"Our target was terror. Our mission was clear: to strike at the network of radical groups affiliated with and funded by Osama bin Laden, perhaps the pre-eminent organizer and financier of international terrorism in the world today,"
...
"With compelling evidence that the bin Laden network of terrorist groups was planning to mount further attacks against Americans and other freedom-loving people, I decided America must act."
Is it possible that the greatest damage done by the entire Lewinski affair was that America and the West couldn't hear this one speech over the noise of the scandal?
6 comments:
I've heard this before, and I find it a remarkable question. I would say that the most real damage done by the raging hatred of Bill Clinton, the willingness to destroy him at all costs, was first not listening to this speech and next not listening to him when he told Bush that bin Laden, and not Iraq, was the biggest threat to national security.
I mean, is there any doubt that without Lewinski Gingrinch's Republican would have found something else to use to impeach Clinton? He perjured himself during a deposition in a civil trial.
So, yes, the cost to our nation of the Republican hate machine's efforts to unseat Bill Clinton is not just a country divided for two decades and crippling partisanship. It may also be the attack on 9/11.
By the by, I'm totally serious about my question in the paragraph above. Do you think there is ANY chance the Republicans would not have impeached Clinton on Whitewater, and ignored his speech for that reason, or distracted his administration in defending that?
Jim,
I can't go there with you. Yeah, I'll gladly agree with you that Tom Delay eats the flesh of christian babies at moonlight in a graveyard -- he was that bad. But no, I do not think that they could have proceeded to impeachment without the self-inflicted damage Clinton did to himself.
Thinking back, I remember what a really amazing time it was in american politics. I remember the total shock when it came out that the affair was probably real, and the rampant speculation that clinton would be forced to resign. It was seismic. It was huge. Nothing I have ever experienced politically compared to those weeks.
Remember that Whitewater went on for six years before Monica, and it never amounted to much either politically or in the public consciousness. But Monica instantly changed that. Without the sex (never mind the lie), this would never have generated enough support from the DC insiders to gain the critical mass for impeachment.
Matt --
Great point. I am not sure how much impact it actually had, in that the Bush team was pretty determined to to the exact opposite of whatever it was Clinton was doing when they came into office. They literally reversed 100% of his policies. It was decided that if Clinton thought OBL was the bad guy, then Saddam must be the real bad guy. I don't think this was due to Monica, but due to the Bush team's (and indeed entire conservative establishment's) visceral loathing of Clinton.
I'm a Bill Clinton fan. Always have been. I think that the "Republican machine (or whatever)" during that time was a terrible, terrible thing. I think they represented partisan politics at its worst at the expense of the country and the well-being of it's citizenry. Perhaps I'm just getting soft in my old age, but looking back I place more and more blame on Clinton. Even if he couldn't have diffused the situation (and he may have been able to) because of partisan hate, he could have been much more straight and forthcoming. He could have not lied. He effectively fanned the fire, and for that he also shares any responsibility if in fact the distraction caused harm to our country.
He was/is a grown man at least partially responsible for the consequences of his actions, even if those consequences were an unnecessary witch hunt perpetuated by his enemies across the aisle.
Clinton blew it. Very Greek tragedy.
But I also think, like Liam, that the Bush administration wasn't interested in what Clinton had to say, anyway.
I respect Clinton less the more I know about him. I think he was too centrist. I also find it iritating that he couldn't have kept it in his pants while president, at least.
I think there is no way Bill Clinton could have avoided impeachment.
Depressing to hear you've heard this before, I was hoping it was a semi-original thought.
I think without Lewinski BClinton wouldn't have been impeached. I think the partisan attacks would have continued regardless.
BClinton's relationship with all of us is incredibly complex. Not for the far-right haters, but for everyone else. I always thought he was a competent administrator, nothing so great, but nothing so negative either. I was and am angry about the Lewinski affair. It seems like such a petty thing to have allowed get so huge. He was absolutely complicit in the explosion, and the subsequent loss of focus on world affairs. I don't think he shares equal responsibility, but I think he share substantial responsibility.
It's frustrating, he could have been so much more.
Post a Comment