Clinton, Democrats perfect
politics of hate
Doug Mills / Associated Press
President Bill Clinton on Dec. 18 called for
an end to the "politics of personal
destruction."
WASHINGTON
It takes Olympian shamelessness to send private detectives after your
enemies, use the artifice of law to hoodwink your friends, sew seeds of
hatred everywhere - and then beg, as Bill Clinton did on Dec. 18, to "stop
the politics of personal destruction ... (and) get rid of the poisonous venom
of excessive partisanship, obsessive animosity and uncontrolled anger. ..."
President Clinton is the undisputed master of practicing everything he
condemns, whether it be the glib abuse of power in Iraq or the reduction of
women to carnal playthings. But nowhere has he explored the possibilities
of cynicism more fully than in his recent quest to portray Republicans as
foaming vessels of hatred and himself as the saintly target of their rage.
Rush Limbaugh, who has taken shots at Clinton and felt the heat of
returning fire, recently compiled a long litany of Democratic Party quotes. It
made for riveting listening because it confirmed what many conservatives
have long known: The Democratic Party has become hooked on political
libel.
At the heart of the trend lies a debate of central importance - the argument
over whether government dispenses compassion or oppression, and who
best preserves the values that have defined and blessed America for the
past two centuries, federal agencies or individual citizens.
Conservatives have warned against undue concentrations of government
power, cautioning that even the most benign ruler will become a despot if
given the opportunity. They have claimed that many of liberalism's proudest
monuments were in fact costly frauds: Welfare didn't work. Clean-needle
programs didn't work. "Save the Children" schemes didn't work. Economic
pump-priming didn't work. Medicare and Medicaid were making workers
pay the high price of false promises. Social Security was primed for
disaster.
These are formidable arguments. But Democratic elders have chosen to
fight back not with facts or ideas, but calumny.
A few examples will give you a flavor of things: Congress debated a minor
change in the school-lunch program three years ago - a change that would
reduce federal authority over kids' meals while allocating more money for
food. Rep. Lynn Woolsey of California accused the GOP of "starving
children." House Minority Richard Gephardt warned that "the Republicans
are taking food out of the mouths of millions of needy and middle-class
children." Rep. John Lewis of Georgia took the most incendiary approach,
claiming: "They're coming for our children. They're coming for the poor.
They're coming for the sick, the elderly and the disabled."
In similar fashion, the White House led a charge against the Contract with
America, accusing the enterprise of being "mean-spirited" and "extreme." In
one floor debate, Rep. Pat Schroeder of Colorado, Gephardt and four
others used the phrases with almost robotic frequency.
The 1995-96 debate about Medicare offers an even more dramatic view of
the hate-thy-neighbor approach to politics. The White House and the GOP
produced very similar plans for keeping the program afloat. Nevertheless,
the president and his party portrayed the minor discrepancies as crimes
against humanity. Jerrold Nadler of New York called the plan "Draconian,
mean-spirited and immoral." Rep. Luis Gutierrez of Illinois complained,
"Once again, they're playing Robin Hood in reverse: taking from the poor to
give to the rich." Rosa DeLauro warned, "our children are being left the
crumbs of the Gingrich Revolution."
Or think about the Thompson committee's hearings into the systematic
fleecing of Asian Americans by the Democratic Party. Rather than disputing
facts, Team Clinton actually accused the Republicans of being anti-Asian!
So now comes the president, depicting the GOP as driven by blind hatred
during the recent debate on his impeachment. This insult has in it the stuff of
the old blood libel against Jews. It depicts others as animals animated by
rage rather than reason and hints that all's fair in fighting such an enemy.
The White House has even tried to exploit wounds it says it wants to heal.
It has incited ill will among African Americans, for instance, by accusing the
Republicans of racism in L'Affaire Lewinsky.
Such attacks are irrational, unanswerable - and, therefore, highly effective in
inflaming suspicions. Let's be clear: Hatred is and always has been the
weapon of first resort for Bill Clinton and his minions. One can review the
cases of Paula Jones, Travel Office director Billy Dale, Monica Lewinsky
and others without seeing a single disputation of fact - only smears.
The recent Republican attempts to hold the president accountable for his
behavior are not signs of "obsession" or moral putrefaction. Independent
Counsel Ken Starr and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde
are not psychos. What's sick is the fact that this administration, having
turned the language of morals upside-down, now has the temerity to insist
that Republicans - who in their worst days don't issue the kind of
imprecations Democrats now utter as a matter of course - are responsible
for the ugly atmosphere in Washington today.
detnews.com |
