Google+
Close
Wit’s End On Witnesses; I Spy; Liberal Fascism, Yet Again; Corrections, as Promised


Text  


Jonah Goldberg

WIT’S END ON WITNESSES
Joe Lockhart looked like he just found his Christmas pony slumped in a dead heap on top of the presents. Maybe it’s just me but I thought the guy was going to cry. The White House doesn’t want any witnesses. Not only that, they feel it’s just plain mean of the Republicans for them to offer Clinton an opportunity to confront his accuser and defend himself. Bastards! How many times did Lockhart or his comrades in the House bemoan the fact that there were no “fact witnesses”? Now, the White House is willing to stipulate to what Lockhart called, “the so-called ‘facts’” from the grossly “prejudicial” and “harshly” Starr report. What does that mean exactly? Is he referring to the “so-called ‘semen’”? Or maybe he means Clinton’s so-called “denials.” The obvious reason why the Clintonoids don’t want witnesses is that they’ve reached the high water mark of their popular support. A long trial could very easily serve as an educational form of entertainment for a public that has largely turned off the scandal. There is a cynical interpretation which says that whenever the White House sees the inevitable is coming –whether they are delighted with it or not — they scream “unfair!” After all that was the genius of the Clinton Grand Jury deposition. But now Lockhart says that if the Republicans call witnesses then “all bets are off.” This is supposed to mean that the White House will permit the lawyers to call, drum roll please, Lucianne Goldberg. As if the Republic couldn’t take the stress. The real threat, according some reports, is that the White House might call more pedantic, arrogant, pinheads to lecture the Senators on what they can cannot think is an impeachable offense. I cannot wait for the White House to lawyer up. That will truly be shuffling chairs on the deck of the Titanic.

Advertisement
I SPY
The usual State Department cookie pushers and foreign policy think tankers are bent out of shape because we may have been using the UNSCOM inspection teams to spy on Iraq. Well, I say good for us. If this was Clinton’s idea, bully for him. We are supposed to do what is in our national interest. What kind of fools would we be not to spy on Hussein? Real nations are not ashamed of protecting their interests.

LIBERAL FASCISM, YET AGAIN
On Monday I wrote about how Americans are terrified of being “judgmental” except when it comes to condemning the judgers. Herewith a case in point. The American Council of Trustees and Alumni reported that 453,123 college newspapers were either destroyed or stolen between 1992 and 1998. Overwhelmingly, the papers were conservative. College Presidents regularly refuse to condemn or punish students who do this sort of thing, especially when the perpetrators are minority or gay rights groups. If conservative kids were going around burning or burying the Crunchy Gazette or the Birkenstock Times they would be expelled and we’d get reports on the nightly news about “Brown Shirts at Bennington.”

CORRECTIONS, AS PROMISED
In keeping with my New Year’s Resolutions every Friday I will be running corrections. First, in my resolutions I got the quote from Caddyshack slightly off. Bill Murray doesn’t say “so I got that going for me, which is good.” He says “which is nice.” In my reference to the Pataveret from So I Married an Axe Murderer I substituted the Rockefellers for the Rothschilds. Many of you caught this and I even got a memo from Zog. I used the word Christendom in a way that some of you thought was inaccurate. I meant it to mean a geographical area rather than a community of believers, which isn’t quite right. But I should point out that what I said was still accurate considering Christians do revere the Ten Commandments. A while back I quoted Conan — Crush your enemy, see him driven before you etc. — and a number of you claim that quote actually comes from Ghengis Khan and others say its from Sun Tsu. I don’t really care. Movies often plagerize from, what do you call it? Oh yeah: life. Some die-hard Conan defenders were VERY upset that I said that Oliver Stone wrote Conan, instead of John Millius. Well, they both have writing credits. But Millius did direct. And in my Monday column I failed to make any pop culture reference whatsoever. I should also point out that nobody got the Animal House reference about “double secret probation.” That really surprised me.



Text  


Sign up for free NRO e-mails today:

NRO Polls on LockerDome

Subscribe to National Review