Now Mobile-Friendly
Home | RSS Feeds | CFP Store | Photo Gallery | Archives | About Us | Advertise | Subscribe | Letters | Submissions | Links |Facebook | Twitter | Gas Prices
Custom Search
Countdown until Obama leaves Office

Donatello Restaurant Fine Italian and Mediterranean Dining in Toronto.


Democratic Party is one big trailer park filled with Jerry Springer contestants

Democrats more dysfunctional than ever

Author
- Klaus Rohrich  Tuesday, July 15, 2008
| Print friendly | Email Us

Barack Obama’s people have said that Hillary Clinton will probably not be the Democratic vice presidential candidate because of her husband, Bill’s past.  In explaining why the former First Lady will likely not be on the ticket, an Obama spokesman said that vice-presidential candidates must be “fully vetted”.

Apparently this means full disclosure of all information pertaining to Hillary’s husband, including financial information, names of past contributors and whether or not he has “any girlfriends”.

Now, I’ve never been much of a fan of the Clintons, but I find the Obama campaign’s objections to Hillary because of her husband’s past, frankly offensive.  Aren’t the Democrats supposed to be the party that takes people at face value, regardless of their race, their gender, their religion, etc.?  If so, then why is Hillary being punished because of the sins of her husband?

What’s more, aren’t these the same Democrats that less than a decade ago defended the then sitting president during impeachment proceedings brought about as a result of Bill’s perjury and suborning perjury?  As I recall there was something about a “vast right-wing conspiracy” bent on bringing Bill Clinton down.

Also, for Obama’s people to be concerned about Bill Clinton’s past is a joke, given the people with whom Obama has been associated over the past 20 years.  At least Bill Clinton was a two-term president, compared to Obama’s less than two years in the Senate.  Obama’s associates, such as the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, whose ravings and raging against America raised serious concern’s about the candidate’s suitability until Obama threw him under the bus.  Another huge concern for the American electorate should be Obama’s wife, Michele and her angry mouth, if we are going to get into spousal missteps.  Then there’s Obama’s association with Tony Rezko, a Democratic fundraiser who was recently convicted of corruption in Federal Court in Chicago.

The reasons the Obama campaign is giving for not wanting Hillary on the ticket are specious in the extreme.  The real reason is more likely to have to do with the mutual contempt in which the two former rivals hold for one another.

It’s also somewhat bizarre to have a Democratic presidential candidate claim that a former Democratic president’s past is an impediment for a member of that president’s family to serve as vice president.  I don’t think I would have as much of a problem with Obama’s refusal to take Hillary on as running mate because of her own dodgy past, of which there is more than sufficient cause for concern.  But then, the entire Democratic Party seems to have a dodgy past. 

When one looks at the current Democratic leadership there is real cause for concern if any of these people are fit to hold public office under any circumstances.  Let’s start with Ted Kennedy.  I know this is all water under the bridge (no pun intended), but what happened at Chappaquiddick and the ensuing two-month jail sentence (which was suspended) make Kennedy the poster boy of what the Democrats are all about.

Then there’s Howard Dean of the primal scream, Chairman of the Democratic National Committee, who by all accounts is certifiably bonkers, given the bizarre positions he is known to take.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is probably the weakest majority leader of any party in the history of the United States.  His self congratulatory claim that he “killed the Patriot Act” will one day certainly come back to haunt him and the Democrats.

Ditto for Speaker of the house Nancy Pelosi, who initiated her own foreign policy parallel to that of the U.S. after taking office last year.  Her leadership, combined with Reid’s has landed the approval ratings of the U.S. Congress in single digits for the first time in the country’s history.

There’s a lot more.  I could go on about Congressman Jack Murtha, who was implicated in the Abscam corruption scandal in 1980.  He managed to avoid being prosecuted by agreeing to testify against other politicians.  Then there’s William Jefferson of Louisiana who kept $90,000 in cold cash in his freezer, which he recovered during the Hurricane Katrina disaster, using the Louisiana National Guard as his chauffeurs.

If truth be told, the entire Democratic Party is one big trailer park filled with Jerry Springer contestants.  It’s rare to see Democrats of the stature of Daniel Patrick Moynihan, John F. Kennedy, Adlai Stevenson or Averell Harriman because the party has become so base and dysfunctional.

Rather than worry about how Bill Clinton’s past might impact the election of 2008, Barack Obama would be well-advised to think about his own personal affiliations as well as those of the entire Democratic Party.  There’s a lot more cause for concern than anything in Bill Clinton’s past.




Klaus Rohrich
Most recent columns


Copyright © Canada Free Press
Klaus Rohrich is senior columnist for Canada Free Press. Klaus also writes topical articles for numerous magazines. He has a regular column on retirementhomes.com and is currently working on his first book dealing with the toxicity of liberalism.  His work has been featured on the Drudge Report, Rush Limbaugh, Fox News and Lucianne, among others.  He lives and works in a small town outside of Toronto and is an avid student of history.

Klaus can be reached at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Older articles by Klaus Rohrich

Surviving Times of Trouble...

An Every Day Online Almanac to See You Through Disaster Natural or Otherwise
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 2012 the individual authors.

Site Copyright 2012 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement