- Text smaller
- Text bigger
While there is reason to celebrate the House of Representatives votes of impeachment, the Clinton White House now must be viewed by Americans as a wounded animal — even more dangerous and unpredictable than it has been.
That’s saying a lot, because this administration is by far the most dangerous and most unpredictable in the history of the United States — at least for those of us who still care about freedom, equal protection under the law, the Constitution, and the other ideals upon which this great country was founded.
America is one year and nine days away from what may be one of its most critical tests. Call it “the millennium bug,” Y2K, or the day the earth stood still. There is simply no debate in any quarter that it will be a severe problem. The only question is, “How bad?”
Will there be power? Will there be telecommunications service? Will there be food and water? Will there be a global depression? Will there be martial law? These are not questions being asked only by Y2K doomsdayers. They are legitimate questions being raised by such respected, established and official sources as U.S. congressmen, the Red Cross, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Department of Defense, the Canadian government, the British government, and computer experts worldwide.
With so little time before all our questions about this potential disaster are answered, the big question every American, and particularly every member of Congress, should be asking themselves is this: Is it in the best interests of the United States for Bill Clinton to be serving as president when we approach that momentous and dreaded day?
It’s a question, ironically, I hear no one else asking. And it’s a question that propels the impeachment debate to the forefront of all other national public policy issues.
Bill Clinton keeps telling us he’s got important work to do for the country — work such as solving the Social Security crisis. Multiply the seriousness of the Social Security crisis by a factor of 1,000 or so, and you begin to comprehend that it pales in comparison to the threats we face beginning Jan. 1, 2000, 374 days from now.
Like it or not, life as we have come to know it is going to change overnight — in the blink of an eye. I’m not suggesting a worst-case scenario is inevitable. What I am saying, unequivocally, is that, even in a best-case scenario, Y2K is a far bigger danger to Americans than Social Security going bust.
And with that crisis coming, the question arises: Is a seriously damaged, discredited, desperate, unscrupulous, immoral, authoritarian, self-obsessed, potential despot the man America wants at the helm of the all-too-powerful executive branch of government when it hits? Is he the man who should be commander-in-chief of the most powerful armed forces in the world, with extraordinary and frightening emergency powers, when tough decisions need to be made?
For the life of me, I don’t know why no one else is asking these brutally honest and timely questions. But I will continue to ask them whether or not I remain a lonely voice crying out in the wilderness.
Through his cavalier use of executive orders, his willingness to create wars for political advantage, and most of all, his blatant disrespect for the Constitution of the United States, Bill Clinton has demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that he is the worst of all possible bad choices for political leadership in a time of crisis.
The countdown has begun. No matter how bad the Y2K crisis turns out to be, the bigger, long-term threat to freedom in America and throughout the world is the question of how government responds to it.
An impeached president, one who admits he lied, cheated, and covered up, and one with more critics than he can count, is the worst possible alternative.
America has been very fortunate, indeed, that it has survived the six-year Clinton presidency relatively intact. Given his collectivist goals, his ruthlessness, his cunning, his Teflon-like appeal, it could have been much worse. With the world approaching what is at worst, disaster, and at best, an excuse for governmental mischief on a grand scale, how much longer can America afford to risk its luck?