Starr Power

I have a larger point in a separate post I want to make (assuming I have time), but I just had to make mention of this ...

First off, Nixon was guilty as hell, period. I'll get to Newt in the other post.

That being said-

I have never, not once, had a conversation with a Clinton apologist regarding his sex scandal (I guess I should be more specific - Lewinsky), & not not listen to them parse out at least a sliver of blame (often more) for Ken Starr. And you didn't endanger that streak, let me tell you.

Had Starr actually focused on alleged criminal activity by the President when he was still Governor, then the matter would have been resolved quickly and quietly, and a tangible stain that never really goes away would never have been placed on the White House. If you don't see what I am saying, then ask yourself this: When I say "tangible stain" in association or reference to the Lewinsky scandal... do you think about a stained dress? I do, and I don't think that is a good thing.

In fact, the "Whitewater" investigation fizzled almost immediately... but the Lewinsky scandal proved hot and juicy. So, eleven months and $70 million later, Starr finally gets Clinton to lie outright on camera ("I did not have sexual relations with that woman.")... victory is attained, right?

Yes, ultimately, the responsibility for that association lies with Clinton himself. He had the affair, he bears the blame for the results... I know this. I find it unfortunate, but it is true.

I mean really? That makes 2 posts in as many days that you concede to it being all Clinton's fault ... but not really, it was mainly Starr, but mostly Clinton, but partially - ENOUGH.

Such duplicity Titus, tisk, tisk.

The idea that you find fault with Starr, on any level, for Clinton's "stain" on the White House is laughable. I can't even take that position seriously. And the idea that Starr "got Clinton to lie", HA! Come on man, this is bush league stuff, and you're a starting AAA third basemen!

And what's more revealing is that you find it unfortunate not that Clinton did these things, but that he is to "blame." At least, that's how you phrased it.

What is often conveniently forgot by the blame Starr (at least a little, wink and nod) crowd is that each and every expansion of Starr's investigatory powers were granted to him by Clinton's very own DOJ. The Special Prosecutor's office had to seek and get approval from Justice for each and every expansion beyond Whitewater. I can only assume that Starr's argument was so compelling that Janet Reno had no choice but to say yes, go forth my son and investigate. Less I'm to believe that she was also part of the "vast right wing conspiracy." So if you have a beef with where and how his investigation proceeded, lay it at Reno's size 13 shoes.

Now that being said, did Starr and his office have political motivations and allegiances that weren't in Clinton's best interests? Undoubtedly. But are you telling me the Watergate Hearing participants didn't grandstand? Didn't build entire careers in some cases based on the zeal with which they went after Nixon? Woodward and Bernstein weren't exactly Republicans, shall I blame them for pushing the investigation to the point that poor Nixy felt he "had to" order operatives to interfere with a federal investigation, all because of a fairly meaningless (in and of itself) third rate burglary? And how much money in adjusted dollars was spent investigating Watergate and conducting those hearings after they had apprehended the actual burglars? "HOW HIGH UP DOES IT GO!?" they shouted, with not a scant peice of evidence (at the time) that it did. That wasn't politically motivated? Come on...

Do you see my point? Whether the prosecutor is politically motivated is irrelevant when the prosecuted has been caught red handed.

Look, a guy makes an illegal left turn. The cop sees this and turns on the siren. The guy doesn't pull over, he speeds up. The ensuing chase causes a half million dollars in property damage, over a $60 ticket. And claiming that it wasn't worth it, some people will always come out and blame the cop. Those people are retarded.

Come on man - blaming Starr is "the sun was in my eyes coach" excuse. It's suing McDonalds for their coffee being too hot. It's a parent blaming Wendy's for their kid's childhood obesity. The bottom line is, you minus Starr from this whole thing and it's arguable that it unfolds nearly the same way. You remove Clinton's behavior, his serial adultery, his compulsive lying, and the thing never happens.

So just say Clinton was to blame, 100%, with no qualifications already.

Because to say anything else, is, well... being a Wiener.