CANDICE JACKSON’S “THEIR LIVES”
CANDICE JACKSON’S “THEIR LIVES” -A LOOK AT HOW THE CLINTONS AND N.O.W.
REALLY FEEL ABOUT WOMEN
` by
Ken Eliasberg
When we looked at Ed Klein’s recent exposition of Hillary Clinton, we dealt with the What and When of what Hillary knew as well as the lengths that she (and her husband) would go to get her back into the White House. However, we never really took a penetrating look at the “Who” that was involved in Clinton’s sexual scandals (of which there were legion). That was left to Candice Jackson to explore in great depth (and even greater breadth) in her new book, Their Lives—The Women Targeted by the Clinton Machine, dealing with 7 of Clinton’s more memorable sexual ventures. Thank God, Ms. Jackson limited the undertaking to just these 7; to deal with all of his escapades (the known and the unknown) might require an 8 or 10 volume undertaking (and, quite frankly, would be just a bit tedious). Indeed, Their Lives, a worthwhile read, flirts with the tedious with some degree of regularity. Please don’t misunderstand, it is a good book, but it would be even better were it a hundred pages shorter.
That said, I commend the book to anyone who would really like some insight into the Clinton’s behavior. And here, I am not talking about just Bill’s predatory sexual behavior—that is a subject better left to the ministrations of Danielle Steele, i.e. only a cheap romance could do justice to Slick Willie’s sex life. What commends Ms. Jackson’s effort to the reader’s attention is her description of the lengths that the Clinton “search and destroy” team will go to punish a woman foolish enough to bed him and even more foolish to speak openly of it, even if such speech is compelled by legal process. These women are no longer women, once they have surfaced—they are “bimbos.” How’s that for a sweet reference to even a 1-night stand? Pretty classy, eh? And this is one point made abundantly clear in this book (and Klein’s)—that “class” and “Clinton” (either Clinton) is an oxymoron.
One point that needs to be made—certainly early and possibly often—is that, like Klein’s treatment of Hillary, this is not a tabloid journal effort. It is a very decent and long overdue treatment of these women whose lives were smashed by the Clinton hit squad, who did their level best, in their “damage control” efforts, to do as much damage as possible to these women, whose only crime, if you will, was to have the abominably poor judgment to sleep with Bill Clinton (or engage in some form of sexual conduct which Bill could label as something other than” sexual relations” —you know, oral sex is not a sexual relation to Bill, and, as a consquence, it is unfortunately being so regarded in many other areas of the country, e.g. Junior High Schools—thanks for that, Bill).
The reader is treated (?) to an in-depth look at these seven women and the damage that was done to them. And, frankly, it is somewhat heartrending to see anyone so treated. It also reminds us of how lilttle character either of the Clintons seems to possess. And, as a reminder of just how chilling their behavior was—as well as that of many high ranking Democrats who circled the wagons around Bill, knowing full well of his guilt - which is a useful lesson not just for its historical significance, but, more to the point, as a reminder of what we’ll get if we give Hill and Bill an encore.
That said, I have 2 criticisms which, while not going to the heart of its value, does go to the question of the occasional difficulty the reader may encounter in accessing that value. As I already indicated, I think the book is too long; it is overwritten. And more than occasionally it is both repetitious and too clinical—after all, how many ways are necessary to say misogynist?
However, notwithstanding these flaws, I recommend the book, not merely for its historical value, i.e. a walk down lover’s lane with Bill Clinton..No, not at all - in the case of the Clintons we may not be talking of just history. Thus, an open minded reader (are there any left?) would have to ask himself—do we want 8 more years of a tabloid presidency?
Oh, one final point. This book reveals a lot more than the tawdry details of Clinton’s adolescent libido. And, it is a lot more than a demonstration of the misogynistic treatment of Bill’s women (by both Bill and Hillary). It clearly demonstrates the moral relativism of the entire feminist movement who couldn’t wait to savage Clarence Thomas over an unsubstantiated allegation of a pubic hair on a coke can or a conversational reference to a porn film but sat silently by while their fearless leader was credibly accused of rape (Juanita Broaddrick), sexual assault (Kathleen Willey), indecent exposure in a rather ugly way (Paula Jones), and being fellated in the Oval Office by a 21-year old White House intern (Monica Lewinsky). Way to go girls!! I firmly believe that Bill Clinton could have had sex with a Saint Bernard on the White House lawn and PETA would have come out and said that he was just being kind to animals—that’s how shameless the left was in the face of not only Clinton’s sexual depredations, but, perhaps more to the point, his perjury and obstruction of justice. Can you imagine what the National Organization of Women (NOW) would have done if a Republican behaved in this manner?? Proving rather conclusively that with organizations like NOW, as well as with the Clintons, it has always been politics over principles.
Actually, I am not being entirely fair to Ms. Jackson’s effort here; it is far more than an effort to provide a peep hole through which the reader can gaze at the tawdry (and criminal) details of Clinton’s sex life. Indeed it is more than an effort to launch these women above the realm of the common and cheap, i.e. to give them a platform from which their humanity may be seen, so as to make them more than a mere statistic. In a larger sense, this book isn’t about THEM at all; it is about misogyny and how liberalism, in its great concern to see that its values are foisted on the public, not only loses sight of what’s happening on the individual level, it actually encourages misogynistic behavior. In short, this book is about the vast disconnect between the reality and the rhetoric of the gender equality that liberals are always preaching about.