as soon as I heard about it yesterday, my quick response was "good." and while there are indeed many things to say about him, there's a shorthand that covers a LOT of it. namely, "prick."
a friend of his was quoted in today's NYT as saying that he was an amazingly sweet guy and a remarkably ethical lawyer. fuck them both.
Obviously, Starr's "friend" is deaf, blind and spent the latter part of the 90's in a cave. Starr was pursuing a political vendetta and when he found nothing incriminating in the Whitewater "scandal", he went looking for something--anything--else with which he could play a game of "gotcha" on President Bill Clinton.
There was lots to get Bill with, but Starr wasn't a advocate of the people.. There was a many miles long line of incarcerated Black men and their families; folks cut off from Welfare checks, a passel of women... I couldn't possibly count them all.
I completely agree; WJC was an astoundingly bright man...but he also had a baggage load of faults and blind spots--one of which was being an alumnus of the Democratic Leadership Council.
Worse, he bought the whole line, hook and sinker included. Having been brought up fairly poor, by a single mother, I kinda expected better things from him and was very disappointed--particularly with the welfare reform measures. So was Ms. Ivins and she did not spare him in any of the scathing columns that she wrote about his follies and missteps.
the second time he ran (in '96) I was so irritated with him for his cynical crime and welfare bullshit that I had to do my usual protest vote, which (as I recall) was for the SWP candidate. no way was I gonna vote again for Bill, who was certainly really smart and competent, but also more than a little bit of a neoliberal scumbag.
I didn't vote for him twice, on the grounds I only vote for Democrats. That and reading the way he weaseled and conned with his draft board (there's getting out of the draft and there's..... bullshitting everyone, which is what he did) was a "character tell" for who/what he really was. And eight years of him proved the observation was accurate. I'm pretty sure he'll end up in the record books as the Least Democratic President of the 20th Century. And to tell the truth the only reason I could bring myself to vote for his wife was her opponent. I'd be very happy if they'd both shut up and enjoy their strangely-obtained wealth.
,I am curious to know why you consider B. Clinton 'astoundingly' bright. It is the 'astounding' that stumps me. Compared to Obama, Pelosi, McConnell, Raskin, Whitehouse (R. I. senator), Elizabeth Warren... and so many others, Clinton's mind does not stand out, but his salesmanship was outstanding.
His salesmanship. The term "cracker" comes from "cracking trader," and it's not generally a compliment. Bill was/is a definite "cracker" in the old definition.
I'm not going to defend Clinton against both of you. Obviously my "astoundingly" was a notch too far for either of you to swallow.
My apologies for thinking that winning a Rhodes Scholarship indicated a fair amount of brain power--after all, academic excellence is one of the first criteria. Considering that Clinton came from a very poor background, it seems to me that he overcame a good many challenges to win that scholarship.
It is sad that his personal faults and baggage (and centrist political position) have made him such a pariah that his accomplishments cannot be appreciated. And he did have 'some' accomplishments; he presided over the longest peacetime economic expansion in American history; he balanced the Federal budget; his two terms saw the highest home ownership and lowest unemployment in 30 years; he had some significant foreign policy wins and he spotted the danger from Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden and left precise notes on it for Dubya--who fumbled the ball badly.
The only thing that Ross Perot got right was the NAFTA deal.
PS...In my reading, the term "cracker" comes from the use of cracked corn in the process of making moonshine. To call someone a "cracker" is the same as calling someone an ignorant hick.
Having met a couple of "Rhodes Scholars," let me tell you there is a "range" among them. As there are with Harvard and Yale Law grads, from "hmmm" to "wow."
Outside of being "Republican Lite" and the kind of embarrassment I have always avoided among the slickers of the Boomer generation, I can't think of many accomplishments he had that will last.
Sorry you feel that way, TC. Compared with Ronnie Raygun and the strange, fumbling speeches of George the first, I thought it was great when Clinton got elected. He was better than they were, sorta.
