Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Moynihan Myths
3.29.03 | Mia T

Posted on 03/29/2003 8:06:58 AM PST by Mia T

Moynihan Myths


Moynihan Myth 1:
"Scholastic" Means "Smart"

Mia T
March 26, 2003

Flip-flopping aside, Daniel Patrick Moynihan's scholastic and excessively subtle reasoning justifying his vote not to impeach and remove bill clinton reveals more about the hog-and-bow-tied senator and his party than about the Constitution of the United States.

It had long been rumored that Sen. Moynihan was the Democratic Party's mind. A complete absence of the construct failed for decades to disabuse us of this notion.

This apparent incongruity only widened in the '90s. Under the tutelage of the clintons, "Democratic Party mind " quickly devolved from simple oxymoronic construct to standing joke.

Myth invariably trumps the plain facts. How can the Democratic Party's mind be both Moynihan and absent? No one ever sought to reconcile this seeming contradiction.

For the answer, one has to look no further than the reasoning behind Sen. Moynihan's impeachment vote. Not only did Moynihan fail to discern bill clinton's high crimes, he failed to consider the risk of not impeaching and removing a president that he, himself had long ago branded dysfunctional and corrupt.

That is to say, Moynihan was apparently so intent on saving the Constitution that he --ooops! -- forgot about saving the country.

How can the Democratic Party's mind be both Moynihan and absent? How can it not?

Moynihan Myth 2:
Moynihan Defined Deviancy Down,
i.e., Moynihan Endorsed Missus clinton

Mia T
March 26, 2003

Biography lends to death a new terror.

Oscar Wilde


''There is a sort of absence of character that has been the quality of this administration.''

Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D.-N.Y.)
commenting on clinton administration in a New Yorker interview.
"Mr Moynihan, 71, plans to retire in 2000"

Yesterday, Daniel Patrick Moynihan died. Today, the clintons are arrogating his soul. Hardly surprising. In 1999, the clintons were not at all shy about seizing his still-warm senate seat.

One has merely to recall the Thomas Jefferson double-helix hoax to understand that posthumous misappropriation is, for the obvious reason, the clintons' preferred method of legacy inflation….

Standard-Issue clintonism
If the misappropriation of Jefferson's alleles hinged on a broken line of descent, the misappropriation of Moynihan's endorsement depends on a broken line of dissent. Like Sally Hemmings' progeny, Moynihan's later acquiescence is of dubious lineage.

When clinton told Moynihan she wanted his seat, his initial public reaction -- one must read between the lines -- provided Moynihan a hedge against any later forced conversion.

The details of running for Senate in New York are "more complex than you might think," ["you arrogant, ignorant carpetbagging three-bagger"] Moynihan said after his meeting with Hillary Clinton. He did not give her any advice, he said, ["I don't endorse her…"], but added that early polls showing her beating all potential rivals -- including New York City Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani (R) -- mask the large and diverse political riddle that is New York.["Perhaps you should reconsider. New Yorkers really do detest arrogant, ignorant carpetbagging b*tches."]

First Lady, Moynihan Discuss Senate Race
By David Von Drehle and John F. Harris
Washington Post Staff Writers

Saturday, February 20, 1999; Page A10

Mrs. clinton's version of the event:

And it was Senator Moynihan who welcomed me to his farm in Pindars Corners on a picture perfect July day in 1999 and offered his support, sending me on my way with a gesture of profound kindness.

March 26, 2003
Statement of Senator Clinton in Tribute
to Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan

That Moynihan, the man who proffered one of the more incisive operant definitions of clintonism, "defining deviancy down," would sponsor hillary clinton for anything short of the hoosegow is absurd on its face.

"Defining deviancy down"

Daniel Patrick Moynihan. American Scholar (Winter 1993)


"Well, how would you imagine that we would have got ourselves in the situation we're in now? We have a crisis of the regime. You cannot have this kind of conduct as normal and acceptable and easily dismissed unless there is a great effort to do so. And if, in addition to what we know, there are things we don't know, that will make it worse."

Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D.-N.Y.)
commenting on Lewinsky et al.
ABC's "This Week," Sept. 6, 1998


"I should think not. If it's so, it represents a disorder."

Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D.-N.Y.)
when asked if Clinton could survive if the Lewinsky allegation was true
New York Post, Jan. 26, 1998


[I will] have none of the "it-isn't-so-much-the-sex-its-the lying" [argument].

Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D.-N.Y.),


Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, D-N.Y., also opposed censure, saying Congress should carry out its constitutional duty and decide whether Clinton should be held accountable for impeachable offenses in connection with his affair with Monica Lewinsky or other matters.

Censure unlikely, Lott says, as Congress awaits Starr report
By Jim Abrams
Associated Press


"[T]he critical subject for the politics of the years ahead," [is] "redefining the character issue for the post-Monica era.… There's a sort of absence of character which has been the quality of this administration."

Daniel Patrick Moynihan
Corporate Character: The Humanities and the Businessperson


In the Senate, only Moynihan has called for Clinton's impeachment. …For now, White House and party strategists appear unworried by the criticism they have heard from various Democratic senators and members of Congress. Rather than view the criticism as part of a mounting wave of disillusionment within the party, these strategists are weighing the authors of the criticism one by one: Moynihan and Kerrey, they say, have never liked Clinton, so their remarks are personal.

"Everyone will be punished"

"We have so many things coming on in the world that we have to be ready for and be able to deal with. This [the President's dilemma] is a distraction which is doubly dangerous because of the world's situation." [Moynihan then ticked off the dangers, which included the building of nukes by North Korea and biological weapons by Iraq.]

Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D.-N.Y.)
commenting on Lewinsky et al.
ABC's "This Week," Sept. 6, 1998

COLOR COMMENTARY, Sept. 17, 1998:

A few weeks ago, we were reminded of the continual danger lurking in Iraq when U.N. Weapons inspector Scott Ritter resigned claiming that the Clinton administration had interfered with at least six inspections since 1997 in an attempt to avoid conflict with Saddam Hussein. It is difficult for a weakened President to deal decisively with a foreign military threat. Hussein has repeatedly proved to the world that he has no respect for democratic processes and will cooperate only in the face of force. He has continually tried to take advantage of weakness. The United States' current state of weakness has made the world more susceptible to Iraq's potentially destructive actions.

Just a few weeks ago, the world received a violent reminder of the ever-present threat of terrorism as U.S. embassies in Afghanistan and Kenya were bombed. Immediately following his testimony before the Independent Counsel, the President ordered counter-attacks against bases of the organization responsible for the embassy bombings. The timing and justifiability of the attacks was immediately questioned by some members of Congress, the news media, and many Americans. People thought it was possible that Clinton ordered the bombings to divert media attention from the Lewinsky affair.…the terrorists who committed these bombings and terrorists contemplating future acts were sitting at home watching the United States unsuccessfully trying to project an image of unity and competence. The United States only opens itself, and the world, up to more acts of terrorism when it seems not to know how to deal effectively with terrorist situations even when it knows who the perpetrators are.

MOYNIHAN FLIPPED, February 12, 1999

Thus the Framers clearly intended that a President should be removed only for offenses `against the United States.' It may also be concluded that the addition of the words `high Crimes and Misdemeanors' was intended to extend the impeachment power of Congress so as to reach `great and dangerous offences,' in Mason's phrase.

The question now before the Senate is whether the acts that form the basis for the Articles of Impeachment against President Clinton rise to the level of `high Crimes and Misdemeanors.' Which is to say, `great and dangerous offences' against the United States.

Over the course of 1998, as we proceeded through various revelations, thence to Impeachment and so on to this trial at the outset of 1999, I found myself asking whether the assorted charges, even if proven, would rise to the standard of `great and dangerous offences' against the United States.

More than one commentator observed that we were dealing with `low crimes.' Matters that can be tried in criminal courts after the President's term expires. ...

Senators, do not take the imprudent risk that removing William Jefferson Clinton for low crimes will not in the end jeopardize the Constitution itself. Censure him by all means. He will be gone in less than two years. But do not let his misdeeds put in jeopardy the Constitution we are sworn to uphold and defend.

Statement by Senator Daniel Moynihan for not supporting impeachment of clinton
Congressional Record for Friday, February 12, 1999


the logic of pathologic self-interest

by Mia T


There was a third chance to get rid of the clintons. In '98, when there was still time to stop bin Laden...

