Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
 

 
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Contributors:
  •   Please send any comments or suggestions about America 3.0 to:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Lex's Tweets
  • Jonathan's Tweets
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • “What The Clintons Did For Feminism”

    Posted by Jonathan on April 28th, 2008 (All posts by )

    Rand Simberg has a good post on this topic.

    The Clintons did a lot of damage to the country by their relentless personal attacks on their political adversaries. I don’t blame them for all of the nasty polarization that now exists, yet it seems to me that they bear significant blame. How much more civil and thoughtful might our public life now be if, instead of fanning and exploiting public divisions for their own ends, the Clintons had made some effort to buffer group animosities? To note that they were nice to some people and groups is to miss the point. The Clintons treated conservatives and libertarians as class enemies and abused the power of the State against individuals of all backgrounds who made trouble for them. We shouldn’t forget.

     

    3 Responses to ““What The Clintons Did For Feminism””

    1. thomas Says:

      Feminism is elite social engineering used to control the masses. The fact that people fail to recognize this is beyond belief. Who has more children? Feminist or anti-Feminist women? Who pays more taxes? Feminist or anti-Feminist women? You’ve been duped, Grrls.

    2. Soap Says:

      Actually, now that you mention this, it occurs to me that the divisive argument that is constantly aimed from the democrats at the republicans really gained a lot during the Clinton impeachment period. Since then, have we seen an important senate vote that has not pretty much followed party lines? As I write this, I recall Nixon stepping down, because he did not want to put the country through an impeachment. Clinton did no such thing, though we now know he was not entirely forthcoming in his description of what went on in his office as President. Now, Hillary will not step aside, though her chance of getting enough delegates is very slim… and in her final days to “pull a rabbit out of the hat” we are seeing a very destructive process occur both for Obama and indeed for our country. We really don’t need an more divisiveness in this country or in our government IMHO. I am beginning to wonder if this is a pattern that follows the Clinton’s?

    3. Ginny Says:

      Nixon may have had good-sized flaws, but he also didn’t contest the 1960 election because he didn’t want to undermine faith in elections. From Lani Guinier to Al Gore, this idea was pretty much trashed by the end of the Clinton years. So, now we have Acorn who manages to gather voter registrations in which 99% are false.