What got into former President Clinton during his debut interview on “Fox News Sunday”? Host Chris Wallace mentioned the 1993 “Black Hawk Down” episode in Somalia and al-Qaida’s later bombings of U.S. interests and asked, “Why didn’t you do more, connect the dots and put them out of business?” Clinton worked himself into a finger-wagging tantrum about Wallace’s “nice little conservative hit job on me” and the “false pretenses” of the interview, half of which was to be about his Clinton Global Initiative.
Clinton still seemed upset about that ABC docudrama and kept referring to former anti-terrorism chief Richard Clarke’s book. His spokesman later told the Washington Post that Clinton “came in prepared to respond to any attack on his record.” OK, but if he can’t calmly handle one question about how his White House handled terrorism now, how would he and his wife handle countless questions about that and other aspects of his record during a “Hillary Clinton for president” campaign?
And as Wallace told the Post, the surprise is not that he asked the terrorism question, but that no other TV interviewer asked it of Clinton during last week’s media blitz.
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- HLP on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
- okobserver on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- Chas on Open thread 11/23
178 Comments
Good for Bill.I was proud of him for lambasting Fux.I think next he should take on BillO for being such a lying prick.Cage match.No crying foul and “turning off the mikes” for papa bear.We could have Rush do the announcing if he isn’t too wigged out on downers.You go, Uncle Bill.
Clinton was 100% correct in his comments. Every time he tried to do something the rightie talking heads and their GOP sycophants in Congress hollared “Wag the Dog”
In the immortal words of Dan Akroyd, “Rhonda, you ignorant slut.”
Clinton pointed out that the Fox and other political “hit men” keep asking HIM if he he did enough on terror.
He simply asked the question, why doesn’t anybody–ANYBODY LIKE YOU RHONDA–ever ask if BUSH did enough?
The USS Cole had been attacked just a few months before Bush took office.
What did they do about that, RHONDA?
We breathlessly await your answer . . .
I tell u one thing… it was the best TV i have watched in a long time!
I’m watching the Fox News Spin right now and they are talking about Clintons emotions, not the facts within it.
President Clinton Should be pissed.
Some nerve to be accused of Wag the Dog, only later to be accused of not doing enough.
That vast right wing conspiracy started right here in Kansas by people like Todd Tiahrt,Sam Brownback and Senator Pat Roberts whose scumbag leadership has made a mockery of our state.
Just read it in his own words. Read about the days and hours they pissed away deliberating whether Clinton should be impeached for a personal matter. All the while terrorists were plotting to attack.
Why on earth isn’t Rhonda pissed about this. Why on earth has Senator Pat Roberts and the rest not been held accountable for their double standards.
Senator Roberts is a disgrace. Get angery and put off about that. Have the decency for just once to show some well deserved respect for President Clinton.can – Kansas)
Voting Record — Impeachment Trial of William (Bill) Jefferson Clinton
——————————————————————————–AmeriRoots Home Page Senate Index
——————————————————————————–
Allowed the House Managers to present their case.Allowed House Managers to depose witnesses.Allowed videotaping of witnesses.Allowed the House Managers to present transcripts and video of witnesses.Made trial a sham without any live testimony.Allowed the House Managers to present closing arguments.Allowed normal trial procedures in which closing arguments were not disclosed in advance.Voted to remove Mr. Clinton for perjury.Voted to remove Mr. Clinton for obstruction of justice.——————————————————————————–
Statement Taken From U.S. Senate Web Site February 25, 1999This section is taken verbatim from the official web site of Senator Roberts, except for editorial comments by Orville R. Weyrich, Jr. in square brackets of the form [ORWJr-- ] and minor touch-ups to the HTML.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – February 12, 1999
Statement of Kansas Senator Pat Roberts on Articles of Impeachment VotesI today voted to sustain both articles of impeachment of President William J. Clinton. I so voted because I believe the President is guilty of obstructing justice and lying to a grand jury and because I believe these crimes are so serious they warrant his removal from office.
This has been a difficult time for our nation. It has been a difficult time for me and for each Senator who was required to weigh the evidence and vote on the most important constitutional issue of our generation.
I listened to 18 days of debate and testimony covering nearly 70 hours. I reviewed 14 hours of taped testimony by three witnesses and the President. I spent many more hours reading the voluminous record of the impeachment articles and meeting with my fellow Senators in order to reach a conclusion that was 1) fair, 2) met the constitutional mandates and 3) best served the nation.
I did not seek that responsibility. I have, however, carried it out to the best of my ability.
As a Senate juror, I was asked to weigh whether the House articles of impeachment charging the President with lying and with obstructing justice were likely true or false and, if true, whether the offenses rose to a level that requires the President be removed from office.
I was especially impressed with testimony that misleading witnesses does indeed constitute obstruction of justice. I was equally swayed by the video testimony that painted a clear picture of a president willing to be untruthful and to encourage others to be untruthful in order to cover up abhorrent personal behavior.
I believe that any open-minded individual hearing what I heard and applying the principles of Kansas common sense would arrive at the same conclusions.
We in Kansas know that you don’t call witnesses in the middle of the night unless you want to sway them. The President did so.
We in Kansas know that you don’t urge hiding legal evidence under the bed unless you want to affect the outcome of a legal proceeding. The President did so.
We in Kansas know that you don’t hide behind the meaning of “is” when you are asked a direct question. The President did so.
Do these actions rise to the level envisioned by our founding fathers in the Constitution as “high crimes and misdemeanors” so warranting removal from office? Our Constitution requires that the threshold for that judgement must be set by each Senator sitting as a juror.
Again, I believe an open-minded individual applying Kansas common sense would reach the conclusion that I reached.
In similar circumstances, 182 individuals were convicted and jailed in 1997 for perjury. That same year, 144 persons were convicted and jailed for obstruction of justice. The Senate has removed from office federal judges found guilty of perjury.
