"What accounts for President Clinton's sorry record of weakness in the face of the three-part terrorist threat of al Qaeda, Iraq, and North Korea? Why was Clinton, so aggressive in domestic policy, so reluctant to move to stop terrorism?
At his core, Bill Clinton is a moral relativist. Things are not black and white to the former president; nor do they easily divide into good and evil. Whether facing partisan adversaries or foreign opponents, Clinton could always see the other side's point of view and make allowances for its conduct. Where George W. Bush sees absolutes, Clinton sees complexity.
Shakespeare's Hamlet summed up Clinton's cluttered mind well:
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all; And thus the native hue of resolution, Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought; And enterprises of great pith and moment, With this regard, there their currents turn awry, and lose the name of action.
Today we call it "paralysis by analysis."
Noting that terrorism "has a very long history, as long as organized combat itself," Clinton reminded his audience of what he labeled American terrorism, in an implicit reminder not to see the issue as a simple contrast of good vs. evil. He recited a genealogy of terrorism, from the Crusades through the slave trade and the treatment of Native Americans. Carrying his narrative into the present day, Clinton analogized terrorism to "hate crimes rooted in race, religion, or sexual orientation." The implication was clear: We were not all good, so they could not be all evil."
-Dick Morris
~SB~ |
