Random thoughts on Ed Klein's "Bill raped Hillary" stormlet
Now that I have discussed what I consider to be the
real scandalof the Clinton administration, I would like to comment briefly as the dust settles on the Ed Klein book matter.
1) Many conservative bloggers spent the day yesterday defending the Clintons from the Ed Klein book. The bloggers received no credit for this defense, as the book has been and will be labeled a "right wing attack." I am not criticizing the bloggers, but it is important to know how we will be treated even when we take the high road.
2) The best quote regarding yesterday's stormlet is from Hard Starboard:
If maintaining our "credibility" were to henceforth require stridently proactive defense of our political foes against personal attacks and innuendo from their own side, then that would consign one more word to the dustbin of etymological incoherence.
Conservative bloggers don't need to defend the Clintons from the latest "attack."
3) Yesterday's unpleasantness brought out of the woodwork the "I used to be conservative" brigade. There were several commenters at various blogs who claimed that they usually-vote-Republican-but-were-now-going-to-support-Hillary-because-of-the-book. Anyone who could be swayed so easily, has already been swayed. We can only hope that Bush' first Supreme Court nominee is sufficiently conservative that the "I used to be conservative" brigade will make a similar declaration when the nominee's name is announced.
4) Kitty Kelley's anti-Bush book, so often invoked yesterday as a parallel to the Klein book, was reenacted on Saturday Night Live on the eve of the election last fall. No doubt the Klein book will not receive the same attention.
5) Had Bill Clinton been a conservative Republican, the MSM/DNC would undoubtedly have asked Juanita Broadrick to provide her thoughts on Ed Klein's book.
6) Where was the outrage when John McCain publicly joked (while Chelsea was still a minor) that Chelsea Clinton's physical appearance could be attributed to her being the product of a union between Hillary and Janet Reno? (McCain later apologized, and then began his "straight talk express.") For that matter, where was the outrage when Chelsea wrote her famous article in the wake of 9-11 that used the terrorist attacks as a basis for partisan sniping at the Bush tax cuts?
7) Yesterday's funniest line:
. . . Hillary was one of the most liberated women of her generation and would be about as likely to accept forcible assault as step out of a moving plane sans-parachute . . .
We know from experience that there is little that Hillary will not accept for the sake of her political ambitions. We don't need to know exactly how much she will accept - such as whether she would accept the events depicted in Klein's book. She has tolerated from her "husband"(and defended) the worst public humiliation of any first lady in history. She has attacked her husband's accusers, much the same way that the fabled "trailer trash" women (of which James Carville speaks) attack the police when the police come to arrest the drunken husband in the middle of a domestic smackdown. She makes her attacks all behind the protective cover of the MSM/DNC.
Maybe the above blogger was thinking of Paula Jones instead of Hillary. Paula Jones, if the MSM/DNC permits you to recall, was the brave "trailer trash" woman that nearly brought down the Clinton administration. The woman who suddenly found herself harrassed and marginalized at her state job after rebuffing the good Governor's advances. The woman who found herself the subject of IRS audits after going public with her story. The woman whose physical appearance became the target of MSM/DNC attacks.
If we are going to deep six Klein's book, that's fine. It won't be the first book to be ignored and/or castigated. But please don't use it as an excuse to impute heroic attributes to our lamp-throwing junior Senator from New York.