Another opinion that Clinton is more like Hitler than most realize...
Contemptible Clinton
Linda Bowles
November 23, 1999
Over the past few years, I have been particularly harsh in my criticism of Bill Clinton -- but I have always tried to be fair. Even though the depth of my contempt for him is bottomless, it is impossible for me to remain silent when I see him suffering a serious injustice. Reluctantly, but in the spirit of honest commentary, I rise to his defense.
Recently, one of Rupert Murdoch's newspapers, the New York Post, took a poll to identify the 25 "Most Evil People" of the millennium. The paper provided a long list of notoriously wicked people, and asked readers to pick the most evil. Bill Clinton and Hillary Rodham were not on the list, but made a good showing as "write-ins."
Nineteen-thousand readers participated. Adolf Hitler barely edged out Bill Clinton for first place, and Joseph Stalin came in third. Pol Pot was fourth, and Nazi death-camp doctor Joseph Mengele was fifth. Hillary Rodham came in sixth, followed by Saddam Hussein, Adolf Eichman, Charles Manson and Idi Amin, which rounds out the Top 10.
The injustice is not that Bill Clinton was voted in as one of the top, world-class, evil men in the last thousand years. The injustice is that, with a level playing field, he might have come in first.
It is obvious that Clinton would have scored even better on the poll if the mainstream media and the Democratic Party had not stayed for so long in abject denial of their leader's brazen in-your-face degeneracy and corruption. If he had tattooed "I AM EVIL" on his forehead, the media would have explained it away as a birthmark, Hillary would have claimed that it was the result of a vicious, right-wing DNA conspiracy, and 43 percent of the American public would have believed them.
For the poll to have been fair, more consideration should have been given to the environment within which Clinton works. While Hitler and Stalin had the enthusiastic support of 100 percent of the media in their countries, Clinton has never been able to count on the support of more than about 92 percent of the American media.
And while Stalin and Hitler sent the Secret Service and storm troopers to "take care" of opponents, the best Clinton could do was send the IRS. And as vile and vicious as the IRS is, it is no match for brown-shirted Nazis or KGB thugs.
The point is that Clinton has not had a clear field for reaching his full potential. Think of what he might have been able to do without the constraints of a strong opposition party, a testy Supreme Court, the Pope, Southern Baptists, Ken Starr, Rush Limbaugh and Paula Jones
Why is this important? It is important because topping the list as the most evil man of the millennium is Clinton's only chance for any kind of legacy. Second place simply won't get it done. It is not good enough that Adolf Hitler is Alpha Evil while Bill Clinton trails along as Beta Evil. What kind of legacy is that?
Any student of history understands that, in the right time and place, the justification of evil is more than possible. Joseph Stalin rationalized his mass murders to himself and to many American intellectual elitists with these words: "You cannot make a revolution with silk gloves" and "A single death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic." Adolph Hitler convinced an entire nation that Jews were a "virus" infecting the human gene pool, and that getting rid of them was virtuous.
If anybody could make a virtue of being tops on an evil list, Clinton could. The times are overripe for it. Given the trends in moral decay and social rot, it is entirely possible that it will not be long before the distinction between good and evil will have either completely disappeared or been totally reversed.
You can hear the Clintonese: "Doesn't it depend on what the meaning of evil is? Is evil done in pursuit of a good result truly evil?" and "Who are you to judge what is in another man's heart?"
The second place rating was an interim judgment. Clinton is an evil work-in-progress. Is the presidency of the United Nations and a world platform in his future? Infanticide without tears and the unrepented deaths of innocents at Waco, Texas, and in Yugoslavia hint at the capacity for grand-scale massacres and wars, justified as necessary for the defense of human rights and freedoms.
Although Hillary was the only women to make the Top 25 list, beating out such contenders as Jack the Ripper and Ivan the Terrible, she hit the evil glass ceiling and only placed sixth. It's a travesty. Were it not for the good old bad-boys club, she might have edged out both Bill and Adolf.
COPYRIGHT 1999 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.
newsmax.com
|
