I am a bystander, Neocon. Unlike you, what I write here is all I write on the subject, aside from a bit of personal correspondence. This is a message I sent privately to a pro-Clinton person who used to post here until he got bored with the long running meaner, harsher nature of the forum. I wrote this on 9/30/98.
If you happen to notice a better forum to discuss issues, drop me a note. I've wasted too many words already. My wife pointed out an interesting article to me last night from the Sunday Times, "Clinton, Most Charming at a Distance", nytimes.com. . After reading this article, I felt sort of drained.
It's not like I thought much of Clinton to begin with, I had hopes for him in '92, he seemed smart, and it was a relief to have a President who knew how to talk after the Reagan/Bush years. But he hit the ground stumbling, and it just kept getting worse. Another Jimmy Carter, wanted to be President but didn't know why. Better campaigner, equally inept politically, (much?) less personal integrity. I though Hillary's botch of national health care was the nadir, little did I know.
Sorry for venting on you, I still don't thing anything good will come out of the impeachment path, but that's not the point anyway. How we're ever going to get a decent President, or get back to some semblance of political civility, beats me. Again, let me know if you find a more reasonable forum.
The recipient (who liked Clinton, but was also fiscally conservative) replied that he liked Clinton politically, as a centrist, much the same argument presented by Weisberg in nytimes.com . As I've stated previously, I'm reevaluating Clinton from that point of view. The final judgement won't be in for a while, and I'm sure the Clinton-hating contingent will be there arguing he's a total scumbag as long as he's alive. I don't know myself. I'm dubious of absolutist arguments of the Clinton - Capone form, though. |
