One of the most annoying things about arguing with Democrats is that they simply refuse to argue honestly- whether it be denying facts in favor of suspicions, leveling ad hominems in lieu of facts, or, as is the case with this Calpundit post, comparing things that just aren’t the same. Today, Kevin notes this news story, which he came to by way of the ‘Crockmeister‘:
President Bush played host to dozens of overnight guests at the White House and Camp David last year, from world leaders to some of his most loyal supporters, including friends who double as campaign fund-raisers.
Bush and first lady Laura Bush have invited at least 270 people to stay at the White House and at least the same number to overnight at the Camp David retreat since coming to Washington in January 2001, according to lists the White House provided The Associated Press…
Bush’s criticism of the Clinton fund-raising scandal is one of the reasons the White House identifies guests. In a debate with Vice President Al Gore in October 2000, Bush said: “I believe they’ve moved that sign, ‘The buck stops here,’ from the Oval Office desk to ‘The buck stops here’ on the Lincoln Bedroom. And that’s not good for the country.”
Bush’s overnight guest roster is virtually free of the famous
Lex
No. It was a bullshit story then and it is a bullshit story now. A scandal is giving money and getting your own personal tax loophole or deregulatory legislation, no matter who does it. Giving money and getting a night in the Lincoln Bedroom is tacky but not a scandal, no matter who does it.
Just my $.02.
Robin Roberts
No, your $.02 is wrong. The White House is public property, renting it out for the benefit of a campaign is more than tacky.
Now, John, that Oliver and Drum continue to discredit themselves doesn’t surprise you?
shark
My god…people on the left continue to prove they are intellectually and morally bankrupt scum every day…
Oliver
Yes, John, I’m sure their campaign contributions had nothing to do with staying overnight at the WH. Frankly, energy meetings to the highest bidder worry me more than a night at the Lincoln, but this is just the latest in the GOP’s “do as I say” policy.
Ricky
John:
They.
Don’t.
Care.
About.
Honesty.
As long as they ‘get’ Bush.
Kenneth G. Cavness
Oooh, this is going to be a nasty election, isn’t it?
And Ricky: I believe you meant “we”, not “they”; sadly, it appears that Bush himself doesn’t much care about honesty, if you go by the recent claims in his speeches.
Can we take eight months of this?
Terry
Come on fellows; you don’t seriously expect honesty and integrity from a bunch of loons like Oliver and Drum. With each passing month, the two of them have steadily evolved into atrios and Hesiod-type figures, except they apparently have access to “spell-checker” and some typing skills. Otherwise, they are all hysterical ideologues.
OdysseusInRTP
Terry,
I couldn’t agree more. I used to go to Drum’s site to make sure that I wasn’t missing any side of an issue. It has gone so far down hill now that I don’t really bother any more. I have lost respect for the site.
Court
Same here, Terry. I think it has something to do with commentors. I especially noticed it on Drum’s site. His commentors started getting worse and worse and now it seems like he’s pandering to them.
Same thing happened to kos. Remember when Tacitus used to go over there and rustle a few feathers? He wouldn’t last 5 minutes over there now with their self-censoring memory hole of a system.
JKC
Hmmm…
If someone gave me as much money as some of the Bush Pioneers and Rangers raised for him, I’d call them friends, too. And they could sleep wherever they damned pleased.
I suspect, John, that you’re going to need a chiropractor to get out all the knots you’ve twisted yourself into trying to explain how this is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT from what Bill Clinton did in the 90’s.
Barbar
Hahaha. I get it — Bush is just some clown who’s good at making friends. He’s risen to the top simply by being a good buddy to his pals. A real outsider to Washington and politics!
HH
Kerry and the elite media pooh-poohed this as a scandal when it was Clinton in charge so it’s almost nonexistent as a campaign issue.
Slartibartfast
Trying to follow JKC’s logic here, all we’re going to need is some evidence that they promised Bush large amounts of money back when they were friends with him, prior to election, in return for sleeping in the Lincoln bedroom after his landslide victory over Gore.
I’m thinking this is a reach.
