Joe Conason’s profile of Bill Clinton in the new Esquire is notable mostly in how blandly soundbite-ish the rhetoric of the ex-president it declares “The most influential man in the world” is. There are, however, points of interest here and there, not least of which is when Clinton notes in defense of George W. Bush that “when you’ve been president and troops are committed and lives are on the line, I think we have to be very careful what we say.” Whoa! When did Ari “watch what they say, what what they do” Fleischer start coaching Clinton? And when will the left side of the blogosphere start condemning the 42nd president for this attack on their right to dissent? Is someone at Daily Kos even now photoshopping a picture of Bill Clinton lighting the Bill of Rights on fire with a cigar? Can I expect an online petition and fundraising request from MoveOn.org in my inbox this very day?
Joesph McCarthy, you wily rascal, the latest form you’ve taken on is your most dastardly yet!
Another interesting quote from Clinton: “You know, I have an interesting relationship with President Bush, and I believe when a president asks you to do something, if in good conscience you can do it, you should do it.”
Yeah, priggish White House interns, he’s talking to you. Now somebody call Dominos.
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?