Moby's *****! Clinton's Peter! Bill's Pudd! The Story Of Bill Clinton!
Ann Coulter
June 23, 2004
According to the front page of The New York Times -- so it must be
true! -- the release of Bill Clinton's latest round of lies, "My
Life," has "many of his old antagonists ... gearing up again." Among
many others, MSNBC's Bill Press said the book was "bringing all the
Clinton haters out from under their rocks. I mean, they're salivating
because they get another chance to get into all of these issues."
We're not salivating with anticipation -- that's drool as we fall into
a coma.
Since Clinton was impeached, liberals have been trapped in a time
warp. They just can't seem to "move on." Books retelling Clinton's
side of impeachment -- only since the decadent buffoon left office --
include: Joe Conason's and Gene Lyons' "The Hunting of the President:
The Ten-Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton" (endorsed
by America's most famous liar!), David Brock's "Blinded by the Right:
The Conscience of an Ex-Conservative," Sidney Blumenthal's "The
Clinton Wars," Joe Eszterhas' "American Rhapsody," Joe Klein's "The
Natural: The Misunderstood Presidency of Bill Clinton," Hillary Rodham
Clinton's "Living History," and now, the master himself weighs in with
"My Life."
As far as I know, conservatives have produced one book touching on
Bill Clinton's impeachment in this time: In 2003, National Review's
Rich Lowry decided it was finally safe to attack Clinton and thereupon
produced the only Regnery book with Bill Clinton's mug on the cover
that did not make The New York Times' best-sellers list. That's how
obsessed the Clinton-haters are.
Now there's even a documentary version of liberals' Vast Right-Wing
Conspiracy fantasy, "The Hunting of the President." O.J. had more
dignity.
If we're so obsessed with it, why do they keep bringing it up? OK,
uncle. You win, Mr. President. If I buy a copy of your book, will you
just shut up once and for all, go away, and never come back? It will
cost me $35, but, judging strictly by weight, that isn't a bad price
for so much cow manure. At 957 pages, this is the first book ever
published that contains a 20-minute intermission. Readers are advised
to put it down and read a passage from Clinton's 1988 D.N.C. speech
nominating Dukakis just to stay awake. This thing is so long, he
almost called it "War and Peace." Or, I suppose, more properly, "War
and a Piece."
Considering how obsessed liberals are with turning their version of
Clinton's impeachment into the historical record, it's interesting how
these books spend very little time talking about Clinton's
impeachment. In lieu of discussing the facts of his impeachment,
Clinton simply makes analogies to grand historical events - events
notable for bearing not the remotest relationship to his own sordid
story.
Clinton claims, for example, that conservatives decided to target him
in lieu of the Soviet Union after the Cold War ended and conservatives
needed a new villain. In other words, Clinton is equating himself, in
scale and importance, to the Soviet Union, the global communist
conspiracy and the Marxist-Leninist Revolution. Nope, no ego problem
there. ("My Life" was Clinton's second choice title, after the
publisher balked at naming the book "I Am God, and You Are All My
Subjects.")
Alternatively, Clinton claims conservatives hated him because he
represented "the '60s." As is now well-known, four lawyers, toiling
away after hours and on weekends, worked quietly behind the scenes to
propel the Paula Jones case to the Supreme Court and bring Monica
Lewinsky to the attention of the independent counsel. All four of us
were 5 to 8 years old when Bill Clinton graduated from Georgetown in
1968. (Actually, it was the '70s that I really hated, but that's
another column for another day.)
So I'm pretty sure it wasn't our anger about "the '60s" that inspired
feelings of contempt for Bill Clinton. It must have been something
else -- some ineffable quality. Let's see, what was it again? Ah yes!
I remember now! It was that Clinton is a pathological liar and
sociopath.
If Clinton wasn't the Soviet Empire or "the '60s," then he was Rosa
Parks! Clinton actually compares his battle against impeachment to
civil rights struggles in the South. Haven't blacks been insulted
enough by the constant comparison between gay marriage and black civil
rights without this horny hick comparing his impeachment to Selma?
And that's when Clinton is even talking about his presidency. From
what I've heard, roughly half of Clinton's memoir -- hundreds and
hundreds of pages -- is about every picayune detail of his life before
becoming president. Through sheer force of will I shall resist the
urge to refer to this book as a "blow by blow" account of Clinton's
entire miserable existence.
Most presidential memoirs get right to the president part, on the
assumption that people would not be interested in, for example, Harry
Truman's deal-making as Jackson County executive or Jimmy Carter's
initiatives as a state senator in Georgia -- let alone who they took
to their junior high school proms. When Ulysses S. Grant wrote his
memoirs, he skipped his presidency altogether and just wrote about
what would be most interesting to people -- his service as a Civil War
commander.
But Clinton thinks people are dying to read 900 pages about his very
ordinary life. He views being president as just one more episode in a
life that is fascinating in all its stages because he is just so
fascinating as a person -- at least to himself. In a perverse way,
it's utterly appropriate. What actually happened during the Clinton
presidency? No one can remember anything about it except the bimbos,
the lies and the felonies. Fittingly, in the final analysis, Clinton
will not be remembered for what he did as president, but for who he
did.
.
|