The failure to remove the clintons in '98 was a monumental error and is directly traceable to the logic of pathologic self-interest.

Recall in particular:

  • THE LIEBERMAN PARADIGM: (clinton is an unfit president; therefore clinton must remain president)


  • THE SHAYS SYNDROME: (clinton is a rapist; therefore clinton is a fit president)



Senator Joseph Lieberman's bifurcated Monicagate speech in 1998 on the floor of the Senate was almost universally misperceived as an act of honesty and courage.

In reality, it was neither.

Reduced to its essence, Lieberman's argument was this:

clinton is an unfit president;

therefore, clinton must remain president.

I have called this argument "The Lieberman Paradigm."

Lieberman's argument that sorry day was rightly headed toward clinton's certain ouster when it suddenly made a swift, hairpin 180, as if clinton hacks took over the wheel. . .which they probably did.

What was Joe promised? A place on the 2000 ticket?

To be fair, it was not the Lieberman speech but rather a New York Times apologia that institutionalized this shameless scheme to protect a thoroughly corrupt and repugnant--and--as everyone except The New York Times now acknowledges-- dangerous -- Democrat regime.

The Lieberman Paradigm made its debut in The Times' utterly loony 1996 endorsement of clinton. The Times actually argued--NOTE: this is NOT satire--that although bill clinton was a "corrupt," "dysfunctional personality [with} delusions" -- The Times' own words -- we need not--we must not--remove bill clinton; we need only remove.the character lobe of bill clinton's brain.*



Not an aberration, the Shays Syndrome was quickly adopted by the entire Senate as its impeachment show trial deus ex machina of choice.

Shays, you may recall, examined the evidence in the Ford Building, concluded that clinton did, indeed, rape Broaddrick -- "VICIOUSLY!" AND "TWICE!" he declared at the time-- and was planning to vote to impeach; he changed his mind, however, after a tete a tete with the rapist.

Any cognitive dissonance Shays may have experienced rendering that verdict was no doubt assuaged by the political plum clinton had given Mrs. (Betsi) Shays...

Each of the 50 senators, on the other hand, cured the cognitive dissonance problem pre-emptively by making certain not to examine the damning Ford Building evidence in the first place.

Well, with the help of the 100 corrupt and cowardly cullions, clinton walked. The senators' justification for their acquittal votes requires the suspension of rational thought (and, in the curious case of Arlen Specter, national jurisdiction).

--Mia T, Musings: Senatorial Courtesy Perverted


by Mia T

Hypocrisy abounds in this Age of clinton, a Postmodern Oz rife with constitutional deconstruction and semantic subversion, a virtual surreality polymarked by presidential alleles peccantly misplaced or, in the case of Jefferson, posthumously misappropriated.

Shameless pharisees in stark relief crowd the Capitol frieze:

Baucus, Biden, Bingaman, Breaux, Bryan, Byrd, Cohen, Conrad, Daschle, Dodd, Gore, Graham, Harkin, Hollings, Inouye, Kennedy, Kerrey, Kerry, Kohl, Lautenberg, Leahy, Levin, Lieberman, Mikulski, Moynihan, Reid, Robb, Rockefeller, Sarbanes, Schumer.

These are the 28 sitting Democratic senators, the current Vice President and Secretary of Defense -- clinton defenders all -- who, in 1989, voted to oust U.S. District Judge Walter Nixon for making "false or misleading statements to a grand jury."

In 1989 each and every one of these men insisted that perjury was an impeachable offense. (What a difference a decade and a decadent Democrat make.)

Senator Herb Kohl (November 7, 1989):

"But Judge Nixon took an oath to tell the truth and the whole truth. As a grand jury witness, it was not for him to decide what would be material. That was for the grand jury to decide. Of all people, Federal Judge Walter Nixon certainly knew this.

"So I am going to vote 'guilty' on articles one and two. Judge Nixon lied to the grand jury. He misled the grand jury. These acts are indisputably criminal and warrant impeachment."


Senator Tom Daschle (November 3, 1989):

"This morning we impeached a judge from Mississippi for failing to tell the truth. Those decisions are always very difficult and certainly, in this case, it came after a great deal of concern and thoughtful analysis of the facts."  


