Sunday, July 15, 2007

Bush vs. Clinton

The Second Amendment Correspondent and I have been good friends for quite some time. While I find no fault with most of his comment about the previous post, I must take issue with its ending.

Here’s the SAC’s final paragraph. (Emphasis added by The Home Office.)

Bush's real "crime" here is once again doing things without any regard for how his office will appear to the American people. And yes, he has repeatedly said that he won't tolerate criminal behaviour in his administration. Then again so did Clinton.

This is a common Republican failing. They spent eight years vilifying Bill Clinton for everything he did. Now, no matter how egregious Bush’s actions, they immediately compare it to something Clinton did, or to Clinton’s character.

Isn’t that self-setting the bar awfully low? To say that Clinton is a low-life, bottom-feeding, son of a bitch, then continually compare your guy to him every time he’s criticized, is to admit Bush is a low-life, bottom-feeding son of a bitch, at best.

Bill Clinton is a detestable human being. I wouldn’t walk across the street to shake his hand, and I wouldn’t allow my daughter to be I the same room as him. That being said, his Administration paid for things as they went, and the Constitution wasn’t treated as something only he had the power to interpret. George Bush has been a catastrophe to the nation he swore to defend; the damage he has done to our standing and respect abroad is immeasurable and will take years to repair. The damage done to our domestic institutions may be irreparable. To compare his record of malfeasance to anyone else is not unlike comparing a swale in your backyard to the Grand Canyon.

No comments: