et tu, Bubba?
Bill Clinton is an embarrassment to the Presidency and to
the country. He is a failed leader and an expert, avid liar. He looked
us (his constituents) in the eye and lied about whether he lied to Congress.
I am especially incensed by people who burble sound-bite excuses/ complaints/
arguments about why we shouldn't storm the White House and throw Bill Clinton
out on his ass. I'm embarrassed that we are all scrambling around making
excuses for him. He's the elephant in the living room.
Please find your favorite canned response below, and
click to see me destroy it.
"It's a Republican Conspiracy"
"Anyone in his position would have lied."
"So a girl blew him- should we impeach him for that?"
"It's Private, and None of Our Business, Really"
"I Cant' Believe We've Spent X millions of Taxpayer
Dollars on This Investigation"
"The Senate is Trying to Undo the Result of a Popular
"An Impeachment Will Hinder Presidential Function
in the Future"
"OK, he perjured himself, But It Was Only About Screwing
"He's been a Good President; We Can Forgive Him
"I don't like what he did, but it's not a *HIGH
CRIME OR MISDEMEANOR*. He's being railroaded."
"I'm so tired of this. I wish we could just put this
"It's a Republican Conspiracy."
Brilliant retort. Ever hear of shooting the messenger? The facts
of the matter are not tainted by the source of the information. What
if it really IS a conspiracy? SO WHAT? Facts are facts. The White
House administration, on 12 Jan 1999, two days before the impeachment trial,
offered to stipulate the entire Starr Report as fact, in exchange for a
trial with no witnesses. Does that sound like a response to a conspiracy
An act this grandiose, and this public, can't be faked. The public
is stupid but not that stupid. Bear in mind that Clinton will be
attacked and undone by the facts of his own behavior, not by a lynch mob
of angry Republicans.
Clinton is not a martyr, or a victim of some hidden agenda. He is a
criminal with a consistent pattern of behavior, who seems to believe that
he is above the law.
"Anyone in his position would
Well, on the surface, this statement is correct. Most people would lie
about getting a blowjob while on the phone to a Congressman, or about sexually
harassing someone as atrocious as Paula Jones. The failure of this
excuse is that the President is not everyman. I don't want Joe the
Plumber in the White House. I want a fucking LEADER. Leaders lead,
and they teach by example. What are we learning from Bill Clinton?
I really don't care what he did with his peter. I am insulted by
his behavior after the fact. His increasingly pathetic displays of
mock piety, and his insistence that we put this all behind us, are infuriating.
We'll all put this behind us as soon as Clinton grows up and accepts responsibility
for his actions.
"So a girl blew him- that's hardly
an impeachable offense."
No, of course it's not. Getting a little strange is not that big
a deal. It doesn't affect his ability to lead. Collusion, obstruction
of justice, and perjury, however, are serious offenses for which people
go to prison. These crimes demonstrate Clinton's complete lack of
leadership skills. It's really not about sex, it's about an arrogant
politician and his pattern of belief that he is above the law.
"It's Private, and None of
Our Business, Really"
It's NOT private. Clinton is on the public payroll, living in a house that
we pay for. Having sex with a subordinate, while you're on the clock,
is very likely to piss off the people who are paying you. In this
case, it's the public. His offenses could only be MORE public if he were
doing the naughty right on the lawn during a press conference.
I don't enjoy the 'salacious' details of our President's failings being
made public. It makes me embarrassed. Unfortunately, trials
do not enjoy the luxury of good taste. Detailed talk of murder is
in poor taste, but it is necessary during a murder trial. Bill Clinton
could have spared himself and the country all this embarrassment by acting
like a leader when his transgressions first came to light. A simple, quick,
sincere confession and apology, and it would have been over with.
When you find yourself annoyed or embarrassed by all this, focus your frustration
at the source- Bill Clinton.
"I Cant' Believe We've Spent
X millions of Taxpayer Money on This Investigation"
This falls apart when we consider two points-
1. This was not a random, out-of-control, dirt-digging operation. Starr
followed specific leads and produced mountains of specific evidence.
My recollection is that Ken Starr didn't even want the job in the first
2. If Clinton wasn't a scumbag, there would have been no such investigation.
Again, a little integrity goes a long way. Starr's hand was forced
by Clinton's consistent denial of any wrongdoing. "... that depends
on what your definition of *IS*, is?" Am I the only person who is insulted
"The Senate is Trying to Undo
the Result of a Popular Election"
Wrong-o, boy. The Senate is trying to determine if the President is fit
to lead the country. The implication of this statement is that, once
elected, the President answers to no one. We elected Clinton, he was not
born into monarchy. He answers to us, and more directly to the Legislative
Branch. The impeachment process is an established part of the "checks-and-balances"
system we all learned about in the sixth grade.
