Big Dogs Weblog

Roots: The Anti War Movement

by Big Dog on Mar 22, 2007 at 10:39 Political

A big deal was made about Bill Clinton’s anti war stance and his ability to manipulate the system in order to avoid service to this country and, by extension, service in Vietnam. Clinton was against the war in Vietnam and he did not want to serve in the military regardless of whether there was a war going on or not. His wife’s loathe of the military is not unknown even if that little item is swept away by her supporters. These would be the same people who ignored the fact that Clinton used connection to get accepted into the ROTC program and then when he found out his number would not come up in the draft lottery, he had a “change of mind” and expressed his opposition to service. The man who would later become Commander in Chief and order young men and women into battle had, himself, avoided service.

This is basically water under the bridge because no matter what, he was elected and he served two terms. The yellow dog Democrats elected him by rationalizing that service was not important (which it is not) and by excusing his draft dodging as an acceptable act because it was an unpopular war and no one wanted to go, blah, blah. These are the same mindless drones who, only eight years later, decided that service was important but that George Bush did not really serve because he was in the National Guard and he used family influence to get in. We have heard the stories and though there has never been one shred of credible proof, they persist today. The people who supported Clinton and his draft dodging, chastised Bush for what they saw as avoiding Vietnam service by getting in the guard. In an about face, the yellow dogs decided that “real” service was necessary to serve as Commander in Chief and in 2004 they got behind a man whose three months in Vietnam were ginned up to equal MacArthur’s return to the Philippines. The yellow dog Democrats had it both ways with Kerry. They had a guy who actually served (albeit nominally) and also a guy who protested the very war he served in. They had a guy who met with the enemy and assisted in handing the US a defeat that came from within.

Now a writer named Taylor Branch is going to write an historical account of the Clinton Presidency based on notes and recording of meetings the two had since the time Clinton was the president-elect. They met for years and Branch kept a presidential diary, so to speak. He will write the book to show the inner workings of Clinton and how he handled his duties as President. The book will not be without bias because Branch and Clinton are friends and have been for a long time. The interesting part of the Times article describing the project is what brought them together and why they bonded:

They are also the product of a friendship between Mr. Clinton and Mr. Branch that dates back nearly 40 years, to when the men met at antiwar meetings in the thick of the Vietnam War and collaborated on Senator George S. McGovern’s 1972 presidential campaign in Texas.

~snip~

The men bonded over their roots as Southerners who witnessed the civil rights movement and later joined the antiwar movement, and their friendship deepened throughout the presidency. [my emphasis] NYT

Clinton had no intention of ever serving and his ROTC gimmick was nothing more than a ruse to keep him out so he could be a part of the anti war crowd. That is the problem with the Democrats, they can not find anything worth fighting for. The anti war movement started with them and has evolved into the sub human beings that we witnessed last weekend in DC. Clinton, and Kerry for that matter, are the grandfathers of the anti war movement. They gave birth to the idiots who spray paint signs and damage Congressional offices. They gave birth to the types of people who claim to support the troops and then burn them in effigy in places like Portland.

I am sure that Branch will never write a book that exposes any more than we already know and might even gloss over the less than stellar parts of Clinton’s time in office. One thing he can never gloss over is the fact that Clinton was an anti war zealot who avoided service to this country only to use the military, years later, for dangerous operations.

Regardless of what happens with this book there is no doubt that the first chapter should be titled Genesis and it should describe Clinton’s efforts to avoid service and his direct involvement in the birth of the anti American left. That chapter could be followed by one titled Chronicles and it could describe all the people involved back then and how their descendants have devolved into lower forms of life than their ancestors.

Put this down as another Clinton saga I will not read.

Tags: Political