I understand that Bill Clinton was far from a perfect President, let alone a perfect husband and Christian. In fact, it is clear that for much of his marriage, he's been a pretty poor husband. And I would not want to excuse his affair with Monica or the way he lied about it to the country. That was all wrong and showed a significant defect in character.
Still did the man really deserve to be impeached for lying to a court about his sex life? When you consider what a distraction this was to the real issues of his presidency (like, for example, hunting down a terrorist named Osma Bin Laden) and how minimal his descretion was vis-a-vis the way he carried out his oath of office, you might come to think that punishing his wrongdoing wasn't worth the damage that his impeachment would do to the country or to the office of the president.
Compare Clinton's case with that of our current President. I'll buy that President Bush was sincere in leading us to war--he was trying (I believe) to do what was in the best interest of the country. (Although, from the reporting of Bob Woodward it seems that his primary reason for wanting to go to war had more to do with a desire to build a democracy in the cradle of the Middle East rather than concern over WMD, although there was undoubtedly that too.) But his over-confidence and arrogance led him to not consider all the intelligence with the seriousness it deserved. He oversaw a Defense Department that made no plausible plans for the protracted war that was to come. He instituted policy of tapping phone calls of American citizens without gaining even post facto warrants. He's ruined our reputation as a nation that protects human rights by his blatantly declaring that the Geneva Convention doesn't apply to the prisoners we take. Bush has done all of this and has not had to worry about impeachment. Now I ask you, which is worse: leading a country to a pre-emptive war without paying attention to all the relevant intelligence and violating the Constitutional rights of U.S. citizens (when getting post facto warrants was always a possibility if he only cared to) or lying about oral sex?
The question answers itself.
Tuesday, September 26, 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)