Here's an analogy to illustrate the fallacy of this argument:
A guy gets caught stealing from work, and his boss says
"you're fired!". The guy replies "Hey, you can't fire me! You hired
What kind of sense does that make? Just like the guy getting fired,
we're seeing a different Clinton than the one we elected.
We elected a man to do a job, and we also elected the Senators to represent
us. One facet of that representation is to accept the ugly responsibility
of the impeachment process. Clinton started this ugly process with
his ugly behavior.
As far as Clinton's popularity, here's two non-sequiturs to ponder:
Nixon was elected by a much stronger majority (60-something
%) than Clinton (43%).
More people seem to think Clinton should stay in office, than voted
"An Impeachment Will Hinder
Presidential Function in the Future"
This statement is insidious because it includes two subtle presuppositions-
that the impeachment is frivolous or vindictive, and that the President
is an innocent victim of the process. Both are false.
The same brilliant rationale could be extended to other situations.
"My older boy killed the neighbor's cat, but I didn't wanna
spank him because his little brother might see. Then he'd grow up afraid
of being spanked."
An impeachment, if nothing else, is a loud wake-up call, a reminder that
we replaced kings with presidents a while back. Hopefully, it will
hinder Presidential dysfunction in the future.
"My secretary doesn't even show up to work anymore, but if I fire
her, the other secretaries might not be able to do their jobs."
I have a valuable bit of advice for future Presidents- you can avoid
the emasculating effects of an impeachment, by not being a dirtbag.
Why would a reasonably honest, forthright President be hindered by the
threat of an impeachment hearing? Even if a frivolous impeachment
were a possibility, it could at worst be a nuisance for a President with
nothing to hide.
"OK, he perjured himself, But It
Was Only About Screwing Some Girl."
This one might be my favorite. Apparently , it's OK for the president
to commit a crime, as long as it's only against a woman. Even more outlandish,
sexual harassment is so trivial that lying about it is no big deal.
This statement sets the gender war back about fifty years, and Democrats
are destroying this progress, simply to save face (i.e. to prevent a Democrat
from being removed from office). Don't we hear a lot of Democrat
whining about Republicans and their self-serving, socially destructive
policies? Isn't this embarrassing statement a desperate example of the
exact same thing?
Is perjury a different crime, depending on the topic of your dishonest
sworn testimony? I don't think so, and to play down the significance
of the offense in this fashion is an insult.
"He's been a Good President;
We Can Forgive Him This Trespass."
I disagree with both of these statements, but let's focus on the second
part. We can forgive him? It's not my job to forgive him. He
won't be up for election again, so I can't show my support by voting for
him. I guess the only slack we can cut Bubba is to let him stay in office
until his contract is up. I can't imagine a worse turn for foreign
policy than to have this emasculated criminal acting as President.
He may have done some good things as President, but they're seriously undermined
by his utter lack of integrity. Did he become a scumbag recently, or has
he always been a self-serving arrogant liar? It's like finding out
that your spouse has been conducting an extramarital affair for years-
when did the lying start? Is the whole relationship a lie?
"I don't like what he did,
but it's not a *HIGH CRIME OR MISDEMEANOR*. He's being railroaded."
The overused term, *high crimes and misdemeanors*, deserves some explanation.
It directly references back to bribery and treason, the two crimes specifically
named as *impeachables*. So other crimes of similar gravity are generally
considered impeachables as well. Perjury and obstruction of justice are
certainly in that league.
*Misdemeanor*, in this context, draws from English common law ca. 1386
AD- it was not used to describe a lesser crime [as opposed to a felony]
until later. A misdemeanor is a crime that undermines the demeanor
or character of the perpetrator. You know, like sexually harassing
your subordinates and using the power of your office to prevent yourself
from being sued, or committing perjury and directly, unequivocally, lying
to your constituents about it. I think those things speak volumes about
a character defect, and under this context it's without controversy that
these are impeachable offenses.
"I'm so tired of this. I wish
we could just put this behind us."
More hyperbolae- I think everyone wants this to be over. This an infuriating
response because it often comes from the White House- the source not only
of the misconduct but of the delays! Clinton's cronies have done
nothing but impede the investigation, and now impede the impeachment process,
while Bubba and his press secretary glibly repeat the mantra- "we just
want to move forward..."
The same underhanded tactics were used to confound the Paula Jones
case, and that behavior was the catalyst for the grand-jury investigation
in the first place!
It's worth mentioning again that Clinton could have 'moved forward'
at several steps along the way-
Unfortunately his complete lack of integrity have prevented any of these
events from occurring. Clinton doesn't want this to move forward, he wants
everyone to get tired of the impeachment so he can keep his job.
He could have kept his dick in his pants in the first place.
He could have admitted to his indiscretion before there was a mountain
of evidence amassed.
He could have sat for deposition before the Supreme Court forced it.
He could resign and end the process immediately. He's guilty, and
he knows it, and he knows that the world knows it. He has destroyed himself
as a credible President, but his resignation might at least preserve some
dignity for the office.
back to top