In a recent blog I wrote about the despicable, hypocritical Special Prosecutor Kenneth Starr: Clinton, Whitewater, Lewinsky, etc. The Daily Kos has run an expanded update to Starr’s duplicitousness under this headline:
Kenneth Starr, or How I learned to Stop Worrying about Republican Attacks on the Clintons
So, Kenneth Starr was fired from his position as president of Baylor University due to the university’s failure to properly address accusations of sexual assault against members of the Baylor football team. Well, not totally fired.
He has resigned his position as chancellor, but will be allowed to continue teaching law. I hope he will be teaching criminal law. After all, it takes one to know one. He is nothing more than a low life in a tie.
Starr joined Baylor in 2010, and “appears to have been devoted to helping turn the school into a football powerhouse,” according to a recent article on the unfolding scandal by Sue Ambrose and David Tarrant of The Dallas Morning News. Why? Does he think this sort of behavior makes men out of wimps like him?
What’s interesting is the superficial examination of the sexual assault that was done by the university, which was condemned by the prosecution when the case went to trial as “cursory and unprofessional,” and Starr’s weak, written defense of it … The law professor has forgotten the meticulous nature in which he followed issues inconsequential to the case for which he was hired to pursue in the Clinton case. It has taken all these years, but now we know what a windbag of sleaze Starr really is.
It is interesting because during the 1990s Starr would stop at nothing in his attempt to indict a president. Golly, he had the stamina of an athlete back then, maybe like a football player. Now he can’t carry the water bucket. Nor can he build Baylor’s football program by turning his chubby cheek at criminal behavior. Hmm, one wonders what else he may have buried under a pile of football recruiting reports on his desk. I think we are going to find that there is more to this.
Back then, he displayed the same callous disregard for the impact of his actions on another 20-something young woman that he showed for the women of Baylor as he refused to allow anything to stop the school from building a football powerhouse. He said he was pursuing the truth back then. Today, it seems, some truths are better off buried. The American public doesn’t have to know “everything.”
… Regardless of what one may think of the behavior of Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky, it is worth keeping in mind that when the affair (using the term loosely) between the two of them began, she was 21 years old, fresh out of college. Yes, reprehensible personal behavior.
Perhaps a year or two older than the young women who were raped at Baylor. No means no, Mr. Starr.
The article continues with more of the same, and also quotes from different sources, including the New York Times. As you might imagine, there are also a plethora of comments to this specific piece. I will close my blog with a paragraph that I think pretty well sums up the entire case of hypocrisy Starr has offered us on a platter.
It does seem that the men who impeached President Clinton were some of the last men on Earth who were morally or ethically qualified to do so. And they did it based on a report that was clearly a partisan political attack designed only to delegitimize a Democratic president. In March 2002, Josh Marshall, writing for Salon discussed the “$70 million bag of garbage” that Starr produced.
… and on, and on, and on.