I will admit that Clinton disappointed all of us Dems in so many ways. And admittedly...he does have that sheen of slickness--sigh. After all, he did earn the moniker "Slick Willy" back when he was Governor of Alabama and casting aside progressive policies pursued by previous governors.
You were not wrong when you called him Republican Lite, I admit.
I just had an involuntary response from the days when I just hated the hypocrisy of serial cheater Newt Gingrich and his other cheating cohorts chasing Clinton in full cry, all the while they were behaving every bit as badly as Clinton himself.
T L, I accept your defense of B. Clinton but you do not know my opinion of him, although put forward your 'sense' of it. I asked you a question about your use of the word 'astoundingly' bright. It was a question not an attack. I did not refer to Clinton as a centrist. In faulting him, I mentioned three areas in which I believe he did a good deal of damage. . You have mushed together my comment and TC's, while I am generally in agreement with what TC wrote.
Perhaps astoundingly was not just the right word. My apologies for misconstruing your question. I still think of Clinton as smart but flawed.
I will admit that signing NAFTA without making adequate provision for retraining and other measure did devastate unions and the middle class who depended on the industries which promptly fled overseas (well, Reagan started the damage to unions, but Clinton didn't help).
I'd say more, but I have to go help my partner paint outside. Later, Fern. I want to know in what other areas Clinton failed. I greatly respect your opinions.
T L, I feel as though the sourness of our offkey exchanges about Clinton has evaporated. I value our subscriber friendship. We've had fun together. I'm very wrapped up with what is going on here in several dimensions and to a lesser degree in other faltering and failed democracies. We can learn from them, too. T L, I don't want to go back to Clinton. The time may come when we will return to 'him'. Anything that I say now will open the door. I thought of the 'damsel in distress' as I worked my way to finding a polite way to say 'no' for now. I hope you share with me the happy relief that we are back on track. Cheers.
I had exactly the same reaction you've had...the article (today's NYT obit) failed to specify the party affiliation of these friends, but I'll wager they're NOT Democrats.
Har har. Was thinking similarly. Never speak badly of the dead, but don't avoid the opportunity to wish them Gospeed. And, maybe a little nudge, extra burger, "sweetened diet coke," a visit from Garland's wet workers as it sleeps.
Fred, are the extra burger and 'sweetened diet coke', along with a visit from Garland's wet workers for the living or the dead or for someone in between?
YES!! And thank you for saying so. I read the NYT article on Starr (well, just the headline) and I was disappointed the comment section was not open because I wanted to post “Good. The world is a better place without the likes of that slimy salacious bastard.” How many lives did he gleefully ruin in his tenure? This is how he will be remembered.
I don’t have any problem speaking ill of the dead. But with some people you just don’t know where to start. Ken Starr is one of those. He screwed up so much stuff, either through malice or incompetence, sometimes both, and hurt so many people, that you just have to mark him as vile. And he was a big contributor to our political disfunction. If Starr has a place in history, it will be adjacent to people such as James Thomson Callender, Robert A. Taft and Joseph McCarthy, people who did nothing positive and diminished everything they touched. (Yeah, I know, tfg too.) Good riddance.
Boy howdy are you telling me! Rochester, NY law enforcement does not take too kindly to a 66 year old gray haired, flabby, losing to gravity, white woman shaking her naked fat ass booty up and down the street shouting, "Fuck Yeah!"
as soon as I heard about it yesterday, my quick response was "good." and while there are indeed many things to say about him, there's a shorthand that covers a LOT of it. namely, "prick."
a friend of his was quoted in today's NYT as saying that he was an amazingly sweet guy and a remarkably ethical lawyer. fuck them both.
His friend? Ken Starr had friends?
Obviously, Starr's "friend" is deaf, blind and spent the latter part of the 90's in a cave. Starr was pursuing a political vendetta and when he found nothing incriminating in the Whitewater "scandal", he went looking for something--anything--else with which he could play a game of "gotcha" on President Bill Clinton.
There was lots to get Bill with, but Starr wasn't a advocate of the people.. There was a many miles long line of incarcerated Black men and their families; folks cut off from Welfare checks, a passel of women... I couldn't possibly count them all.
I completely agree; WJC was an astoundingly bright man...but he also had a baggage load of faults and blind spots--one of which was being an alumnus of the Democratic Leadership Council.
Worse, he bought the whole line, hook and sinker included. Having been brought up fairly poor, by a single mother, I kinda expected better things from him and was very disappointed--particularly with the welfare reform measures. So was Ms. Ivins and she did not spare him in any of the scathing columns that she wrote about his follies and missteps.
the second time he ran (in '96) I was so irritated with him for his cynical crime and welfare bullshit that I had to do my usual protest vote, which (as I recall) was for the SWP candidate. no way was I gonna vote again for Bill, who was certainly really smart and competent, but also more than a little bit of a neoliberal scumbag.
I didn't vote for him twice, on the grounds I only vote for Democrats. That and reading the way he weaseled and conned with his draft board (there's getting out of the draft and there's..... bullshitting everyone, which is what he did) was a "character tell" for who/what he really was. And eight years of him proved the observation was accurate. I'm pretty sure he'll end up in the record books as the Least Democratic President of the 20th Century. And to tell the truth the only reason I could bring myself to vote for his wife was her opponent. I'd be very happy if they'd both shut up and enjoy their strangely-obtained wealth.
🎯🎯🎯🎯🎯
,I am curious to know why you consider B. Clinton 'astoundingly' bright. It is the 'astounding' that stumps me. Compared to Obama, Pelosi, McConnell, Raskin, Whitehouse (R. I. senator), Elizabeth Warren... and so many others, Clinton's mind does not stand out, but his salesmanship was outstanding.
His salesmanship. The term "cracker" comes from "cracking trader," and it's not generally a compliment. Bill was/is a definite "cracker" in the old definition.
TC, you pinpointed that 'cracker'. My broadest smile of the day is thanks to you.
I'm not going to defend Clinton against both of you. Obviously my "astoundingly" was a notch too far for either of you to swallow.
My apologies for thinking that winning a Rhodes Scholarship indicated a fair amount of brain power--after all, academic excellence is one of the first criteria. Considering that Clinton came from a very poor background, it seems to me that he overcame a good many challenges to win that scholarship.
It is sad that his personal faults and baggage (and centrist political position) have made him such a pariah that his accomplishments cannot be appreciated. And he did have 'some' accomplishments; he presided over the longest peacetime economic expansion in American history; he balanced the Federal budget; his two terms saw the highest home ownership and lowest unemployment in 30 years; he had some significant foreign policy wins and he spotted the danger from Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden and left precise notes on it for Dubya--who fumbled the ball badly.
The only thing that Ross Perot got right was the NAFTA deal.
PS...In my reading, the term "cracker" comes from the use of cracked corn in the process of making moonshine. To call someone a "cracker" is the same as calling someone an ignorant hick.
Having met a couple of "Rhodes Scholars," let me tell you there is a "range" among them. As there are with Harvard and Yale Law grads, from "hmmm" to "wow."
Outside of being "Republican Lite" and the kind of embarrassment I have always avoided among the slickers of the Boomer generation, I can't think of many accomplishments he had that will last.
Sorry you feel that way, TC. Compared with Ronnie Raygun and the strange, fumbling speeches of George the first, I thought it was great when Clinton got elected. He was better than they were, sorta.
I will admit that Clinton disappointed all of us Dems in so many ways. And admittedly...he does have that sheen of slickness--sigh. After all, he did earn the moniker "Slick Willy" back when he was Governor of Alabama and casting aside progressive policies pursued by previous governors.
You were not wrong when you called him Republican Lite, I admit.
I just had an involuntary response from the days when I just hated the hypocrisy of serial cheater Newt Gingrich and his other cheating cohorts chasing Clinton in full cry, all the while they were behaving every bit as badly as Clinton himself.
Compared to them, he was good. Compared to previous Democrats, not so much.
