Sorry, But We Have to Talk About Bill Clinton
There’s been one name conspicuously absent from the current anti-sexual-predator uprisings in Hollywood, Washington and state capitals around the country. And no, I’m not talking about Trump.
One-time “liberal” icon Bill Clinton, we all recall, was accused of actions much like those of Harvey Weinstein (and Trump, for that matter), and was defended by lots of liberals who were willing to sell their principles to keep the White House. Is it hypocritical of them to now voice such outrage about Roy Moore (or Trump)?
Matt Yglesias of Vox says yes, arguing that the failure of Washington Democrats to force Clinton to resign gave sexual predators 20 more years of happy hunting. He credits Clinton’s successful defense of his presidency to successfully framing the issue not as sexual assault but marital infidelity.
That positions might strike you as absolutist, but even a more nuanced look back at Clinton’s predilections, like this one from The Rude Pundit, reaches this conclusion:
I do think that Bill Clinton is tarred by all the allegations, from the most outrageous to the most tragic, true or not, and he was impeached. Yes, he gets to live the life of a wealthy man, but his legacy has an asterisk, and a good percentage of the country vilifies him and Hillary.
He’s right about that last part. But I wonder if those who vilify him do it for the right reasons.
We, and I include myself in this, dismissed his behavior that one of his aides described as ‘bimbo alerts’. We, and I include myself, dismissed the message due to the right-wing messengers (wasn’t David Brock involved in this?). We and I were all too willing to dismiss the accusers as trailer-park trash.
When we look back, we (and I) should never have been this cavalier when it comes to his rampant womanizing. All I can say is I’ll try to do better moving forward.
Don’t be too hard on yourself.
The first time I ever heard Bill Clinton’s name spoken was over drinks in DC years before he made a national name for himself. Someone in our group was from Arkansas, and in talking about Dem up and comers someone asker her, “What about that Governor of yours, Bill Clinton?”
I will never forget her response. “I love him. He’s great and he’d be a great President – but he’d never make it through a primary and general election because he can’t keep his pants up.”
I’ve seen first hand that part of the reason some people get away with terrible behavior is that they are otherwise likable. People liked Bill Clinton.
I think we have to take his accusers seriously.
look, If Bill Clinton consentually bangs his way across the country I dont care.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they have “an arrangement” and it’s a shame that our society is so hung up on monogamy.
If, however, even one of those encounters wasnt fully consensual… toss him on the pile with the rest. And im sure at least one time his boundless self-assured confidence clouded what would have been obvious protests to us lowly “betas”.
“If Bill Clinton consentually bangs his way across the country I dont care.”
I do, but I care more about him lying about it. Wear two faces and I’m going to spit in them both, just to see which one is real.
“I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they have “an arrangement” and it’s a shame that our society is so hung up on monogamy.”
Again, then let them say so. I disliked Hillary more for her two-facedness than her positions. I agreed with some of her positions.
Do you think he could have gotten elected if they were openly swingers? No way in hell. It falls under “not hurting anyone, not our business”… if they DO hurt someone, as Bill may very well have, he should face justice for it.
Sorry, but I’m of the generation that sees secrecy as the doorway to blackmail. Lying because it’s convenient is lying.
He should never have been elected in the first place, but the both of them looked into the camera and lied. Once you learn to fake sincerity….
BTW, if the hookers-in-Russia video turns out to exist, who got hurt? See, the problem there isn’t the peeing on the bed, it’s the kompromat.
It wasn’t so much his infidelities prior to being elected that damaged his presidency, I think he had been more or less forgiven for that by the electorate. It was the Oval Office escapades afterward and the bald-faced lying about it. The tragedy to me is what might have been. He could have been face on the currency, Mt. Rushmore good, balanced budgets, healthcare reform, President Gore afterward, no WMD goose chase in Iraq…..sigh.