Carol Platt Liebau: An Instructive Contrast

Wednesday, February 15, 2006

An Instructive Contrast

One President sullies the Oval Office by allowing an intern to perform oral sex on him while he speaks with a member of the House of Representatives. He lies under oath, lies to the American people, and deliberately tries to mislead everyone as much as possible. Only after he is caught dead to rights does he apologize to anyone. Members of his party argue that what he does on his own time is his own business -- and that his manifest character flaws have no bearing on his ability to do his job.

The Vice President in the succeeding administration hits his friend with birdshot by mistake, and takes full responsibility, speaking to the press about the matter well within a week of it occurring. But the Democrats are livid about the matter. An accidental peppering of birdshot -- now that's something they can unite around!

Even before the interview, the office of Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) issued a statement accusing Cheney of being "unable, or unwilling, to level with the American people." Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) added: "Vice President Cheney had a chance to shoot straight with the American people, but he decided to stonewall and delay.

Interesting that intentional wrongdoing means so little to the Democrats -- and an apparently innocent accident means so very, very much.


Blogger Mr. Twister said...

Gosh, I hadn't realized how lucky we were.

Had Dick Cheney received fellatio and hidden it from his wife, instead of downing a beer or two at lunch, shooting a man in the face at close range, having the Secret Service run off the deputy assigned to investigate, and hiding the whole thing from the public, we might have had to impeach the poor guy.

Not because anyone would have been concerned with his personal sex life, of course. It would be because of what it said about his character.

[Rant taken almost verbatim from inimitable Digsby.]

9:30 PM  
Blogger Greg said...

Let me get this straight, Mr. Twister.

Saddam speaks before the fact about terrorist attacks on the United States and thousands of Americans are subsequently murdered. He and his closest aids also discuss ways that nuclear and biological weapons can be unleashed on the American public without Iraq being suspected.

And that's no big deal.

But the Vice-President has a hunting accident and the Democratic Party is livid.

Does that not make it perfectly clear to you why Americans are reluctant to trust the Democrats with national security?

6:18 AM  
Blogger Gary Gross said...

Clinton was talking to Robert "The Torch" Torricelli during that infamous call. At the time, he'd already been elected to the Senate.

7:20 AM  
Blogger Mr. Twister said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

6:51 PM  
Blogger Mr. Twister said...

Just to set you straight, Greg--I don't get to pick the topics.

Carol wanted to compare a guy guilty of getting blow job to a guy guilty of going out, knocking back one or more cold ones, shooting a guy in the face, and having the Secret Service obstruct justice for him. So I compared a guy guilty of getting a blow job to a guy guilty of going out, knocking back one or more cold ones, shooting a guy in the face, and having the Secret Service obstruct justice for him.

You see, Greg, there is a separate post where we deal with your inane Saddam point. In that thread, I point out exactly what a Tool you are.

8:35 PM  
Blogger Mike's America said...

Dems priorties in a knot?

Clinton "shoots" in the oval office and it's his private life.

Cheney shoots on a ranch and the world comes to a halt for four days.

And people wonder why the lamestream media is losing viewers and why the Democrat Party is losing voters?

9:32 PM  
Blogger Jessica said...

Mr. Twister,

Why are you so sure Cheney had Secret Service agents obstruct justice? Where is your proof of that? Why aren't the authorities in Texas investigating the matter further or pressing charges if such proof exists? Are you privy to more information in this case than they? People around here accuse others of a lot of blind prejudice towards the other side. In many cases, these accusations are well-founded. The irrationality of your posts indicates to me that this is one of those cases.

3:36 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home