited political shakedown artist Rev. Jesse Jackson; and used other denigrating, belittling language calculated to drive polarizing wedges between white and black Democrats.
Hillary has likewise tried to drive wedges between Hispanics and African-Americans, many of whom compete with each other for the same low rungs on the economic ladder.
At Univision’s presidential debate translated into Spanish, Hillary refused to participate unless her two Spanish-fluent rivals, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson and Connecticut Senator Chris Dodd, a former Peace Corps worker in the Dominican Republic, were prohibited from speaking Spanish during the debate. She thus showed her high-handed racist contempt for Hispanic Americans by deceiving them.
The Democratic Party has always used divide-and-conquer racist tactics. It is, after all, historically the party of the slave owners, the Ku Klux Klan, Jim Crow and Bull Connor, as this column has noted many times over the years.
One of the biggest con jobs in history has been the Democratic Party’s success in bamboozling African-Americans to vote for the party of their oppressors and against the Republican Party of the Great Emancipator Abraham Lincoln who freed their ancestors.
But Bill Clinton this year has resurrected his party’s virulent racism in such a blatant, cynical way that it has turned even Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts against Senator Clinton’s candidacy and, as of this week, openly in favor of Senator Obama.
American liberals are, at last, beginning to open their eyes, but many deluded Democrats still believe that the Clinton era was one of greatness for their party.
But how would an objective observer, such as a visiting Martian, evaluate the legacy of the Clintons?
Bill Clinton might go down in history as a “great” president, this Martian would conclude, but if anything Clinton will be regarded as a great Republican president.
President Clinton, after all, achieved things that even the venerated Republican Commander-in-Chief Ronald Reagan was unable to do.
Clinton ended “welfare as we know it,” undermining one of the key pillars of vote-buying with taxpayer dollars that supports the Democratic Party plantation.
Clinton signed NAFTA, a “free trade” law dearly desired by multinational corporations.
Clinton, and especially his haughty hard-leftist wife Hillary, produced a tidal wave of disgust with his Administration’s brazen dishonesty that led to the 1994 voter overthrow of Democratic control in both houses of Congress, a change of power that President Reagan could scarcely dream of achieving.
Today’s liberals and progressives have themselves to blame for the Clinton legacy – and not merely because they voted to elect the Clintons.
In the late 1990s the Clintons were in quicksand, on the verge of sinking in the swamp of sewage and filth they had created.
Bill Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives, the only elected president ever thus disgraced. He was also disbarred for lying under oath before a court (and yet some foolish people still believe things he says).
Democratic lawmakers at that moment faced a decision. They knew the Clintons to be guilty of immoral behavior that, if exposed, would have forced any previous president to resign.
But the Clintons were too brazen and too immoral to do the honorable thing and leave office, to give up their power and loot.
With a combination of blackmail and bribery, such as a free space shuttle ride to Ohio Democratic Senator John Glenn in exchange for his willingness to block the constitutional process, the Clintons manipulated enough lawmakers to prevent Bill Clinton’s removal by the U.S. Senate.
Today’s progressive peace advocates need to admit their complicity in the wars and thousands of deaths that have followed.
Had Bill Clinton been removed by Senate Democrats in 1999, Vice President Al Gore would have ascended to the Oval Office.
Relatively untainted by the Clinton scandals, Gore running as incumbent president in 2000 would easily have won in Florida and other key states and remained President. Gore likely would have won re-election in 2004.
Al Gore would probably be President today, pursuing his peculiar agenda against purported global warming and in favor of progressive goals.
By embracing the filth of Bill and Hillary Clinton, Gore and the Democratic Party and the left paved the way to another six years of Republican control of Congress and to the eight-year presidency of George W. Bush.
Had Democrats done the moral thing in 1999 and flushed Bill Clinton down the toilet of history, what followed might have been very different.
Would 9-11 have happened under a Gore presidency? Would U.S. forces have gone as they did into Afghanistan and Iraq?
Democrats face the same choice again today.
When Alabama Governor George Wallace was term-limited out of office, he got his wife Lurlene elected as a front for his continued puppeteer rule. This is what Bill Clinton, another racist former Southern governor, is doing today with the presidency.
If Hillary Clinton wins their nomination and is elected president, we could have four or eight more years of the Clintons, a re-run sequel of a contemptible administration.
Democrats have a far more interesting, attractive and exciting alternative in Barack Obama.
Democrats, do not make the same mistake you made in 1999.
For the sake of the Democratic Party, the progressive movement, America and world peace, this time put your hand firmly on the lever on election day and flush Hillary and Bill Clinton.
© 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.
|