Are we to have standards for the President different from standards applied to other citizens? Americans long ago rejected the imperial presidency. The President is not above the law. He is not a king.
In arriving at the conclusion this President should be removed from office I weighed whether his actions damaged the national security of the United States. Again, I concluded that the President, by his actions, has severely damaged his ability to act as a leader in the community of world nations at a time when solid leadership is needed.
This President has lost respect of our allies. His actions have emboldened our potential enemies, creating opportunities for them to act adversely to U.S. interests. Our foreign policy is adrift. The consequences to this generation and future generations are severe.
I am convinced that this President has used foreign policy and the power of his office for his own purposes in an effort to divert attention from the legal and personal problems he created.
Last February, as the President’s sordid affair surfaced, President Clinton threatened an attack on Iraq, complete with national town meetings and a cabinet road show.
Last August, as Monica Lewinsky testified, President Clinton ordered a missile attack on targets in the Sudan and Afghanistan. There is increasing evidence his hand-picked target in the Sudan was a mistake.
Last December, on the eve of the House impeachment vote, President Clinton ordered air strikes on Iraq. The result is murky at best, the reasons unclear.
Each time the President has acted, charges of “wag the dog” have reverberated around the globe. Whether those charges are true or false is no longer material. What is material is that the President of the United States is not credible. He is not trusted. He cannot act in the best interest of America.
He has lost the moral mantle of leadership.
He has selfishly placed this nation in jeopardy.
It is precisely this kind of situation, I am convinced, that worried America’s founding fathers as they devised the impeachment mechanism to remove a sitting president whose actions endangered the republic.
Senator Richard Lugar said this:
“We have been fortunate that this damaged presidency has occurred during a time of relative peace and prosperity. In times of war or national emergency it is often necessary for the President to call upon the nation to make great economic and personal sacrifices. In these occasions, our President had best be trustworthy a truth teller whose life of principled leadership and integrity we can count upon.”
The trial is concluded. The votes have been cast. It is important to note that our democratic institutions were tested and survived intact.
We are a strong nation because we have a strong people.
Working together to heal the wounds and put this behind us, we will emerge even stronger as a nation and as a people.
——————————————————————————–
This Web Site is Sponsored By:Weyrich Book ReviewsYOU TOO CAN SPONSOR THIS SITE! Send e-mail to find out how.
——————————————————————————–Copyright © 1999 Orville R. Weyrich, Jr.Permission is granted to view this material on the World Wide Web. All other rights reserved.
Information provided on this page is “AS-IS” with no warranty regarding its accuracy. Please report any suspected errors or comments to
Last updated: March
Ben
Please give an example of a Republican in Congress of ‘Hollering’ “Wag the Dog”.
I think that you will have a hard time finding any.
Tony – they don’t DARE talk about the facts in it – they know they are wrong and Clinton is right.
Clinton listed several examples; I do not have the time to do a literature search for you. However I do think someone else posted an old Pat Roberts memo on another thread.
Rhonda,
Your disdain for the factual record bristles in your smarmy and dishonest commentary. Drink the Republican media Kool-Aid much, Rhonda?
Here’s some evidence for you, Rhonda, about how it was GOP senators back in 2003 who argued that we should “cut and run” from Somalia afer our troops were killed there. Clinton was right, they were wrong. It’s been that way ever since. The GOP should stop lying about what Clinton did and did not do. And you should stop providing them with political cover for doing so. Doing so makes you a liar, too, Rhonda. Is that what they taught you at the KU Journalism School?
You’re such a media whore, Rhonda, that the only thing that gets your goat is when someone has the temerity to stand up to the media narrative that’s been disseminated and legitimated through repetition. When your sad, dishonest little version of events is challenged on factual grounds, all you can do is appeal to some faux notion of civility.
Here’s Glenn Greenwald, exceprted from his piece in Salon. Read it, Rhonda. Some debunking will do you good.
ksfarmgrrl,
As shills go, I’d take Values Boy over Rhonda Holman, any day.*********************************
“My analysis is set forth in the Salon post. Following are the full excerpts providing the factual support for that analysis:
GOP Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, speech on the Senate floor October 6, 1993
I supported our original mission, which was humanitarian in nature and limited in scope. I can no longer support a continued United States presence in Somalia because the nature of the mission is now unrealistic and because the scope of our mission is now limitless. . . . Mr. President, it is no small feat for a superpower to accept setback on the world stage, but a step backward is sometimes the wisest course. I believe that withdrawal is now the more prudent option.
GOP Sen. Dirk Kempthorne, speech on the Senate floor, October 6, 1993
Mr. President, the mission is accomplished in Somalia. The humanitarian aid has been delivered to those who were starving. The mission is not nation building, which is what now is being foisted upon the American people. The United States has no interest in the civil war in Somalia and as this young soldier told me, if the Somalis are now healthy enough to be fighting us, then it is absolutely time that we go home. . . It is time for the Senate of the United States to get on with the debate, to get on with the vote, and to get the American troops home.
GOP Minority Leader Sen. Robert Dole, Senate speech, October 5, 1993
I think it is clear to say from the meeting we had earlier with–I do not know how many Members were there–45, 50 Senators and half the House of Representatives, that the administration is going to be under great pressure to bring the actions in Somalia to a close. . . .
GOP Sen. Jesse Helms, Senate floor speech October 6, 1993:
All of which means that I support the able Senator from West Virginia–who, by the way, was born in North Carolina–Senator Robert C. Byrd, and others in efforts to bring an end to this tragic situation. The United States did its best to deliver aid and assistance to the victims of chaos in Somalia as promised by George Bush last December.