HH
Reminder from the source still providing the Dem talking points on Limbaugh
Bloggerhead
I have question: since when did you right-wingers become such pussies? “Ooh, Kevin Drum. I can’t bear to read his site anymore.” Try sprouting some gonads, girls (surely, some vestigials remain in place, or in your wives’ purses). It’s politics, down and dirty as always, and more so in the last decade. Or don’t you guys remember the well-financed slime machine of the 90’s, where everything was thrown at our then CinC and all that stuck was semen to a blue dress?
Look, I drop by John’s, Ricky’s, Steve’s and Tacky’s during every blog circuit I make. I rarely agree with them and sometimes they take liberties with the truth, logic and the american way. But what’s the point in publicly (and snivellingly) denouncing them as hacks; it’s embarrasing for you, really. (By the way, I’ve witnessed a number of Tacitus’ forays into Kevin’s comments, and while the former is indisputably a knowledgable guy with a very eloquent pen–and a great blog, to boot–he invariably leaves holding his head like a football, ie. after having it handed to him.)
Now let’s take this post, as an example. I agree with John that perhaps there is a distinction to be drawn between the practices of Clinton and Bush, but it’s one of degree that John is attempting to contort into one of essence. That’s classic hackery, but you don’t see progressives dropping by, sticking our fingers in our ears and going, “Nah, nah, nah.” Besides, that Bush rents out the Lincoln bedroom to guys who happened to wet-nurse him through his troubled business ventures, and continue to do so through his political career, hardly presents a flattering portrait of the man.
John Cole
Umm the distinction is that one is entirely ethical and appropriate, one is entirely unethical, inappropriate, andperhaps, illegal.
I gues it is just a degree of difference, hack or not.
Slartibartfast
Your obsession with the size and shape of my gonads says much more about you than it does about me. The fact that you evidently believe girls DON’T have gonads also says much, and it’s not a bit complementary.
Terry
Blockerhead is a new visitor to this site, isn’t he/she/it? The inanities contained in the comments above certainly mark the individual as a likely and regular visitor and commenter on such lucid and insightful sites as that of the ever profane and inarticulate, Hesiod. Somehow the inability to distinguish between the Clinton and Bush practice in terms of relative appropriateness is strongly suggestive that Blockerhead may indeed BE Hesiod using a pseudonym.
Ken Hahn
The major difference I see between Bush’s list and Clinton’s is that Bush’s people seem to be US citizens. Just like Kerry, Clinton appealled mostly to foreigners, especially those registered to vote under motor voter. Republicans do seem to be more popular among Americans while Democrats have a hugh lead with tombstones, house pets, fictional characters and illegal aliens.
Mito
What a bizarre post, it seems you aren’t over your Clinton hating after all. There isn’t any difference at all between what Clinton did and what Bush did with people staying over.
Just John
The argument would be more persuasive if there it included any long time friends who didn’t raise the big bucks.
Ricky
Bloggerhead, if you ever see anything presented as fact when it’s incorrect on my site, feel free to let me know & I’ll gladly update. Calling someone a poopeyhead is an opinion but saying that so-and-so did _______ is presenting something as a fact & I definitely don’t want to present something false. I think Oliver & Yglesias would do the same (glaring omission of Drum from the list is emphasized, for good reason).
Why do that when they can sit in a circle jerk and talk to each other about how ruthless “instahack” and “crazy andy” are to each other on a left-wing site, where they’re never challenged? [that was a joke, btw] :)
mailman
The difference with Clinton is that he couldn’t invite any old friends for a stay in the White House, as they were either dead (the DFOB list), under indictment (Jim Guy Tucker), or in jail (the McDougals).
maha
Bush doesn’t have friends who don’t give him money.
John Cole
Gary- I apologize. I should have added the word ‘many.’ That would have been correct in this case, as the majority of the Democrats tried to claim this was the same thing as Clinton, while some, like Mark Kleiman, got it right.
At any rate, the simple fact of the matter is tha tit is the Democrats who have been launching specious attacks from the very beginning of this administration.
As usual, you ignore the gist of this post (which I assume you agree with- these aren’t the same thing), and nitpick my rhetoric.