T L, I accept your defense of B. Clinton but you do not know my opinion of him, although put forward your 'sense' of it. I asked you a question about your use of the word 'astoundingly' bright. It was a question not an attack. I did not refer to Clinton as a centrist. In faulting him, I mentioned three areas in which I believe he did a good deal of damage. . You have mushed together my comment and TC's, while I am generally in agreement with what TC wrote.
Perhaps astoundingly was not just the right word. My apologies for misconstruing your question. I still think of Clinton as smart but flawed.
I will admit that signing NAFTA without making adequate provision for retraining and other measure did devastate unions and the middle class who depended on the industries which promptly fled overseas (well, Reagan started the damage to unions, but Clinton didn't help).
I'd say more, but I have to go help my partner paint outside. Later, Fern. I want to know in what other areas Clinton failed. I greatly respect your opinions.
T L, I feel as though the sourness of our offkey exchanges about Clinton has evaporated. I value our subscriber friendship. We've had fun together. I'm very wrapped up with what is going on here in several dimensions and to a lesser degree in other faltering and failed democracies. We can learn from them, too. T L, I don't want to go back to Clinton. The time may come when we will return to 'him'. Anything that I say now will open the door. I thought of the 'damsel in distress' as I worked my way to finding a polite way to say 'no' for now. I hope you share with me the happy relief that we are back on track. Cheers.
I had exactly the same reaction you've had...the article (today's NYT obit) failed to specify the party affiliation of these friends, but I'll wager they're NOT Democrats.
'Tragedy is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you fall into an open sewer and die.'
___Mel Brooks
Fern wins the intertoobz!
Do I get a trophy?
Here you go. 🏆
😉
Camilla, Thank you. I adore the trophy. It will go on the mantel. Mel Brooks thanks you, too!
Or as with Homer Simpson’s epitaph as proposed by Patty and Selma:
We are Richer For Having Lost Him
“Beauty is only skin deep, but ugly goes clean to the bone.”
Dorothy Parker.
🗽
Damn, TC, that’s concise.
Har har. Was thinking similarly. Never speak badly of the dead, but don't avoid the opportunity to wish them Gospeed. And, maybe a little nudge, extra burger, "sweetened diet coke," a visit from Garland's wet workers as it sleeps.
Fred, are the extra burger and 'sweetened diet coke', along with a visit from Garland's wet workers for the living or the dead or for someone in between?
For YKW.
Who'd have guessed? 😲
Once again, I actually Laughed Out Loud, Fern.
For the fine gentleman, so in the news who presently resides in Florida.
Thanks for the chuckle, Tom.
First I felt shock. Then I felt other things. He did so much harm in so many venues. A model of the Grand Inquisitor. Or Baron Scarpia.
YES!! And thank you for saying so. I read the NYT article on Starr (well, just the headline) and I was disappointed the comment section was not open because I wanted to post “Good. The world is a better place without the likes of that slimy salacious bastard.” How many lives did he gleefully ruin in his tenure? This is how he will be remembered.
Off this coil he shuffles, to appear wig-wringing before the great star chamber in the heavens.
I don’t have any problem speaking ill of the dead. But with some people you just don’t know where to start. Ken Starr is one of those. He screwed up so much stuff, either through malice or incompetence, sometimes both, and hurt so many people, that you just have to mark him as vile. And he was a big contributor to our political disfunction. If Starr has a place in history, it will be adjacent to people such as James Thomson Callender, Robert A. Taft and Joseph McCarthy, people who did nothing positive and diminished everything they touched. (Yeah, I know, tfg too.) Good riddance.
Yes indeed.
Boy howdy are you telling me! Rochester, NY law enforcement does not take too kindly to a 66 year old gray haired, flabby, losing to gravity, white woman shaking her naked fat ass booty up and down the street shouting, "Fuck Yeah!"
My thought was 'couldn't happen to a better guy'.... can't help but wonder who he saw in his mirror?
“There is no shortage of fault to be found among our Starr.” What John Green should have written