But now we find ourselves involved there in a brutal war, in an urban environment, with the hands of our young soldiers tied behind their backs, under the command of a cumbersome U.N. bureaucracy, and fighting Somalia because we tried to extend helping hands to the starving people of that far-off land. Mr. President, the United States has no constitutional authority, as I see it, to sacrifice U.S. soldiers to Boutros-Ghali’s vision of multilateral peacemaking. Again, I share the view of Senator Byrd that the time to get out is now.
President Clinton’s speech, on October 8, 1993, arguing against withdrawal
And make no mistake about it, if we were to leave Somalia tomorrow, other nations would leave, too. Chaos would resume, the relief effort would stop and starvation soon would return. That knowledge has led us to continue our mission. . . .
If we leave them now, those embers will reignite into flames and people will die again. If we stay a short while longer and do the right things, we’ve got a reasonable chance of cooling off the embers and getting other firefighters to take our place. . .
So, now, we face a choice. Do we leave when the job gets tough or when the job is well done? Do we invite the return of mass suffering or do we leave in a way that gives the Somalis a decent chance to survive? Recently, Gen. Colin Powell said this about our choices in Somalia: “Because things get difficult, you don’t cut and run. You work the problem and try to find a correct solution.” . . .
So let us finish the work we set out to do. Let us demonstrate to the world, as generations of Americans have done before us, that when Americans take on a challenge, they do the job right.
Sen. John Kerry, Senate floor speech, 10/7/93, supporting Clinton’s anti-withdrawal position
But, Mr. President, I must say I have also been jarred by the reactions of many of our colleagues in the U.S. Senate and in the Congress. I am jarred by the extraordinary sense of panic that seems to be rushing through this deliberative body, and by the strident cries for a quick exit, an immediate departure notwithstanding the fact that what we are doing in Somalia does not bear any resemblance to Grenada, to Panama, to Iraq, and most importantly, to Vietnam. . . .
We must recognize that any decision that we make about Somalia is not just a decision to get our troops home. It is not just a decision about looking out for the interests of the United States. There are extraordinary ramifications attached to the choice that we make in the next days in the Congress and in this country. . . .
Mr. President, we are in a situation now where withdrawal would send the wrong signal to Aidid and his supporters. It would encourage other nations to withdraw from the U.N. effort in Somalia and no doubt would result in the total breakdown of the operation and possibly the resumption of the cycle of famine and war which brought the United States and other members of the international community to Somalia in the first place.
Rightly or wrongly, the Bush administration committed us to this operation. We, as a nation, have accepted this responsibility. We should not panic and flee when the going gets rough. If we are going to withdraw, we have an obligation to do so in a responsible manner, in a way that does not undermine the operation or leave the Somali people to a worse fate. I think the President’s plan, as currently outlined, will allow us to step aside responsibly.
New York Times article, October 6, 1993, by then-reporter Thomas Friedman
As hundreds of additional United States troops with special weapons and aircraft began heading to Somalia, a wave of hostility toward the widening operation swept Congress. . . . But Mr. Aspin and Mr. Christopher were besieged by skeptical lawmakers, who scorched them with demands for a clear road map for an exit from Somalia, coupled with bitter complaints that the policy goals were unclear or unrealistic.
It is not clear whether the critics can assemble sufficient votes to pass a law requiring Mr. Clinton to stop the operation. But Congressional anxiety, already high, has been fueled by a wave of constituents’ telephone calls reflecting outrage over the prospect of a new hostage crisis, and television pictures of Somali crowds dragging a dead American servicemen through the streets. . . .
Mr. Christopher said the United States wanted to withdraw its forces when possible, “but not before our job is done of providing some security.”
New York Times, October 6, 1993
A wave of hostility toward the military operation in Somalia swept Congress today, forcing the White House to send two Cabinet secretaries to Capitol Hill to try to calm critics and plead for additional time to formulate a new policy.
“It’s Vietnam all over again,” said Senator Ernest F. Hollings, Democrat of South Carolina, who is in a group of conservatives calling for quick withdrawal from Somalia. . . .
Mr. McCain, a prisoner of war in the Vietnam War, said of Mohammed Farah Aidid, who has been blamed for attacks on United Nations peacekeepers: “We should tell Mr. Aidid that we want the Americans back. Otherwise he will pay sooner or later. Then we should come home.”
As always, no matter how many times it occurs, it is truly disturbing how there seems to be no limit on the false propaganda and rank historical revisionism which can be disseminated by this administration and its followers and uncorrected by our national media. My full analysis of this is here.
posted by Glenn Greenwald
http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/
Heckler – Pat Roberts words:
“I am convinced that this President has used foreign policy and the power of his office for his own purposes in an effort to divert attention from the legal and personal problems he created.
Last February, as the President’s sordid affair surfaced, President Clinton threatened an attack on Iraq, complete with national town meetings and a cabinet road show.
Last August, as Monica Lewinsky testified, President Clinton ordered a missile attack on targets in the Sudan and Afghanistan. There is increasing evidence his hand-picked target in the Sudan was a mistake.
Last December, on the eve of the House impeachment vote, President Clinton ordered air strikes on Iraq. The result is murky at best, the reasons unclear.
Each time the President has acted, charges of “wag the dog” have reverberated around the globe. Whether those charges are true or false is no longer material. What is material is that the President of the United States is not credible. He is not trusted. He cannot act in the best interest of America.”
Have a hard time finding any?
Heh, wrong again, Heckler:
http://www.texnews.com/1998/opinion/wag0823.html
. . . firebrand Sen. Dan Coats, R-Ind., who wants Clinton to resign, [saw] a Monica plot: “He’s under a cloud of doubt. I’m on the Intelligence Committee and this is a total surprise. I wonder if the president was desperate to avoid his personal problems?”
Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., [rushed in] to charge Clinton with trying to “focus away from his collateral problem.”
Heckler:
Maybe you should read the blog. I posted the entire comments made by senator pat roberts reasons for voting to impeach President Clinton. It was posted on the senate website. Read all of it.
