It's doubtful there will be many fireworks, even where they disagree strongly. Both are making their best attempts at being statesmen.
The Globe and Mail has a write-up on the upcoming event and these graphes caught my eye:
Although both presidents demonstrated an ability to compromise in the interests of bipartisan consensus — Mr. Clinton toughened welfare rules while Mr. Bush expanded public health care and funding for education — their opponents saw them only as the personifications of the evil of the other side.It's true that a lot of effort was put into impeaching Clinton. Far more than was probably necessary. But to make the say that war crimes and crimes against humanity is tantamount
So Mr. Clinton was impeached for abasing his office after lying about an affair with an intern.
And the wild-eyed are still trying to get Mr. Bush and his vice-president, Dick Cheney, tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity for their handling of the war on terror.
The meter doesn't exist to measure the time and energy that has been wasted on all of this.
with perjury is disappointing. I haven't heard anyone serious in the current debate discuss charging Bush or Cheney. The lawyers Jay Bybee and John Yoo, yes, but not Bush or Cheney.
The ease the journalist makes this comparison is surprising, especially from a Canadian journalist. Clinton lied about an affair. Bush and Cheney authorized war crimes that we tried both Germans and Japanese after WWII with.
Passing off the desire to see justice as a purely partisan act doesn't demonstrate enough respect for the rule of law or the United States Constitution.