There was a deliberately planned effort to gas infants and toddlers at Waco in order to get the Branch Davidians to give up.
Let me repeat that: Bill Clinton and Janet Reno deliberately gassed children. They engaged in a calculated program of physical and psychological torture in order to end a siege that inept Federal Law Enforcement -- more concerned with showing off it's toys and tactics than enforcing the actual law, at the time -- created by eschewing the relatively-simple prospect of arresting David Koresh while he was at the supermarket, and instead chose to storm the Branch Davidian Compund.
And by the way, the word "Compound" is even suspect; it makes it sound as if this was some sort of Fortress of Doom. It was a church, with outbuildings, on an old farm. Why is it that when the word "Compound" is applied to the Kennedys, it's supposed to evoke visions of regal splendor, but when it's applied to a bunch of religious mental patients, it's an indication of Nazi tendencies and sedition? Oh, right, I forgot; propaganda, and all that.
You know, I wonder what Bill Clinton -- and especially the people On His Side of the Political Spectrum -- would have to say if you asked them the following question;
Given that Bill Clinton ordered the intentional infliction of physical and psychological pain against enemies of the State, by use of gunfire, toxic gasses, loud rock music and other noises, withholding of food, water and fuel, intentionally inflicting physical discomfort, withholding medical care from the wounded, and attempting to manipulate the emotional state of the Branch Davidians to effect their surrender, which resulted in the deaths of 80 people -- including 25 children who were NOT targets of the original Law Enforcement action -- just What, then, is your objection to waterboarding terrorists captured upon an actual battlefield in military actions which have Congressional authorization?
Compared to what Bill Clinton and Janet Reno did at Waco, every detainee at Gitmo is on vacation.
When Bill isn't conveniently forgetting his own repressive past, he's screaming that Tea Parties are a mortal threat to democracy and decency, and will lead some of the more weak-willed amongst us to do terrible, nasty things. Unfortunately some of the more weak-willed amongst us have already done terrible, nasty things. They come from all walks of life; they are Congressmen who make false accusations of racism, they're Union Thugs who attempt to disrupt public meetings and beat up people who stand up to them, there are racial hustlers who equate honest and principled disagreement with President Obama as a re-emergence of the Klan, and the next-best-thing to the re-implementation of slavery.
Bill's repeated assertion that American citizens utilizing their rights to assembly, free speech and petition of the government and their elected officials about their legitimate grievances sounds much like the old European Monarchists did when they argued that the Crown was beyond reproach. Curiously, this argument (the Throne is sacrosanct and it's Majesty should not be ridiculed, or even questioned) is the very same argument many Old-Line European Conservatives would have used -- and often did -- to justify the worst abuses of Royal Power and Authority.
Someone who's this clueless -- and this guilty -- should really just shut his fat yap, already, and hide in shame. Of, course, I've forgotten that Bill has no shame.