CircusMakesMeSad3-8-01pg1

The Circus Makes Me Sad

As a child, I went to the circus and laughed at the clowns and marveled at the animals. As I watched, I began to wonder what the animals must have been thinking. I began to wonder if this is what they called living, striving to be what God had created. I thought about their struggles to survive in the wild. I realized they would be safer in a circus. However, was it what God had intended? Did God create tigers to jump through hoops or to chase down zebras and maintain the balance he created? If one thinks about the incredible balance of nature, the circle of life that God designed, then a circus seems to fall short of the great potential of those animals. It made me sad to see how their great glory of life could fall so short of its potential because of the desires of another species.

About now, one could ask if I was some PETA fanatic or an animal rights activist. I am not either. However, as I watch and read about the current happenings in the Congress as it �investigates� the Clinton pardons, I cannot help but find the same sadness. I think of the potential of those who created our representative democracy and its potential, and then I realize what it has become. As Louis Libby, former Marc Rich lawyer, began to testify, against the wishes of republican lawmakers, I began to look at who was present. One could notice how some republicans, including Dan Burton, the republican chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, had suddenly disappeared from something they claim is so important. As the committee�s ranking democrat, Henry A. Waxman, began to question Libby about not only his involvement in the Clinton pardon of Marc Rich, but also began to cite various potential abuses of the Presidential Pardon powers, I began to think about the entire process.

I began to wonder, who was worse? The republicans, whose only concern is to use Clinton as political shelter and try and finally pin the tail on Clinton after 8 years of trying? Or the democrats, who waited until now, before they brought forth the information on other pardons that, seemingly did not make headlines over the years? The republicans that had abused those same powers in the various pardons of the likes of Armand Hammer, George Steinbrenner, Orlando Borsch, and Gilbert Dozier, to name a few, then choose to pursue the same actions by Bill Clinton? Or the democrats, who didn�t say anything about those pardons so that they could use those same powers for Marc Rich, Carlos Vignali and others?

Then I began to realize that there is little to no impact to these hearings. What would happen if the Congress went after Clinton for impeachment proceedings? Considering, if convicted, he would only lose his presidential benefits, which would mean nothing to a man making $100,000 per speaking engagement�there is no real impact. Other than political gain and loss, that is. The only real impact to investigations would need to be done by a prosecutor, such as Mary Jo White, or the Attorney General, John Ashcroft. That means the congressional hearings are the circus and we are the animals being nudged through the rings of fire.

Yet, as I listen to people daily, I continue to hear the pro- and anti-Clinton sentiment. It seems to surround this pardon, yet none talk of the process or previous pardons. The politicians have made Clinton the sacraficial lamb to the people. In order to hide the practice that both Reagan and Bush used, and other presidents have used before them, Clinton must become the scapegoat. It is not as if the practice will suddenly stop. It won�t. It is not as though the republicans are some integrity filled group that is out to save America from the evils of the democrats. They aren�t.

As I talk to people daily, they tell me they voted for Gore or Bush. I often ask why. They often respond with the claim, �it was the lesser of two evils.� That statement makes me wonder. If both are �evil� as people claim by that statement, then why do they vote for them? Isn�t the �lesser of two evils� still �evil?� Will voting for the �lesser of two evils� restore �integrity� (a word thrown around quite loosely) to anything? No, it won�t.

Republicans often talk about how Bill Clinton has lowered the standards of America. Even Senator Byrd, in a recent interview, claimed that would be the legacy of Bill Clinton. However, it would appear that the standards were lowered long before Clinton. If the stories about previous pardons being given to contributors are true, and it appears they are, it may be that we are raising our standards because of Bill Clinton. Not because he did anything to raise them, but as a response to his presidency. However, for that to be true, republicans must acknowledge the problems of the past and put them on an equal level as the Clinton pardons.

Instead, republicans are telling us that is a distraction to �muddy the waters� from the real issue of Bill Clinton. They are hiding from the past, just as democrats are hiding from Bill Clinton. In both cases, they are telling us which hoops to jump through. The question becomes: what is best for America? Is it best for Americans to ignore abuses by recent presidents to focus on Bill Clinton? Is it best to look at past presidential abuses and see the Clinton pardons in that context as acceptable? Or would it be better to acknowledge both Bill Clinton�s pardons and the pardons of past presidents, and condemn them both as not only wrong, but possibly illegal? Are we the animals told what hoops to jump through in this circus, or are we the ringmasters, telling the animals what hoops to jump through? Unfortunately, it would seem to be the former, rather than the latter. That is why this circus makes me sad. Americans need to take control of this circus, and hold people responsible for their actions. Not only Bill Clinton, but past and future presidents.
---Chris Knight 3/8/01

Chris Knight is a Sr. Fellow at the Global Freedom Institute

Return to Main Page