Clinton was accused of Wag The Dog 24/7. Every republican was saying it, as well as every neocon talking head.
It was truly strange watching the normally suave, controlled former President Clinton explode when he got a semi-tough question.
I’m sure that President Bush would love to go off on some reporters and their insulting questions, but he obviously can’t due to his position.
Mr. Clinton apparently feels that former presidents are not held to that level of dignity.
Ben
Very good, just a moment while I pull my muddy boot from my bleeding mouth, or is that your boot.
You should note however this statement was in the context of the impeachment vote, long after the military response took place. There was no outcry immediately following the action, as a matter of fact I think that you will find that the Republican leadership was publicly supportive of Clinton’s action. This statement by Roberts is months later after much more information was available for him to make his judgment.
I kneel before you Immenance.
I’m proud of Bill Clinton for having the nerve to tell Chris about that smirk he has when asking a well-placed question.
Clinton is right. Why hasn’t Chris Wallace (or anybody for Fox News) asked these same questions of George W. Bush and his cronies?
At least Clinton regrets not getting bin Laden. Hell, George W. Bush doesn’t even think about bin Laden anymore (his own words). What is worse? George only pulls bin Laden out of the background to drum up votes by scaring everyong with the big boogeyman.
The Republicans have always known that if Bill Clinton was to ever run again – he would beat any of them. And they can’t stand that.
If this had been Rush Limbaugh shaking his finger in Bill Clinton’s face, all your Bushies would be salivating to pay for another showing!
That’s the trouble with you Republicans, you want to say and do what you want and if anybody else does, they are wrong.
Word of the military strike spread among House members as they were walking into their respective party meetings to map out strategy for the impeachment debate.
Many Republicans were unable to contain their anger, voicing suspicions that the attack was politically timed to distract the nation from the president’s domestic woes.
“He’s a liar, and he can’t be trusted,” shouted Rep. Dana Rohrbacher, R-Calif. as he walked into the meeting.
A number said it only reinforced their belief that the president should be removed from office.
“The suspicions some people have about the president’s motives in this attack is a powerful argument for impeachment,” said House Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Irving. “After months of lies the president has given millions of people around the world reason to doubt that he has sent Americans into battle for the right reason.”
Rep. Joe Barton, R-Ennis, said that “today’s events have reinforced the need for President Clinton to resign or be removed from office.”
In a highly unusual move, Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss, issued a news release just moments before the bombing saying he opposed the military action.
Others rushed to the television cameras to condemn the president’s motives.
“It is obvious that he is doing it for political reasons, and I and others are outraged,” Rep. Gerald Solomon, an outspoken Republican from New York, told Cable News Network.
“Drop a bomb and your ratings go up 10 points,” said Larry Sabato, political science professor at the University of Virginia, who believes that the president factored in political considerations in deciding to launch the attack the day before the impeachment debate.
He noted this is the second time the president has taken military action when he was in trouble. In August, Clinton sent cruise missiles into Afghanistan and the Sudan days after he admitted to an improper relationship with Lewinsky.
At the time, the events were likened to the movie “Wag the Dog,” where a president embroiled in a sex scandal concocts a fake war to distract voters.
December 17, 1998, Thursday 3 STAR EDITION
SECTION: A; Pg. 1
LENGTH: 870 words
HEADLINE: U.S. hammers Iraqi targets;Assault fans bigger fires on the Hill
SOURCE: Staff
BYLINE: BENNETT ROTH, Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau
Boy, when you’re wrong, Heckler, you are really, really wrong.
HECKLER,I admire your readiness to admit a mistake.Can you give paulfrosell and Nathan a lesson in humility?
Clinton only did what every other liar does when confronted with the truth: explode and deny deny deny.
I was waiting for another episode of “I did not have sex….”
It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly American criminal class except Congress…..Mark Twain
So if the Republicans were so worked up about Bill Clinton using military to distract from his own impeachment troubles – then why do these same Republicans praise George W. Bush for using distractions away from the Iraq war?
If it was wrong for Clinton then it is wrong for George W.
Oh, I forgot, they are the party of do as I say and not as I do.
So you think Clington just uses the deny-deny-deny trick? Well what about Bush when he uses the trick lie-lie-lie?
Hmmm, which is worse?A presidential and patriotic BJ,or starting wars that kill many thousands?If you’re a golfnut, it must be the BJ.Sould be KSWingnut.
Tracy – For those pure sainted Republicans the choice has to be the BJ. After all, isn’t every Republican faithful to their spouse?
Assuming the apparent implication that President Clinton was influenced by political criticism from the right into not doing more on the anti-terror front, aren’t we left with what the man has frequently been accused of; namely putting political consideration above all else?
KSGolfnut–
Thanks for that post.
I think I finally figured out why you people got so exercised about the Monica Lewinsky.
You never get a bj.
Hence, golf . . .
Clever, he’s damned if he did and if he didn’t, right Outlander?
You are a true conservative whore.
You’re probably listening to Rush “DrugsRUs” right now . . .
Clinton was exactly right when he said in the interview that he did SOMETHING. He set up a counter-terrorism strategy, put Clarke in charge, and attacked Al Qaeda targets.
Eight months after he took office, GW had done exactly NOTHING to fight terror.
i like golf and bj”s….what does that say about me?
What can I say after that complete roasting except to concur. Rhonda, you slut.
Outlander,
In your universe, is “semi-tough” the equivalent of “dishonest” and “misleading?”
More to the point, I recall the Chimperor’s response to a question that was both honest AND tough: “I’m the decider.”
