Posts Tagged ‘bill clinton’

Camelot

February 13, 2012

The Camelot mythology regarding John F. Kennedy has to be one of the greatest humbugs ever foisted on the American people by the mainstream media and the liberals. The more we learn about John Kennedy, the more deplorable his actions seem to be. He and his father lied about his war record. He took sole credit for his book Profiles in Courage, even though Theodore Sorensen did the actual writing. His personal life was far sleazier than Bill Clinton’s worst fantasies. He was not as healthy and vigorous as claimed but may well have suffered from addison’s disease, which could have affected his judgement. And yet, according to the left, he was one of our greatest presidents since Obama.

In case you’re wondering, it was this article I read in Big Journalism that brought on that rant. Here are a few excerpts, but you have to read it all.

With the recent news of a 19 year old White House intern having her virginity taken by the 45 year old JFK, the apologists were lined up on NBC’s Rock Center (the show has now moved to Wednesday’s because the Monday ratings were horrible—perhaps they should bring Leno back to do it.)

John Fitzgerald Kennedy remains a mythic figure in American public life and in the memories of so many of us,” said host Brian Williams. Mythic? Is that the word you use after broadcasting an hour of Mimi Alford’s account of the trysts in the White House that included oral sex with at least one member of Kennedy’s Cabinet while JFK watched? “Mythic”? Perverted might be a better word (Alford also claims JFK wanted her to “service” little brother Teddy, but she said no to that; so at there was some decency here).

Say what you will about Clinton, but he never tried to share Monica Lewinsky with any members of his cabinet, or with his brother. And, I am positive that none of the women Clinton slept with was actually a spy.

The news that before the embargo of Cuban products JFK asked Pierre Salinger to buy him as many Cuban cigars as he could. Salinger got 1,200 of them and when they were brought into the Oval Office, Kennedy immediately signed the embargo that is still in place today. Quite the leader there, once he had his Cuban cigars, he was good to go. Regardless of what you think of the embargo, this is a classic abuse of power that is not surprising now that we know the real JFK. Maybe the Rushmore likeness can have him smoking one of those cigars.

Also, while we’re talking legacy here, did you know JFK was the guy who, with his brother Bobby, illegally wiretapped Martin Luther King and that both sat in the White House during the famous “I Have A Dream” speech because they were worried about the political ramifications had they gone to it? Probably didn’t know that, did ya? Hard to see through the aura of Camelot.

“He did what he wanted to do regardless of other people’s feelings and I think that made him strong,” added Matthews. Amazing, ignoring others feelings is now a sign of strength in a President. We’ll expect you to use that same standard on the Republican candidates during this campaign cycle when you spew your venom towards them on MSNBC. Ignoring others feelings is now a sign of strength (when it’s JFK.)  Brilliant. Love to see you mention that when you accuse Mitt Romney of being out of touch. Also—help me out here—were the Kennedy’s wealthy? I forget. Oh ya, that’s right, pops made money as an illegal bootlegger and passed it on to his boys. Camelot.

Yes, at least Romney made his money legally. By the way, why do we still have an embargo against Cuba? If we can trade with Communist China, why not with Communist Cuba?

In a way, being assassinated was the best thing that could have happened to Kennedy, in that it made him a martyr of sorts and beyond criticism for at least two decades. If he had survived, he almost certainly would have been re-elected to a second term and I have a feeling that some of the sordidness of Camelot would have leaked out despite the efforts of the media to protect him, not to mention the troubles that our increasing involvement in Vietnam would have brought.

Advertisements

Not Mitt Romney

November 10, 2011

John Hawkins at Right Wing News helped start a  blog called Not Mitt Romney, largely because he doesn’t like Mitt Romney.

I don’t like Mitt Romney.

I never have and I probably never will.

You see, politicians like Mitt Romney have a history of screwing over movement conservatives.

You know the type.

Lincoln Chafee. Arlen Specter. Charlie Crist.

You might say, “No way! Romney’s more conservative than those guys!”

