Had yet another conversation with someone whose opinion I respect and I had to add them to the already long and growing list of those disagreeing with me about who is worse, Bill Clinton or Barack Obama. It's seems I'm virtually alone in my judgments.
Readers of this blog are well aware of my disdain for our 42nd president, that I find it almost impossible to let any opportunity to mock him pass without doing just that. But with so many arguing with me that I'm wrong, that Obama is worse, I was forced to step back and reassess.
Well, I have, and my position remains the same.
First, let me be clear (to coin a phrase), neither man is good for the country. But then, no Democrat is or ever could be.
What I find grudgingly acceptable nevertheless about Obama is that at least he's a principled liberal, that he really believes in all this left-wing lunacy. Oh, he'll dissemble, lie even, but it's always in the service of some liberal goal, socialized medicine, green energy, progressive taxation, affirmative action for GLBTs, etc.. But for a principled liberal that's not lying at all, it's being strategic. Such is their creed.
Clinton, by contrast, has no core principles. (Which is consistent at least with having no core, so I'll give him that.) He has reflexes to be sure, and they're all to the Left. He is, after all, a Democrat. But aside from that, he is utterly without principle or even scruple of any kind. On any issue, great or small, he has to take a poll first in order to know what he thinks.
With this in mind, I'll even concede that insofar as Obama's a true believer and Clinton believes in nothing at all, Obama is potentially more dangerous to the country.
But, having admitted that, here's the bottom line for me still: Not even one of Bill Clinton's most strident defenders would for one moment consider leaving a teenage daughter of theirs alone with him. For heaven's sake, can it get any worse than that?
Barack Obama, on the other hand, can babysit my kids (or grand kids) anytime he's available. At least as long as he's babysitting rather than governing, he'll be doing some good for and no harm to the country.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
What and who Bill Clinton really is became apparent during his tenure as President. At the end of the day, he seems like a self-serving doofus - boring and unimportant. President Obama, on the other hand, feels more threatening to things Americans should hold dear.
ReplyDeleteMrs. Sage just gave you an "Amen!" slc.
ReplyDeleteGeez! I can't convince anyone I'm right about this.
Sorry Mr Sage, but since everyone is throwing in their 2 cents I'm going to do the same and have to "Amen" slc as well. Furthermore, I'll go back to my longstanding view that, while ineffective as a president (and thankfully only a "one-termer") Jimmy Carter should be right in contention. What a president does after he leaves office is still important, if nothing else because he contributes to the tone of the current administration by lending support, remaining respectfully silent, or fueling fires of contempt & disrespect. You know right where I stand on that where Carter is concerned. I can't stand the sight of him. I'd rather listen to Bill Clinton any day. He may be a boring, self-serving doofus, but even he is temperate in his speech when he disagrees with his predecessors/successors and has reached out to work with them. Carter is in no danger of that!
ReplyDeleteWomen of all people hustling to Bill Clinton's defense! Who would have thought?
ReplyDeleteBut then I guess it does make a certain kind of sense.
If it weren't for the women's vote, Clinton would have remained nothing more than a former governor of Arkansas.
I'm certainly not defending him to the extent that is implied by your response to my comment, I think. He's a slave to his testosterone levels. As nasty and repugnant as that is, there is something about Carter's intemperance w/ his speech that gets me even more. There's a self-righteousness to him that is absolutely nauseating. Clinton used his position to make conquests, though it was of course made a bit more complicated by his postion, security issues, etc. Carter used his to further the divide a nation and disparage the integrity of a public servant who is a decent, God-fearing man. Something, ironically, Carter also claims to be. Disgusting.
ReplyDeleteI'm just teasing Lavender. There's plenty not to like about both of these chraracters.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, both men are publicly self-righteous. It's just that with Clinton, like everything with Clinton, it's an act. And he'll act humble and contrite too, as long as he can still score the chicks.
Carter, by contrast, is genuinely indignant. Nastily so, but genuinely sill.