Posted by Scott Malensek on 7 March, 2008 at 4:57 am. 13 comments already!



“Over The Top” By Peggy Noonan

While anyone on the left would immediately discount the source because she was one of President Reagan’s speech writers, they’d be smart to at least look at this one. Whether it’s bombing a recruiting station as a demonstration of their support for peace and “the troops,” or calls on liberal websites demanding that the DNC convention “re-create 68,” or perhaps it’s the growing Dem vs Dem punditry on tv…it really doesn’t matter. The point is the same: there is a deep fracture in the Democratic Party between Senator Obama’s supporters and Senator Clinton’s supporters. This divide opened the wounds of the 1990’s using tactics that Republicans could never have dreamed of using. Those wounds-as Ms Noonan describe so perfectly-are the things that have been taboo for Democrats to talk about for ten years or more. In fact, not only have Democrats been forbidden by party partisanship and political politeness, but they’ve actually been compelled to EXCUSE them against all forms of rationality, historical fact, and patriotic responsibility.

This week the Obama campaign repeated the mass media call for her to release her present or past tax records, her Presidential library records, and/or other records (see also real-estate records) that would demonstrate her financial independence from special interests, her White House experience, and/or her financial brilliance. Rather than expedite the release of such sound substance to her political claims, the Senator compared the request to that of Ken Starr’s investigations.

Now, the words “Ken Starr” are bad words in the Democratic Party. They are those which should not be spoken without a spit to the right, a crotch grab, a sneer, and/or a flip of the finger. But…in her complaint/weak attack against Senator Obama she compelled the large and vibrant portion of Senator Obama’s supporters-youth voters-to ask, “Who is Ken Starr?” See, a lot of them were too young to remember or understand the long list of Clinton scandals, and in a moment of personal defense and political PTDS, she caused a firestorm of Google searches on “Ken Starr” and “Clinton scandals.”

My favorite part of the article (obviously) was where Ms Noonan let Democrats be Democrats.

One Obama supporter on apparently didn’t get the memo. That is the great threat to the Clintons, the number of young and independent Democrats who haven’t received the memo about how Democrats speak of the Clintons. Writer Mark Q. Sawyer: “If Obama won’t hit back, I will. Why aren’t we talking about impeachment, Whitewater and Osama?”

The answer is simple Mr Sawyer: because you were not allowed to hold your party accountable, and if you DARED point out the absolute disgrace and abject failures that went along with any successes in the 1990’s…you’d be described as a Joe Lieberman, a neocon, a conservative, etc. Now, the time has come-not to recognize that Republicans were right to complain about certain things, but to demand better of the party-not more of the same.

…and to those who would ignore this lemming-like, wide-eyed, unquestioning obedience and support of the partisan line in favor of distracting the conversation and using childish, “They do it too” styles of discussion, one need look no further for proof of being wrong that this article itself for Peggy Noonan, a conservative of stature that typically raises the hair on the back of her political opposition…has done more than her fair share of Bush-bashing (ie calls for accountability) herself. In fact, anyone who reads the article will see that she and other Republicans have at least less fear of holding their party to account. So the question isn’t do partisans on both sides of the aisle blindly follow their political dogma, but rather why are Democrats breaking out of that box now rather than when it was pertinent?

Or is now the most important time to step up and do so?

Looks like the Clintons are refusing to release the records of the pardons granted 8yrs ago as well. Gosh, why could that be? Nothing to do with money laundered through the UN-Saddam Oil For Food program, millions in income from Arab princes in the UAE that the 911 Commission claimed funneled money for the 911 attacks, or the FARC pardons (something kinda interesting given that 1/3 of South America is on the verge of war over FARC terrorists). Nah, it’s wrong to ask about such things. The Clintons are saints.


Federal archivists at the Clinton Presidential Library are blocking the release of hundreds of pages of White House papers on pardons that the former president approved, including clemency for fugitive commodities trader Marc Rich.

That archivists’ decision, based on guidance provided by Bill Clinton that restricts the disclosure of advice he received from aides, prevents public scrutiny of documents that would shed light on how he decided which pardons to approve from among hundreds of requests.

Clinton’s legal agent declined the option of reviewing and releasing the documents that were withheld, said the archivists, who work for the federal government, not the Clintons.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x