Congressman Charles Schumer (May 10, 1989):  

"Perjury, of course, is a very difficult, difficult thing to decide; but as we looked and examined all of the records and in fact found many things that were not in the record it became very clear to us that this impeachment was meritorious."


Senator Carl Levin (November 3, 1989):

"The record amply supports the finding in the criminal trial that Judge Nixon's statements to the grand jury were false and misleading and constituted perjury. Those are the statements cited in articles I and II, and it is on those articles that I vote to convict Judge Nixon and remove him from office."


* * * * *

"The hypocrite's crime is that he bears false witness against himself," observed the philosopher Hannah Arendt. "What makes it so plausible to assume that hypocrisy is the vice of vices is that integrity can indeed exist under the cover of all other vices except this one. Only crime and the criminal, it is true, confront us with the perplexity of radical evil; but only the hypocrite is really rotten to the core."

If hypocrisy is the vice of vices, then perjury is the crime of crimes, for perjury provides the necessary cover for all other crimes.

David Lowenthal, professor emeritus of political science at Boston College makes the novel and compelling argument that perjury is "bribery consummate, using false words instead of money or other things of value to pervert the course of justice" and, thus, perjury is a constitutionally enumerated high crime.

The Democrats' defense of clinton's perjury -- and their own hypocrisy -- is three-pronged. 


clinton's perjuries were "just about sex" and therefore "do not rise to the level of an impeachable offense."

This argument is spurious. The courts make no distinction between perjuries. Perjury is perjury. Perjury attacks the very essence of democracy. Perjury is bribery consummate.

Moreover, (the clinton spinners notwithstanding), clinton's perjury was not "just about sex." clinton's perjury was about clinton denying a citizen justice by lying in a civil rights-sexual harassment case about his sexual history with subordinates.


Presidents and judges are held to different standards under the Constitution.

Because the Constitution stipulates that federal judges, who are appointed for life, "shall hold their offices during good behavior,'' and because there is no similar language concerning the popularly elected, term-limited president, it must have been perfectly agreeable to the Framers, so the (implicit) argument goes, to have a perjurious, justice-obstructing reprobate as president.

clinton's defenders ignore Federalist No. 57, and Hillary Rodham's constitutional treatise on impeachable acts -- written in 1974 when she wanted to impeach a president; both mention "bad conduct" as grounds for impeachment.

"Impeachment," wrote Rodham, "did not have to be for criminal offenses -- but only for a 'course of conduct' that suggested an abuse of power or a disregard for the office of the President of the United States...A person's 'course of conduct' while not particularly criminal could be of such a nature that it destroys trust, discourages allegiance, and demands action by the Congress...The office of the President is such that it calls for a higher level of conduct than the average citizen in the United States."

Hamilton (or Madison) discussed the importance of wisdom and virtue in Federalist 57. "The aim of every political constitution is, or ought to be, first to obtain for rulers men who possess most wisdom to discern, and most virtue to pursue, the common good of the society; and in the next place, to take the most effectual precautions for keeping them virtuous whilst they continue to hold their public trust."

(Contrast this with clinton, who recklessly, reflexively and feloniously subordinates the common good to his personal appetites.)

Because the Framers did not anticipate the demagogic efficiency of the electronic bully pulpit, they ruled out the possibility of an MTV mis-leader (and impeachment-thwarter!) like clinton. In Federalist No. 64, John Jay said: "There is reason to presume" the president would fall only to those "who have become the most distinguished by their abilities and virtue." He imagined that the electorate would not "be deceived by those brilliant appearances of genius and patriotism which, like transient meteors, sometimes mislead as well as dazzle."

(If the clinton debacle teaches us anything, it is this: If we are to retain our democracy in this age of the electronic demagogue, we must recalibrate the constitutional balance of power.)


The president can be prosecuted for his alleged felonies after he leaves office. (Nota bene ROBERT RAY.)

This clinton-created censure contrivance -- borne out of what I have come to call the "Lieberman Paradigm" (clinton is an unfit president; therefore clinton must remain president) -- is nothing less than a postmodern deconstruction in which the Oval Office would serve for two years as a holding cell for the perjurer-obstructor.