Is he really? What gives you that impression? Is it because he’s telling you what you want to hear right now, when he needs your vote?

Well, if Romney gets elected, which Romney will be President?

Romney 1.0: The left-of-center Republican who was adamantly pro-choice and wasn’t a fan of Reagan or the Contract with America during his run at Ted Kennedy’s seat?

Romney 2.0: The moderate, center-right governor of Massachusetts who left after one term because he would have lost if he ran again in 2006?

Romney 3.0: The fire breathing “conservative alternative” to John McCain who pretended like he was the reincarnation of Reagan?

Romney 4.0: The guy who’s running now, who believes whatever you believe, no matter what you believe?

 

Well, I don’t much care for him either and for about the same reasons.

The thing that I am afraid of is that the 2012 election will be a repeat of the 1996 election. Going into that election, we had an unpopular Democratic President. The Democrats had received a shellacking in the mid-term elections and lost control of Congress for the first time in over 40 years. It seemed likely that Bill Clinton would be a one-term President. And then the Republicans nominated Bob Dole.

As soon as Bob Dole gained the nomination, I knew that Clinton would win. Dole simply didn’t inspire the Republican base. He had made too many compromises with the Democrats and didn’t really seem to believe in anything.

I know that the Republicans have some advantages they didn’t enjoy back in 1996. Back then, the Internet was still in its infancy and new media hardly existed at all. There was no equivalent to the Tea Party movement. Obama isn’t nearly as good a politician as Clinton was and unlike Clinton, he seems to have no interest in triangulating or trying to portray himself as a moderate. In fact, if his recent actions are any indication, it seems that Obama will try to win re-election by energizing his base rather than reach out to independents. Still, I think that if Mitt Romney is the nominee a lot of Republicans will vote for him, just to defeat Obama, but they won’t like it. They won’t like spending the next 4-8 years defending Romney as he tries to govern in the center and betrays Conservative principles.

And also, in these tough times, the last thing America needs is a president without any firm guiding principles, someone who wants to be all things to all people. We need someone who is willing to make the tough decisions and stick by them. I don’t think that is Romney.

I think we can do better than Mitt Romney. I don’t just want to vote against Obama. I want to vote for someone.

Contempt for the President

July 13, 2011

From CBS. Barak Obama implied that Social Security checks might not be sent out on time if a deal on increasing the debt ceiling is not made by August 2.

“I cannot guarantee that those checks go out on August 3rd if we haven’t resolved this issue. Because there may simply not be the money in the coffers to do it,” Mr. Obama said in an interview with CBS Evening News anchor Scott Pelley, according to excerpts released by CBS News.

He is lying and he knows it. I don’t think that I have ever felt such contempt for a President before. Between his feckless appeasing foreign policy and his demagoguery as the country nears the abyss, he has to be the worst president of my lifetime.

I didn’t care for Bill Clinton. He was a sleaze, and I am not just referring to his affairs. He was a pathological liar. But, he did seem to have the best interests of the country in some small corner of his mind. He could also be pragmatic.

Jimmy Carter was bad, but mercifully, I was too young to remember much of his presidency. He was a weakling who mistook his weakness for moral virtue.

George Bush I had no strong core beliefs of his own. He seemed to want to be president simply to cap off a career in public service. He seems to be a good man but he tended to react to events rather than cause events to happen.

His son also seems to be a good man and stronger than his father, but frightfully inarticulate. He never seemed to be able to explain what he was doing or what he hoped to accomplish. This seems to be a Bush family trait.

But again, of all these, Obama is the worst.

Nancy Pelosi Shows Some Class

May 4, 2011

I don’t much care for former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. I don’t like her radical left-wing politics and I don’t think she was a particularly good Speaker. Never the less, we must give credit where it is deserved. According to this article in The Hill, Nancy Pelosi called former presidents George W. Bush and Bill Clinton to thank them for their role in taking down Osama bin Laden. Good for you Ms. Pelosi! Maybe if more politicians acted this way, American politics would be less of a cesspool.


%d bloggers like this: