Why would Bill Clinton compare Tea Partiers to Timothy McVeigh?

Originally posted at "State of the Nation" at The Desk of Brian, www.deskofbrian.com: http://sites.google.com/site/thedeskofbrian/state-of-the-nation/whywouldbillclintoncompareteapartierstotimothymcveigh

Bill Clinton commemorated the anniversary of the horrific Oklahoma City Bombing by comparing Tea Party protesters to Timothy McVeigh, blaming advocates of small government for the bombing fifteen years prior.

Clinton is claiming that McVeigh and others:

"...took to the ultimate extreme an idea advocated in the months and years before the bombing by an increasingly vocal minority: the belief that the greatest threat to American freedom is our government, and that public servants do not protect our freedoms, but abuse them."

For the most point, the Tea Party protesters have been non-violent, vocal dissent against big government, endless spending, encouraging the principles of the Constitution and our Founding Fathers. Bill Clinton, along with the extreme left, the mainstream media want to stigmatize the group by associating them with Timothy McVeigh and his ilk.

Unconscionable.

One might jump to the conclusion that President Clinton is truly maligning the Tea Party members, strategizing with the Obama administration in the transparent campaign to marginalize the Tea Parties.

I'll take a different look and assert that Bill Clinton is behaving as Bill Clinton always has and always will, in his best interest.

President Clinton may want us to believe he's naive, but in fact, I believe is using the opportunity to re-write history.

Timothy McVeigh has revealed to the world why he bombed the Federal Office in Oklahoma City and that's the government's action in Waco, Texas two years prior.

"I explain herein why I bombed the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. I explain this not for publicity, nor seeking to win an argument of right or wrong. I explain so that the record is clear as to my thinking and motivations in bombing a government installation. I chose to bomb a federal building because such an action served more purposes than other options. Foremost, the bombing was a retaliatory strike; a counter attack, for the cumulative raids (and subsequent violence and damage) that federal agents had participated in over the preceding years (including, but not limited to, Waco.) From the formation of such units as the FBI's "Hostage Rescue" and other assault teams amongst federal agencies during the '80's; culminating in the Waco incident, federal actions grew increasingly militaristic and violent, to the point where at Waco, our government - like the Chinese - was deploying tanks against its own citizens. "

McVeigh equates the bombing to hitting a government location in Serbia NOT a protest against "big government" or massive government spending.

McVeigh's actions are heinous, criminal and deplorable on every level and Clinton's efforts to distort McVeigh's intentions to label Americans practicing their free speech is nearly as deplorable.

The Waco Siege ended on April 19, 1993 and two years later, to the day, Timothy McVeigh enacted his distorted and twisted form of justice. Fifteen years later, a former President attempted to politicize the horrors of that day to re-write and protect his legacy and slander protesters.

Pathetic day in history on every level.

http://www.digital-exp.com/doco/TimothyMcVeigh.html

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/04/19/ED5I1D1191.DTL