Such indecorous, dual-purpose architectonics not only threatens the delicate constitutional framework -- it disturbs the cultural aesthetic. The senators must, therefore, roundly reject this elliptic scheme.

In this postmodern Age of clinton, we may, from time to time, selectively stomach corruption. But we must never abide ugliness. Never.


History Lesson

by Mia T


Someone--was it Maupassant?--

once called history "that excitable and lying old lady."

The same can be said of historians.


Surely it can be said of Doris Kearns Goodwin,

the archetypical pharisaical historian,

not-so-latently clintonoid,


(i.e., clinton is an unfit president;

therefore clinton must remain president),

intellectually dishonest,

(habitually doing what the Arthur Schlesingers of this world do:

making history into the proof of their theories).


The Forbids 400's argument is shamelessly spurious.

They get all unhinged over the impeachment of clinton,

claiming that it will

"leave the presidency permanently disfigured and diminished,

at the mercy as never before of the caprices of any Congress."


Yet they dismiss the real and present--and future!!--danger

to the presidency and the country

of not impeaching and removing

this admittedly unfit, (Goodwin)

"documentably dysfunctional," (The New York Times)

presidency-diminishing, (Goodwin)


psychopathic thug.


Doris Kearns Goodwin and those 400 other


retrograde-obsessing historiographers

are a supercilious, power-hungry,

egomaniacal lot in their own right.


For them, clinton validates

what Ogden Nash merely hypothesized:

Any buffoon can make history,

but only a great man can write it.

Copyright Mia T 2003


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Arkansas; US: Illinois; US: New York; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: clinton911; clintoncorruption; clintondanger; clintondepravity; clintonfecklessness; clintonimpeachment; clintonlegacy; clintonrapes; clintons911; definingdeviancydown; moynihan; nepotism; prenupsenateseat; waronterror; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-69 next last
Hear Bush 41 Warn Us--October 19, 1992*


*Thanx to Cloud William for text and audio


LEHRER: President Bush, your closing statement, sir.

PRESIDENT BUSH: Three weeks from now--two weeks from tomorrow, America goes to the polls and you're going to have to decide who you want to lead this country ...

On foreign affairs, some think it's irrelevant. I believe it's not. We're living in an interconnected world...And if a crisis comes up, ask who has the judgment and the experience and, yes, the character to make the right decision?

And, lastly, the other night on character Governor Clinton said it's not the character of the president but the character of the presidency. I couldn't disagree more. Horace Greeley said the only thing that endures is character. And I think it was Justice Black who talked about great nations, like great men, must keep their word.

And so the question is, who will safeguard this nation, who will safeguard our people and our children? I need your support, I ask for your support. And may God bless the United States of America.




play tape


1 posted on 03/29/2003 8:06:59 AM PST by Mia T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

03.29.03 UPDATE:

Sen. Clinton's Virtual Office Welcome Header

Sen. Clinton's Virtual Office Welcome Header

Sen. Clinton's Virtual Office Welcome Header






evidence of consciousness of guilt at Ron Brown's funeral
clinton Complex-Question Fallacy Scheme 



It won't s-p-i-n 


"There isn't a shred of evidence."


Privacy Policy 

Hear the Bill Bennett epilogue


Dear new sucker--er--New Yorker,

This virtual office was established because you are absolutely forbidden to set your peasant foot in my real one. This is how I got here, and this is how I did it.. This helped, too. And this. And this. You had better take a moment to genuflect before the newly erected clinton altar. Additionally, I am pleased to present my new clinton crime family video greeting and video farewell. You would be wise to study them carefully. And don't bother E-mailing me. I couldn't care less what the little people think.

A missive from the smartest woman in the world. Study it.


Latest clinton News

the logic of pathologic self-interest


Moynihan Myths

Either they are obsolete… or civilization is

Another mistaken 'conceptzia'

bill clinton's POLICY: MAKE CERTAIN America was not "the biggest power on the block."

