In 1991 liberals tried to destroy Clarence Thomas because they did not want
a “black conservative” U. S. Supreme Court justice. When they couldn’t defeat
him on the merits of his qualifications, they falsely accused him of sexual
harassment. Now, the same people who said Clarence Thomas was unfit to be a
Supreme Court Justice say we should keep a confirmed liar and sexual pervert as
our president.
Clarence upset many liberals when he said that he was the victim of a “high
tech” lynching. However, if you look at the facts, it’s hard to come to any other
conclusion. Both Clarence and Bill are Yale Law graduates. Bill Clinton did things
that they never even accused Clarence of. Nevertheless, while the liberals
continue to vilify Clarence, they want us to believe that Bill can do nothing that
would justify his removal from office.
When Anita Hill slithered out from under her rock, liberals said that it didn’t
matter if “that woman” said Clarence never touched her. Now they say that
Americans shouldn’t care if their President inserted a cigar up a federal
employee’s genitals in the People’s House.
In 1991, liberals said that it didn’t matter if “that woman” said Clarence never
asked her for sex. Now they say that there is nothing wrong with the President
having multiple episodes of oral sex with a federal employee in the workplace.
In 1991, liberals said that Anita Hill was a victim of vicious sexual harassment
event though she admitted that she continued to call Clarence for years after she
left Washington, D.C. Now they defend Bill Clinton by claiming that he was
ministering to a “disturbed young woman” by having phone sex with her while his
wife was sleeping.
In 1991, liberals said that they believed Anita although she invited Clarence to
be the keynote speaker for a Sexual Harassment Conference at Oral Roberts
University after she left Washington, D.C. Now they say that it simply doesn’t
matter if the president of the United States lied under oath in a federal lawsuit,
before a federal grand jury and to the American people.
How long would Clarence Thomas have lasted if his defense to Anita Hill’s
charges had been that oral sex wasn’t sex? How long would Clarence Thomas
have lasted if he claimed that he hadn’t committed perjury because “it depended
upon what the definition of the word ‘is’ is.”
Bill Clinton claims that his lies are irrelevant because Paula Jones’ case had
no merit. In fact, Federal Judge Susan Weber Wright dismissed the Paula Jones
law suit because the judge believed that Paula Jones could not prove that Clinton
damaged her when she refused Clinton’s advances. After all, Paula Jones kept
her low-level state job and continued to get her small raises. In fact, they did not
fire her. So, as they say in basketball, no harm, no foul.
Judge Wright was wrong. All we have to do is look at what happened to
Paula Jones when she said no and contrast it with what Monica Lewinsky received
as a payoff for saying yes.
When Monica told Bill Clinton yes, a brave new world unfolded for her. She
went from being an unpaid intern to a full-time federal employee. She was
promoted to a Pentagon job with a top security clearance. The President of the
United States took her calls, counseled her about her personal life and her career
and gave her gifts. Monica’s payoff included having the U. S. Ambassador to the
UN come to her home to offer her a job.
When Monica said yes, one of the most powerful lawyers in the world personally found her a lawyer, drove her around and asked the Chairmen of
Fortune 500 firms to hire her. When Paula Jones said no, the President’s men
called her trailer trash and tried to destroy her.
Do we really want a world where we abuse and vilify those who do the right
thing while the Anita Hills and Monica Lewinskys of the world become rich with the
wages of sin and betrayal?
Bill Clinton lied about Monica Lewinsky because he knew that women who
said yes were rewarded. Bill Clinton lied under oath because he knew that to
reward those who had sex with him and to punish those who said no was sexual
harassment. Bill Clinton lied under oath because he knew that the Supreme Court
ruled last year that women do not have to show physical or emotional injury to
prove sexual harassment.
In 1991 Americans could tell that Clarence Thomas was an honorable man
and that Anita Hill was lying. Because we defeated the liars of the left, we allowed
Clarence Thomas to become a great Supreme Court Justice.
In 1999, the people of America will again sit in judgment of a man charged
with sexual crimes. In Bill Clinton’s case, however, we have already established
guilt. In Bill Clinton’s case, the only issue will be what punishment he will receive
for his sins.
We no longer live in a world where the punishment for adultery is stoning to
death. However, we do live in a world where the punishment for adultery and
perjury will be the impeachment of the current president of the United States.
Clarence Thomas was right. He was the victim of an attempted high tech
lynching. Let’s make sure that Clinton gets the full benefit of the law before we
throw him out.