The conservative, far right wing republicans conveniently forget that republicans had control of Congress during most of the Clinton years. If they are so wrapped up in honor and integrity why don’t they put up a fuss about the current Republican Congress refusal to investigate the outrageous war profiteering, the continued assault on military support programs in the budget (in the emergency appropriations bill earlier this year, they voted to remove 2 Billion from the Military Personnel programs, their initiative to cut medical funding to the troops by lessening the amount Tricare and Medicare payments to Doctors. It doesn’t take a brain surgeon to realize that it’s because they continue to take PAC money from the military industrial complex — investigating the profiteering will effect there stock portfolios and their pockt books. These are the same people that have given themselves 6 pay raises in the last 8 years and yet refuse to increase the minimum wage. It was under Clintons presidency that welfare reform occur. Everyone should do themselves and the rest of the country a favor and become independents so they can make decisions logically based on facts not the party (both parties) line of crap.
Clark– you’re a DEMOCRAT!
heheheh CF
Actually, you can have BOTH values boy and rhonda. Hell, I’ll even throw in paul!
A shill is a shill is a shill….
I have a hard time telling them apart.
You’ve got it wrong people, George W. did do something in those first 8 months – he fired Richard Clarke.
Why I wonder? Perhaps they knew Clarke would not go along with their invade Iraq plan?
Jeesh, I was just asking a question Capn. Incidently, you didn’t answer, unless an insult is an answer.
Trying to deal with logic really sets you off, I notice.
CLINTON: “I’m being asked this on the Fox network. ABC just had a right-wing conservative run in their little Pathway to 9/11, falsely claiming it was based on the 9/11 Commission report, with three things asserted against me directly contradicted by the 9/11 Commission report. … And I think it’s very interesting that all the conservative Republicans, who now say I didn’t do enough, claimed that I was too obsessed with bin Laden. All of President Bush’s neo-cons thought I was too obsessed with bin Laden. They had no meetings on bin Laden for nine months after I left office. All the right-wingers who now say I didn’t do enough said I did too much — same people.Over a quarter million Americans stood up to ABC and beat back the right-wing Republican 9/11 propaganda that tries to cover up the Bush administration’s huge failures to protect America before and after the attacks.”
Yesterday Bill Clinton did exactly what Democrats need to do in this election — to stand up to the right-wing and tell the truth. We will not let the Republicans twist history and distort reality.
Is Bush just the Worst President Ever or the Worst President Possible?
Don’t get mad, outhouse, it’s just a question . . .
Begging a thousand pardons but, I think remedying the current Middle East situation and winning the War on Terror is a much bigger more important issue than your Republican /Democrat, Left-Wing/ Right-Wing political squabbling.
:)
Bill Clinton probably energized the Democrats and some independents to go vote this year. There is a majority of Americans who are sick and tired of the Religious Right and the Republicans trying to ram everything down our throats without even so much as a question to be raised to them.
But thanks to reruns of the news soundbites and the Internet, most of the rest of us that don’t watch Fox News (because we are smarter than that) now know that Bill Clinton dressed down Chris Wallace and Fox News. The Democrats do have backbone and they need to learn to use it.
Capn, you assume that everyone takes blogging as seriously as you. There is a real problem with the tone of political discourse in this country. Take a chill pill.
But winning the war on terror has nothing to do carrying on hair gel for your plane trip. This is the kind of nonsense we have been getting from the Bushies since this stupid war began.
The real war on terror has been made worse by George W. Bush’s policies. And you expect him and his cronies to win this war?
We need completely different thinking and we need to get back to a balanced Congress – obviously when one party has control it goes to their little pointy heads.
CapnAmerica…
and very proud of it.
Cheers for Clinton. As stated above, it is time for the Dems to stand up and call a Faux a Faux. Slowly the Democrats are finding their nads. Slick Willie once again shows the way and Howard Dean is still the man we need to lead the party.A howl in the wilderness is a good place to start getting people’s attention.
Suza,
If you want rational yet alternate views on winning the War on Terror, I invite you to check out what I posted in the “War in Iraq hurting War on Terror, but what to do now thread” I too think the president is a fool for thinking he can subjugate the people of the Middle East through force of arms. The war on terror can only be one diplomatically.
won diplomatically.
typo correction
If this had been Rush Limbaugh shaking his finger in Bill Clinton’s face, all your Bushies would be salivating to pay for another showing!Posted by: CR | September 25, 2006 at 12:59 PM
It is not too late for another showing!
Click on EXCLUSIVE VIDEO: Bill Clinton on ‘FOX News Sunday’ | Part 2.
At the following web site: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,215445,00.html
Almost everything Clinton said was a bald faced pathological lie.
And you call conservatives the wingnuts?
Amazing!
Hnak
For all you Democrats and Republicans at each other’s throats, I invite you to meditate on the following phrase:
“A house divided, cannot stand.”
CapnAmerica
Very good, you found the ones I expected Ben to find. Those were actually “at the time” of the attacks. But I don’t think that you will find any more. Republicans publicly supported Clinton. The “Wag the Dog” business was a product of the press and punditry and talk radio.
” Republicans publicly supported Clinton.”
OMG, talk about jumpin’ the shark!
I want some of what heckler is smokin’…..
Heckler…
Wag The Dog was the product of spineless politicians like Senator Pat Roberts. He said it. They all said it.
While Clinton was bombing the smithereens out of bad guys, your guys were talking about sex.
HANK–HORSE POOPIE.
heheheheh cin!
“While Clinton was bombing the smithereens out of bad guys, your guys were talking about sex.”
And speaking of sex…
While the GOP has been “bombing the heck” outa gay people, so to speak…
…our guys have been talking about making peace in the middle east!!
So much for the party of peace and prosperity, much less freedom or choice.
IOKIYAAR
After the Oklahoma City Bombing, Clinton wanted to label every item that could possibly used to make homemade bombs. Remeber the Anti-Terrorism bill?
July 30 1996, CNN reported that Bill Clinton urged Congress to swiftly pass legistlation for anti-terrorism. He was stonewalled from his efforts.
As a matter of fact here’s an excerpt…..