The 30 Seconds that Seemed Like 60 Minutes:
clinton Pats Own Back Preemptively for Bush's Certain Military Success

Utter-Failure clintons Concoct Left-Wing-Radio Scheme FIG LEAF
Flower Children Fall for the 2 Self-Evident Thugs & Opportunists Yet Again (Liberals have always had problems figuring out causation)


10-Year Anniversary of WTC Bombing Marks the clintons' Utter Failure
"It was the TERRORISM, stupid."

hillary clinton A SECURITY RISK: Removal Calls Begin

The wife's self-serving war oscillations are really nothing more than a reprise of the self-serving oscillating ersatz presidency of the husband (Why we cannot afford another clinton. . .)

YOO-HOO Bill O'Reilly

hillary clinton Covertly Hedges Her Bets on the War While Overtly Betting Everything on the Virtual Certainty--Another Terrorist Attack

It's time to take out the trash...
A Senate en passant capture is THE MOVE...

YOO-HOO bill clinton
Bob Dole "ain't got no respect" for you

The Curious Candidacy of Carol Moseley-Braun:
an Extension of clinton drag and drop and legacy of lynching

running clintons...

On clinton's missus' war oscillations...

How to get rid of the clintons in 3 easy steps


THE CLINTONS--AMERICA'S BIGGEST BLUNDER: Hear Bush 41 Warn Us--October 19, 1992


hitchens on the clintons annotated

69% of Voters Nationwide Don't Want hillary clinton to Run for President, EVER

YOO-HOO Mrs. clinton:
A '68 Mustang is not exculpatory

clinton LIEbrary FLYover & other clinton FLIES

BUSH: "I will not wait on events, while dangers gather."

Q ERTY6 utter failure

What did he know. . . and when did he know it ?


SpyLies and Audiotape



HALF A HOUSE, HALF A BRAIN: Why we were compelled to hit on Simon & Schuster,our personal agitprop & money-laundering machine)



Hardball's Softball hillary clinton 'Interview'

Q ERTY8 clinton/Democrat Debacle of '02

Buddy Death Report Raises More Questions Than It Answers

hillary clinton and FUNERALS

But they are space aliens



The Real Danger of a Fake President: Post-9/11 Reconsideration of The Placebo President

copyright Mia T 2003


2 posted on 03/29/2003 8:10:31 AM PST by Mia T (SCUM (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gail Wynand; looscannon; Lonesome in Massachussets; Freedom'sWorthIt; IVote2; Slyfox; Registered; ..


3 posted on 03/29/2003 8:15:15 AM PST by Mia T (SCUM (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
As best as I can tell, your hieroglyphics are kicking a corpse.

How nice of you to piss on the man before he is even buried. You should be ashamed of yourself. Just because you disagree with some of the man's political positions doesn't justify such a trashy display of tackiness. And I bet you will be the first to whine if there are protesters at a memorial to Reagan when he passes.

Slap yourself and show some class. Conservatives don't do Wellstone funerals.
4 posted on 03/29/2003 8:21:13 AM PST by Diddle E. Squat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Hillary sits in Moynihan's Senatorial seat, because Moynihan lent his support. That is the only Moynihan deed that will be remembered.
5 posted on 03/29/2003 8:21:56 AM PST by F.J. Mitchell (Rangel proved his patriotism in Korea-McVeigh in Gulf War I-that was then-this is now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
You obviously don't get it. Try reading the words.
6 posted on 03/29/2003 8:22:09 AM PST by Mia T (SCUM (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
I'm reminded of Rush Limbaugh's retorical question about how much damage one man can do (in the last two years of his presidency). Now we know.

On the other hand, had the bent serial purjurer been impeached we would now have Albert Gore as president.... and that thought leaves me hyperventilating.

Indeed, if not for a small cuban boy, this Nation would now be in mortal danger.

7 posted on 03/29/2003 8:22:37 AM PST by kylaka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
Ooooppps. I meant impeached and REMOVED.
8 posted on 03/29/2003 8:25:31 AM PST by kylaka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: F.J. Mitchell
Support is too strong a word. He acquiesced.
9 posted on 03/29/2003 8:25:42 AM PST by Mia T (SCUM (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
No, I understand. You are using Moynihan's death as a venue to go on another anti-Clinton diatribe. While I think the Clintons are cousins of the devil, it is still disgusting to use the man's death as an opportunity to go on a political rant when you also trash the man who just died. It is no different than the Wellstone funeral.

