Mrs. Juanita Broaddrick told the world Wednesday night that Bill
Clinton raped her twenty
years ago. In yet another “Wag-the-Dog” exercise, Clinton now is trying
to insert our troops into
a civil war in the Kosovo Province of Yugoslavia.
Where is the National Organization for Women when we need them? Why
are they silent?
Where are all the Congresswomen who tried to destroy Clarence Thomas
because Anita Hill
claimed that he talked dirty to her? Where are all of the feminists who
said that there was
nothing wrong with cheating on your wife if your mistress consented to
adultery? How bad does
it have to get before they walk away from Bill Clinton?
Did Bill Clinton rape Juanita Broaddrick? Her story sounds convincing
to me. In most
states, law enforcement officials would have immediately investigated
her allegations. But who
do you call when the person who raped you is the Attorney General of
Bill Clinton must be presumed innocent until proven guilty, but the
evidence is mounting
that he is a serial sexual predator. How much smoke must we see before
we decide that the
house is on fire? How many more women have to come forward with tales of
sexual contact” before the Democrats walk away from this man? At what
point do the
Democrats decide that decency is more important than their lust to
regain control of Congress
and our taxes? At what point do Democrats decide that character matters?
I am concerned about Bill Clinton’s lack of a moral compass because
he also is
Commander in Chief of a military that he “loathes.” In response to a
reporter’s question about
sending troops to Kosovo Tuesday, Clinton said that no American
interests are threatened by
what was happening in Kosovo. However, in a chilling break from
centuries of international law,
Clinton then said that since the Serbs’ actions raise “humanitarian”
concerns, he wants our
military to participate in a civil war in a foreign country.
Since when was it appropriate to use America’s military to take sides
in a civil war? As bad
as the Serbs are, what relevance does the internal rebellion in Kosovo
have to U.S. national
security interests? If we send troops into a foreign country because of
how they are treating
their citizens, we are setting a dangerous precedent. If we can go into
Kosovo, why can’t the
Mexican government send its troops into San Diego County because of the
way the INS treats
Why, by the way, does Clinton want to defend Kosovo in the first
place? He sat on his
hands when they slaughtered half a million people in Rwanda in 1994. He
did nothing when
they slaughtered thousands more in Sierra Leone last month.
How does he decide what is humanitarian and what is not? Is it
humanitarian to allow girl
babies to be aborted in China and India? Is it humanitarian to allow the
Indonesian and Pakistani governments to look the other way as religious
Christians? Is it humanitarian to allow Castro to stay in power? Where
do we start, or should I
say, where do we stop?
We must stop sending American troops into harm’s way just on a whim.
If a situation does
not present a clear and present danger to obvious American national
security interests, our
military should not be involved. We must never forget that the purpose
of our military is to kill
people and destroy things that threaten our vital interests.
However, that doesn’t mean that we sit around doing nothing. We can
do much to help
people around the world without involving our military. We can invest in
helping poor nations
achieve strong, broad economic growth. We can invest in the creation of
vibrant and widespread democratic traditions around the world. We can
use our economic power to oppose the
policies of tyrants.
Only time will tell whether we ever know if Bill raped Mrs.
Broaddrick. But we do not have
a minute to spare if we are to keep Clinton from opening up yet another
foreign policy Pandora’s
Box by sending our troops to Kosovo.