“We need to keep this country together right now. We need to focus on this terrorism issue,” Clinton said during a White House news conference.
But while the president pushed for quick legislation, Republican lawmakers hardened their stance against some of the proposed anti-terrorism measures.
Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Mississippi, doubted that the Senate would rush to action before they recess this weekend. The Senate needs to study all the options, he said, and trying to get it done in the next three days would be tough.”
After Congress gutted the bill agianst terrorism, the Republicans proceeded to treat Bill as if he were a loon. Who’s more cupable here?Obviously, republicans have done everything to refute the claims. But how can they when 60 minutes, MSNBC and CNN have it in their archives?
They do love to talk about sex, dont they?
Too bad they obviously arent getting any. Must explain their facination with guns.
Just think how ballistic he would have gone if Chris Wallace had brought up the issue about Slick allowing technological secrets to be given to China in exchange for campaign contributions. Wooooeeeyyy!!
I dont think he would have gone ballistic.
Just said “pakistan? or india?”
Mr. Obvious–
Thanks to a link to a respected news source.
Oh, wait, you don’t have one.
And I’m not just talking about what’s not in your hand.
*****
Nice post, Jermaine. Looking forward to hearing more from you!
Hank, the once proud defender of the Right has been reduced to “he’s a liar, he’s a liar, he’s a liar!”
Sucks to be him.
Ksfrmgrrl . . . hey, hey good-looking, you’re still the kick in the pants ’round these here parts!
Ah, it’s so good to see all the clinton jock-sniffers and apologists out on cue. I see that the lesson of the barking dog has not yet been learned. lmosrfao
Shrub and clinton are both traitors and in a perfect world they would be swinging from different branches of the same big old oak tree!
Viva La Raza Blanco!!
*sigh*
This tired ass political bickering is getting us absolutely nowhere!
You are all such children with your “Nya nya, I told you so” knee-jerk reactions. Where are the practical ideas which will get us out of this present predicament we’re in? I would be happy to vote for Democrats if they came up with workable solutions rather than acting like children.
Cin
Roberts quotes were after the fact, during the impeachment process. They were not made while we were attacking someone. They were made in retrospect, after analyzing the actions we took, the affect of the attacks, after analyzing the results. After seeing information that we do not have access to, detailed information.
These words of Roberts say it all-”Each time the President has acted, charges of “wag the dog” have reverberated around the globe. Whether those charges are true or false is no longer material. What is material is that the President of the United States is not credible. He is not trusted. He cannot act in the best interest of America.
He has lost the moral mantle of leadership.
He has selfishly placed this nation in jeopardy. ”
If Bill Clinton had acted like an adult instead of like a freshman who found a key to the teachers lounge and snuck in after hours, He wouldnt have had this problem. He would have still gone into history as a severly mediocre president but he could have done it with some honor.
“Clinton did far more damage to a blue dress than he ever did to Al Quaida.”
Ann Coulter
Good ol’ terrorist-loving Ann. Now THERE is a real authority!
Ann Coulter–I wouldn’t fuck her with Hank Price’s dick.
One thing the Republicans cannot stand and will never get over is the fact that Bill Clinton still has more approval rating than George W. Bush. Now that has to be sticking in there claws.
CR,
Totally. Six years later, all they can do is gnash their teeth and play pocket pool whenever the Big Dog roughs them up before a still-admining public.
Wingnut bitches, once again, your hate is showing. And this after all of your insistence on being all about the logic and rational argumentation.
I still say if Democrats would run Bill Clinton as the Vice Presdiential candidate, they would win hands down.
I’ve seen where constitutionally this would be okay. Now wouldn’t that just be the very kick in the pants these arrogant Evangelical Christian Republicans need?
The majority of Americans are catching on to the Bush administration and Republicans lying ways.
Dear CF,
I’m really looking forward to meeting you some day.
Hank
Bill Clinton could run as an independent and still win. At least Clinton can pick up a phone and call most any world leader and they would take his call. Just look at how much money he helped raise for his Global Iniative project.
Heckler:
The fact the Roberts made these comments regarding the Clinton Impeachment are what make them most powerful.
And the Wag the Dog comments came before during and after the Impeachment.What is devastating to Roberts is that he actually sighted one of his reasons for impeaching Clinton as Wag The Dog.
He was disgusted that Clinton used military force against Afghanistan and Iraq. Imagine that. The same Pat Roberts that looks the other way… after Bush led us into a phony mess.
Bill Clinton was the only one acting like an adult. For eight years he was the only one working while your party disgraced this country engaging in a witchhunt. A bunch of republican wife cheats trying destroy another man for doing the same. Instead of engaging in their childlike behavior, Clinton kept his focus on terroism, and on all of the issues, like the economy. That is why our country did so remarkably well with his leadership.
Meanwhile back at the impeachment hearings, we got 24/7 scum from the republicans whose only focus was to humiliate and embarass.
Just imagine had they just once supported Clinton on his efforts to root out bad guys.
The republicans didn’t care about it then and they don’t care about it now. They blame others for their mistakes. It’s the GOP way now.
Clinton is revered as brilliant. When he travels around the globe millions flock to see him. He will go down in history as one of the best American Presidents ever.
When Bush travels around the globe he is mocked made fun of and in between presidential backrubs he continues to lie and destroy the image of our country.
Roberts has protected a scumbag for nearly six years now. In doing that he has hurt our soldiers, and the image of the state of KS.
CF, presidents get tougher (or whatever you want to call it) questions than that on a regular basis. Clinton just lost it. I’m sure he would take a do over if he could get it.
I understand that he told a staffer afterward that if he was ever put him in a situation like that again, the staffer was fired. In other words, softballs only.
Maybe that question was a planted question by the Right-Wingers dutifully executed by their puppet Chris Wallace.
I think Bill Clinton did the right thing by telling Chris about that smirk he always has when he thinks he is getting someone.