Hey, we all make mistakes. I hope you will step back, reevaluate, admit this post was a bad idea, and ask the moderators to delete it. You have made many, many fine contributions to this forum in the past, it would be a shame to have your reputation sullied by one mistake.
10 posted on 03/29/2003 8:26:52 AM PST by Diddle E. Squat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
The establishment has so sacrilized Moynahan, that the central fact about his career (he spoke "thoughtfully," but on every significant vote in the Senate he could be relied on to vote the liberal line just like every other hack Dem pol) has been effectively covered over.
In this sense, he was more dangerous than the run of the mill liberal, in that he provided intellectual cover for the relentless advance of their statist agenda.
11 posted on 03/29/2003 8:29:44 AM PST by ricpic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kylaka
An interesting take…




12 posted on 03/29/2003 8:30:08 AM PST by Mia T (SCUM (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ricpic; Mia T
13 posted on 03/29/2003 8:33:17 AM PST by evolved_rage (Davis is a POS!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
side note, I taught Moynihan how to run a video player in 1981...No Myth, but truth! LOL, always remember if not for Pat, Hillary would not be a NY Senator right now....
14 posted on 03/29/2003 8:33:23 AM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
You are using Moynihan's death as a venue to go on another anti-Clinton diatribe.

Actually there was quite a bit of stuff about St. Moynihan in Mia's post. I wonder: Do you find any of it misleading or inaccurate? These days the bad is oft interred with the bones, so when is the time for truth?


15 posted on 03/29/2003 8:35:38 AM PST by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
The honorable Senator also tried to get a 1000 percent tax on ammunition, in his continued strong support of the Constitution.
16 posted on 03/29/2003 8:36:53 AM PST by gatex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
You can't be more wrong about my motivation.

Moynihan became the venue when hillary clinton began her eulogizing revisionist tour, starting on Washington Journal, C-SPAN, the floor of the Senate and her "virtual office" web site.

It is a myth that Moynihan supported her. The clintons misappropriate posthumously. They did it with Jefferson. They are doing it with Moynihan.

THAT is what this post is primarily about.
17 posted on 03/29/2003 8:40:52 AM PST by Mia T (SCUM (Stop Clintons' Undermining Machinations))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
He's dead.

He can't hurt us anymore.

Time to move on.

18 posted on 03/29/2003 8:40:53 AM PST by wireman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mia T
There's an old saying, "De mortuis nil nisi bonum." But exceptions must be made for public figures, when the good of the Republic requires that we speak the truth.

Senator Moynihan was an extremely intelligent man--absolutely brilliant, in fact--who also knew the difference between good and evil through his Catholic upbringing. He had a remarkable degree of moral and intellectual insight for a United States Senator.

Senator Moynihan was among the first to perceive that the welfare system was destroying black families. He said as much to Lyndon Johnson. Johnson leaned in him in some manner or other--probably blackmail--Moynihan caved, and the War on Poverty went forward like a juggernaut to break up almost ALL the black families in the inner cities, throw them on welfare and into drug dealing, and thus incidentally adding them to the roster of reliable Democrat voters feeding at the public trough.

The same pattern repeated itself again and again. Moynihan had the intelligence to discern the truth, and he had the moral insight to discern right from wrong; but again and again he chose wrong out of political expediency.

The clinton impeachment trial and the gift of his senate seat to Hillary! were only two of the latest incidents in this sad decay of a great man.

Most of the time it could be seen by the dullest eye that Senator Moynihan was drunk. I doubt that his blood alcohol level ever went below 0.1%, even when he woke up in the morning before taking his first drink. I have always assumed that he drank like a fish because he had a bad conscience and was seeking forgetfulness.

Let's hope that he repented in the end before he died. What is certain is that this man of great promise left behind him a legacy of shame. If he had not been a major public figure, we could let sleeping dogs lie. As it is, we have an obligation to speak the truth about his political betrayals, in the faint hope that other politicians may behave better in the future or that voters may learn better sense than to keep voting such failures into office.
19 posted on 03/29/2003 8:43:33 AM PST by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
Respect is earned, not conferred.
20 posted on 03/29/2003 8:44:55 AM PST by kylaka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-69 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson