Viking Pundit |
|
|
The only conservative in Western Massachusetts -
Email Eric Lindholm: ealindholm -at- msn -dot- com
Archives
Link  Home Arts and Letters American Mind Ace of Spades HQ Althouse Anchoress Astute Blog Axis of Right Tim Blair Balloon Juice Betsy's Page Blue Crab Blvd Boots and Sabers Brainster The Corner Conserv Grapevine Contentions Country Store Election Projection Expat Yank Fark Flopping Aces Fox News Gateway Pundit Gay Patriot Hedgehog Report Hugh Hewitt Hit and Run Hot Air Hoystory Informed Speculation Instapundit Jawa Report Jaws Blog Little Green Footballs Maggie's Farm Mass Backwards Macs Mind Greg Mankiw Marginal Revolution Megan Mcardle Michelle Malkin Memeorandum MinuteMan Mises Economics Moderate Voice NE Republican Outside the Beltway Pajamas Media Patterico Political Wire PoliBlog Politico Poor & Stupid PoliPundit Political Junkie Power Line Protein Wisdom Q and O Radio Equalizer Rantburg Real Clear Politics RCP Blog Red State Right as Usual Right Wing News Rightwing Nuthouse Scrivener Sister Toldjah Stolen Thunder Stop the ACLU Strata-Sphere Don Surber Truth about Cars Volokh Conspiracy VT Woodchuck Willisms Wizbang Winds of Change RSS Feed 
|
Friday, February 01, 2008
Bill Clinton fights for a legacy Via Betsy's Page, Charles Krauthammer notes that when you really look at it, Bill Clinton's tenure is a footnote in history between the end of the Cold War and 9/11: Clinton's decade, that holiday from history, was certainly a time of peace and prosperity -- but a soporific Golden Age that made no great demands on leadership. What, after all, was his greatest crisis? A farcical sexual dalliance.That's why he has to get himself back into the White House. Oh, and Hillary too. I read in Newsweek that Bill doesn't worry about losing stature because "he can get it back later." So it's anything goes. Extra - Fox News: "The bad news for the former first lady is she is also seen as the candidate most likely to "do anything - including something unethical - to win," and most likely to embarrass the country." Where in the world did Americans get that opinion?
Comments:
Will the right EVER mature beyond its childish obsession with "legacy" and "the verdict of history"?
It's certainly understandable that Republicans prefer to look to the past ("Truman was unpopular, too, and now look at him!") or the future ("I don't follow polls; the war is a comma; history will judge Bush as a man of moral clarity"). Let's face it. It sucks to be a Republican in 2008. It'd be so much better to be a Republican in 1948, or 2048. But Charles Krauthammer wants to write about a "low" "narcissist" President "clawing for" his "lost opportunity for greatness" and "a legacy that he knows history has denied him and that he has but one chance to redeem" ? And Krauthammer says that that man's name is BILL CLINTON? Good luck, Charlie. If I were stuck selling that one, I'd be desperately promoting the "just wait until we're all dead, you'll see" standard myself. It's a deal. We'll take the footnote. You can keep the fiasco. # posted by
 : 11:18 PM
Will the right EVER mature beyond its childish obsession with "legacy" and "the verdict of history"?
Post a Comment
Damn straight. GOP tenet #1 (to be used in case of success): We're right, they're stupid, WE WIN! GOP tenet #2 (to be used in case of failure): If we lose, it's only because you're all stupider than the magical people of the future, who will realize WE REALLY WON! # posted by
: 5:08 AM |