General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why I'm Ready for President Obama to Leave the White House [View all]Enrique
(27,461 posts)and when the column below appeared in the National Review in 2001, there was no controversy. No calls for the author to get fired, no demanding the GOP denounce it, just a couple of columns in liberal publications pointing it out:
http://conwebwatch.tripod.com/stories/2001/update022301.html
"I hate Chelsea Clintion," John Derbyshire declares in his Feb. 15 column. He admits at first that he doesn't have a clear reason for doing so, but one certainly emerges: She's a Clinton -- more specifically, "the vile genetic inheritance of Bill and Hillary Clinton."
And the only genuine solution for dealing with this situation, Derbyshire writes, is death:
"Chelsea is a Clinton. She bears the taint; and though not prosecutable in law, in custom and nature the taint cannot be ignored. All the great despotisms of the past I'm not arguing for despotism as a principle, but they sure knew how to deal with potential trouble recognized that the families of objectionable citizens were a continuing threat. In Stalin's penal code it was a crime to be the wife or child of an "enemy of the people". The Nazis used the same principle, which they called Sippenhaft, "clan liability". In Imperial China, enemies of the state were punished "to the ninth degree": that is, everyone in the offender's own generation would be killed, and everyone related via four generations up, to the great-great-grandparents, and four generations down, to the great-great-grandchildren, would also be killed."