Diary

If Cosby, Why Not Clinton?

This is not a new idea.  While the nation turns its back on comedian Bill Cosby, the post-White House career  of Bill Clinton soars.  Yet, what is the difference between the two scenarios?  As far as this writer can tell, Cosby used drugs; Clinton used his political prestige.  What it boils down to is that Clinton has a better damage control/public relations apparatus behind him.

This is not to minimize the allegations against Bill Cosby.  If he did what he is accused of, then he deserves to pay the price.  But, let us stay in Hollywood for a moment and see how Bill Cosby has been treated- tried and convicted in the court of public opinion- versus how a more liberal Hollywood icon- Roman Polanski is treated.  Polanski is a convicted child rapist.  Although he plea bargained his case down to unlawful sexual intercourse, he fled the country and remains in France.  Hollywood has rallied around this convicted rapist of a 13-year-old.  Make no mistake: he did the acts for which he was accused.  Take this quote from Swiss film maker Otto Weisser upon Polanski’s arrest in 2009 in Switzerland: “He’s a brilliant guy and he made a little mistake 32 years ago.”  So…when a liberal filmmaker drugs, sodomizes and has intercourse with a 13-year-old, it is a “little mistake.”

Compare this with the treatment of Bill Cosby whose television reruns of his shows from the past were cancelled in the wake of these allegations.  The action was swift and across the board.  Cosby did not plea bargain anything.  Cosby did not sodomize a minor.  Cosby did not drug a minor, nor did he have intercourse with a minor.  Cosby’s main offense, it seems, is that he built a career around telling the black community that they had to take more responsibility for their actions and stop placing the blame elsewhere.  Hence, the rapist of a 13-year-old is celebrated and Hollywood icons like Martin Scorsese, Woody Allen (who knows a thing or two about sex with minors) and Harvey Weinstein rush to Polanski’s defense, while someone who does not spout the liberal line of black victimization is shunned, denounced, and defamed.

Which brings up the subject of Bill Clinton who has been accused of rape at worse and sexual harassment at best.  The case of Juanita Broadrrick- Jane Doe #5- is illustrative.  For dealing with the trauma of rape, Clinton had this advice: “Better get some ice for that.”  Of course, there are the Willey accusations, Paula Jones- who received an out of court settlement (the civil equivalent of a plea bargain), and Monica Lewinsky among others.  The Left excuses these actions under the rubric that his public policies were greater than his personal principles.  I have heard some people say that these incidents were between him and Hillary to work out, or that this was his personal life and should not reflect upon his presidential legacy.  Really?  Rape is now one’s “personal life” if you are a liberal?  That is like saying… well, drugging, sodomizing and raping a 13-year-old is a “little mistake made 32 years ago.”

This whole discussion has nothing to do with rape or violence against women, or sexism, or sexual harassment.  Rape, no matter how committed and by whomever, is a morally outrageous act of violence.  Using one’s influence as a filmmaker, as a politician, or as a beloved television icon to exact unwanted sex from females under the influence of drugs or the influence of prestige and political power is inconsequential to the conversation.  Clinton, despite his emphatic “I did not have sex with that woman” quote, moved the goal posts when he and a lapdog media changed the definition of “sex.”  Technically speaking, after all, mutual masturbation (she with a cigar) is not having sex in the Clinton definition.  Even still, that does not explain the Jones, Willey or Broadrrick incidents, the latter, if true, would fit the classic definition of aggravated rape.

If Cosby is truly guilty of the things of which he is accused, he must pay the piper.  As best as I can tell, no conservative has rushed to Cosby’s defense.  Instead, people like Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh were critical of the obvious double standard being enforced here.  Recent revelations that Cosby purchased “date rape” drugs are not encouraging for him.  Regardless, no jury or judge has decided an allegation.  Bill Clinton walked out of a deposition after the cigar incident was brought up and there was never, ever a categorical denial on his part- just a lot of vagaries, avoidance, refusals, and re-definitions.  Never mind Polanski- he pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual intercourse plain and simple.  Polanski has the liberal Hollywood elite in his corner.  Clinton has the liberal media in his corner.  If Polanski made a “little mistake 32 years ago,” then so did Cosby.  If Clinton groped, fondled, mutually masturbated or even raped someone in a hotel room in Arkansas, then Polanski and Clinton should be held to the same standards that now dog Bill Cosby.  If Cosby is guilty of the accusations, he deserves his just due.  We on the Right just seek that this obvious double standard does not exist.  Rape is rape and a morally outrageous act of violence against women no matter the perpetrator. And that is where any difference of opinion ends.