The Clintons' “Moderate” Makeover

by Christopher G. Adamo

By now it should be evident, even to the casual political observer, that a major effort is underway to revise the entire history of the Clinton years. Throughout the mainstream media, Bill and Hillary are consistently being portrayed as “moderates,” apparently to their own delight. While Bill is likely participating in this ruse largely for the sake of his legacy and his insatiable ego (one of several "insatiable" facets of his persona), to Hillary such a “makeover” is absolutely essential if she is to have any hope of fulfilling her presidential aspirations in 2008. As is usually the case when discussing the Clintons, a reality check is in order.

Though Bill Clinton did superficially embrace some conservative ideas such as welfare reform and traditional marriage for the sake of expediency, those actions were never anything but diversionary tactics. Without exception, every judicial appointment, every executive order, and every international accord was designed to move the social order and political agenda as far to the left as possible.

When the Clintons descended upon Washington, D.C. in 1993, they did not do so as “moderates,” but as revolutionaries and national saviors. Along with their comical assurances to conduct the “most ethical presidential administration in history,” they promised to remake the nation, essentially by corrupting such institutions as its healthcare system into something resembling the overburdened socialist utopias of Europe.

From the moment the election results were confirmed, and throughout their pre-inauguration gatherings (one of which appeared as a surrealistic combination of a coronation and a Berlin rally from the 1930's), their message was ominous and unmistakable: The flower child, love bead and Woodstock generation had finally come of age as was ready to transform the old order forever.

Though Clintonian propensities for short-term self-gratification often undermined the more grandiose schemes, it should never be forgotten that virtually every presumed standard of conduct, as well as many basic premises of the law, were systematically and deliberately violated in order to ultimately render them irrelevant. Furthermore, far from going on the defensive whenever such behavior came to light, the Clinton political machine actually used those incidents to promote its undeniably leftist goals. The very brazenness with which the Clintons regularly flouted and mocked the law served as a weapon to challenge and intimidate their opponents. In the end they suffered virtually no punitive consequences for their actions.

Throughout the debacle of the Clinton years, Hillary often proved to be the driving force behind the calculated and unscrupulous political strategizing. She was invariably a key player, if not the mastermind behind each endeavor. In perhaps her only honest moment of the entire Clinton term, she once unequivocally stated “we are the president.” And this role she embraced, not as an overly enthusiastic First Lady, but rather as the true political opportunist, unfettered by such trivialities as soul or conscience.

On any given day, she could be counted upon to disseminate whatever deceit or accusation might be necessary to defuse the latest controversy. Or, in a pinch, she would suddenly revert back to the monotonously predictable “I don't recall.” Last week's lies were never of any consequence when dealing with this week's scandal. Certainly it can be no surprise that, as she closes in on the presidency in 2008, lies from the past decade are, in her mind, a non-issue.

Nor has Hillary undergone any true reformation since leaving the White House. Securing a ten million dollar book deal after being elected to the Senate, she dismissed accusations of ethics breaches (the very kind that forced Newt Gingrich to return his sizeable advance) on the technicality that she hadn't yet been sworn in, as if that detail negated the possibility of questionable influence. Moreover, the outright falsehoods contained in her book were so outlandish as to make Pete Rose look downright virtuous in comparison.

During the political debate of recent months, Howard Dean has been castigated as being extreme and dangerous on account of his left wing views. Certainly such charges are warranted. Dean's guiding political philosophies, between bouts of religious awakening (from which he quickly recovers), are strictly ultra-liberal in character. However, Hillary poses far more of a threat. For though she subscribes to those same extremist views, she also possesses sufficient political cunning to know when to cloak her radicalism behind a mask of “moderation,” with hopes of lulling her opposition into a false calm, after which she intends to unleash her liberal fury, once again, on an unwary public.

Growing up during the turbulent decades of the ‘60's and ‘70's, Christopher  Adamo saw, to his dismay, the nation's moral foundations being destroyed  before his very eyes. But even then he was a staunch Conservative at heart,  and rejected outright the tenets of America's counterculture revolution.

 After a hitch in the Air Force, where he specialized in airborne  electro- optical systems, he pursued a career in the field of aerospace,  working for major defense contractors in California, Florida, and Colorado. But his career plans abruptly changed during the industry-wide downsizing that followed the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster.

Presently he is working in the field of industrial instrumentation in the state of Wyoming. Concurrently, he has become involved in that state's political process, attending state GOP conventions as a delegate, and serving as a member of the Wyoming Republican Central Committee. He has also aided in the candidacies of local legislators and state senators, as well as a U.S. Senator and Congresswoman.

From 1993 to 1996, he edited and wrote for “The Wyoming Christian”, the state newsletter for Christian Coalition of Wyoming. During that period, he developed an acute awareness of the harm being done to Conservatism by liberal activists within the Republican Party as well as the Democrats. This remains a favorite theme of his articles, which now appear as a regular feature on GOPUSA.