Hard questions are not asked of George W. Bush on a regular basis. If one does get by their screeners, he will usually stammer and make some idiotic gesture and then babble some answer that makes absolutely no sense.
“I understand that he told a staffer afterward that if he was ever put him in a situation like that again, the staffer was fired.”
Got a link for that solid gold information, outhouse?
Cause if you don’t, it ain’t for sh*t.
I understand that George W. had an on-going homosexual affair with Karl Rove that also involved young drugged boys.
See how it works, outlander . . .
Actually, outlander, I understand that the so-called newsperson told HIS staffer that if he was ever asked to interview someone intelligent again he would fire all of FAUX!
Clinton lost it! I mean totally lost control.
I really like the guy and I think he was a good President, but man…this episode made him look worse than Bush.
I remember Clinton lashing out at Peter Jennings back in the day. I guess he has a temper.
*shakes head* The more that comes out on Clinton, the more dissappointed I am of him. His legacy is tarnished. He won’t be able to lie or strong arm a polished image of himself, because it isn’t the truth.
He didn’t lose anything – he simply asserted himself. Rightly so.
Capn, I understand that the reason for Rush’s clandestine Viagra prescription was so GW could ‘get it up’ for those trysts.
Clinton looked REAL presidential on Sunday, didn’t he? Put him in an environment where the press isn’t fawning over him, give him a few tough questions and HE COMES UNGLUED. More lies and intimidation was the best he could do. What an ego-inflated little man he really is.
Ben
Please give an example of a Republican in Congress of ‘Hollering’ “Wag the Dog”.
I think that you will have a hard time finding any.
Posted by: Heckler | September 25, 2006 at 12:39 PM
These words of Roberts say it all-”Each time the President has acted, charges of “wag the dog” have reverberated around the globe. Whether those charges are true or false is no longer material. What is material is that the President of the United States is not credible. He is not trusted. He cannot act in the best interest of America.
He has lost the moral mantle of leadership.
He has selfishly placed this nation in jeopardy. ”
If Bill Clinton had acted like an adult instead of like a freshman who found a key to the teachers lounge and snuck in after hours, He wouldnt have had this problem. He would have still gone into history as a severly mediocre president but he could have done it with some honor.
Posted by: Heckler | September 25, 2006 at 02:50 PM
Good recovery heckler. You admit you were 100% wrong and then proceed to argue the precise opposite point! SPIN!
Ben! He lied countless times in his assertion that Republicans were trying to attack him and it was all a conspiracy. He looked like an idiot. Espcially when he wagged his finger. When he does that, he’s lieing.
He said the Republican Congress was critizing him on Bin Laden, when in fact they all support him. Newt Gingrich told all the Republicans to back President Clinton on terrorism and whatever he can to get terrorist and OBL.
Republicans backed Clinton up, because they are that way. They aren’t partisan hacks like Democrats who just seek power and will put our nation in jepordy so long as it makes Republicans look bad.
Joe – did you bother to read the quotes above with all the Reps attacking him? Even heckler backed down on that claim.
Clinton looked REAL presidential on Sunday, didn’t he? Put him in an environment where the press isn’t fawning over him, give him a few tough questions and HE COMES UNGLUED. More lies and intimidation was the best he could do. What an ego-inflated little man he really is.
Posted by: Roscoe | September 25, 2006 at 05:40 PM
Hey Roscoe,
At least Clinton dont look like a bumbling idiot like our current commander in chief…
At least Clinton uses words with more than 2 sylobles…
At least Clinton had balls enough to sit down with Wallace, Dubba wont sit down with any other news organization other than Fox.
It sure would be fun to see BushDaBum faced by press not fawning over him!
Tony – you misspelled it. It is FAUX.
Tony! You’re wrong.
LOL! I find it amuzing that you guys seriously think that Foxnews is a conservative organization.
When Rupert Murdoch is a huge contributor to Clinton’s global initiative.
Don’t worry guys! Clinton will come back. He’s slated to replace Kofi as the next Secretary General. I’m sure you’ll pledge your support to the UN then.
http://www.clintonglobalinitiative.org/
“He’s slated to replace Kofi as the next Secretary General.”
Oh?
And Hillary is running for President in 2004. OOPS! I mean 2008. And Sebelius is running for VP. Yea, sure!
Joe,
Just shut your mouth. You lose credibiltiy every time you post.
especially when you post comments like this—————————–LOL! I find it amuzing that you guys seriously think that Foxnews is a conservative organization.——————————-
Comments like this tell us that your uninformed, and that its not our worthwhile to waste time arguing with you.
It is amazing the gaul of the Republicans. If that had been George W. shaking his finger at a CBS reporter, then all your loyal Bushies would be giving George glowing remarks about how he stands his ground.
But since it is Clinton, you all paint it as he lost it.
Better look because your hypocrisy is showing.
Clinton lied about sex. Uhh, that is human nature, especially if caught. SO, you a-holes can’t let go of that. Well, Clinton’s biological deposit was found. Georgey Bush is still looking for weopons of mass destruction. Let’s measure what was lost.Clinton: one blue dress.Bush: 2,600 American livesClinton is still the leader of this nation. I guarantee he would be welcomed by every nation if he had the chance to run again. Isn’t it odd that our own religious fanatics want to trash such an intelligent visionary and rally behind a very limited person, Gwb.
God, I am sick of the right wing whining.Clinton is someone I aspire to be like. He has no oil. Do any of us think that Bush will get paid to give speeches after he leaves office? OMG.
Bill Clinton really was one of those kids in elementary school that achieved the American Dream we told so often. Anybody can be president in America.
Clinton came from a divorced home, not rich, had no connections, no no rich daddy’s name to fall back on.
And then along comes George W. He had all the advantages of wealth, famous last name, connections and the whole nine yards. What has he done with all that? He has turned our country into one of mistrust and downright hated.
Clinton embarassed Fox News and the entire conservative media including the Wichita Eagle for the piss poor coverage of practically everything. However this is the first time on Fox News that the actual facts got presented.
It’s a shame we don’t have an elected President as intelligent and articulate as President Clinton. Heck, it would be nice if we had an elected President. On the other hand we have Bush who thinks 3,000 dead American soldiers and tens of thousands of dead Iraqis are just “commas” and their lives really don’t matter.
Clinton went hunting for Osama Bin Laden and Bush spent his first 8 months reading books about goats and clearing brush on his estate.
Clinton did very well in the face of a “journalist” on an obvious political ambush.Chris Wallace and Fox news have all the credibility of a comic book.
I think it’s hysterical. HYSTERICAL! lol Clinton is the worst excuse we’ve had for a president in my lifetime….and if his little dog TOTO gets elected, you’d better all hang onto your shorts.
I think its HYSTERICAL that Clinton is loved so much by so many that the far right can’t give him any credit for how great this nation was under his watch.
It just must kill you that this world is going to hell under conservatives.
Leah dear?
I’m gonna call ya “ghost” Leah. That is the only way I can make sense of your post.
Unless you are posting to us from beyond the grave, Clinton is NOT the worst President in your life time. That “honor” would belong to George W. bush. He is the worst President in US history.
We will see how many post Presidency interviews bush gets. One hopes they will be conducted through a glass barrier in a Federal prison.
CF,Ann Colter would’n fuck you with CapnAmerica’s pussy. So you’ll have to GFY.
Here is a link to the interview.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=UaNIBFSMjb8
Something tells me these whacko’s would much rather be in the mess we’re in now, deficits, loss of world leadership, 6000 dead Americans by foreign hands, than go back to the days when their biggest concern was their children being influnced by the immoral Clinton!
Hey, you all shouldn’t be so hard on Rhonda, she did give us an opportunity to have this discussion. Maybe she’s really a liberal! Certainly gives us fodder for pointing out the wrong headedness of the RR’s.
“That’s the trouble with you Republicans, you want to say and do what you want and if anybody else does, they are wrong. ”
Hi Pot, I’m kettle.
“I think its HYSTERICAL that Clinton is loved so much by so many that the far right can’t give him any credit for how great this nation was under his watch.”
Yea, Clinton did such a great job that two years into his Presidency the House went back to the Republicans since what was it WW2 because the country saw what a liberal he and the Mrs. were.The Republican house is the only thing that kept his fiscal policies in line.You all are still trying to get it back.The House is where the action is and you all know it.
Hey Joe (and others)
Did u see that YouTube removed the Clinton interview?
here is the statement left in its place “This video has been removed at the request of copyright owner Fox News Network, LLC because its content was used without permission”
There u go, Fox is trying to hide its embarasement…
I just spent 20 min trying to find the video on Fox’s website with no luck. U would think that they would proudly promote such an event… But no, its top video is: Across America:U.S. Coast Guard to the rescue in Delaware and SUV smashes into deli in Michigan.
WOW, riveting TV!
But check out the article i did find, its SPIN Time!
Bill Clinton: Play It As It Lies: Link: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,215607,00.html
Spin it FAUX Spin it!
Here is a new link to the video: http://hotair.com/archives/2006/09/24/video-clinton-vs-wallace-on-fox-news-sunday/
Bill Clinton really was one of those kids in elementary school that achieved the American Dream we told so often. Anybody can be president in America.
Clinton came from a divorced home, not rich, had no connections, no no rich daddy’s name to fall back on.-I will agree with you there CR. Clinton did achieve the American dream. I’ve said to my wife and friends, no matter what we think of his politics, we have to respect what he achieved considering where he came from.
And then along comes George W. He had all the advantages of wealth, famous last name, connections and the whole nine yards. What has he done with all that? He has turned our country into one of mistrust and downright hated.-Like I give a turd about the rest of the world. What part of Europe are you from. The part who’s ass we saved or the part who’s ass we kicked?
I don’t know Tony. I’d say more censorship from the former administration as they demanded about the path to 9/11 movie.
Clinton says that he put a contract out on Bin-Laden. Assinations have serious blowback. Such as WWI. Attempted assinations have serious blowback, such as the Cuban Missile Crisis, and maybe we can add to that 9/11.
We need to free ourselves of dependency on Middle Eastern Oil. Western democracies created dictatorships in order to get oil cheap, and make their oilmen rich. Make billionaires of a few foreign plutocrats, and let them keep their peasants in line.
Kansas has enormous wind-power. With a huge amount of unpopulated space, we could also generate a lot of nuclear-generated electricity. In the second-to-latest open thread, I described a new automotive technology that can produce highly-efficient cars powered by electricity, rather than gasoline. You have to generate the electricity to make them work. We have a huge amount of as-yet-undeveloped electricity-generation potential here. Kansas could be a major contributor to an effort to disentangle America from the Middle East. Do that, and “Islamofascist” terrorism evaporates.
Can we do this in 5 years? No. Ten years, perhaps, if we don’t continue to squander money in useless war, but mount a total-commitment effort to domestic energy production. Twenty years to achieve freedom from Middle East oil dependency is definitely doable.
If Clinton had acted this way prior to either of his elections, he would have lost.It was not Presidential.It was a mistake for Clinton to lose his cool.On the substance of what Clinton said, well, those whose minds werent made up, I doubt were swayed.By the way, “The Path to 9-11″ was correct in tone, in that the “vast” government bureaucracy did not make terrorism the priorty it should have, not under Clinton and not under Bush.The question Clinton must take into history is “Why did you prohibit the CIA and Intellegence agencies like the NSA talking to Law Enforcement?”The reasoning, of course, was that this Jamie Gorelick “wall” was designed to make these terrorism cases “clean” for trial purposes, making sure that court evidence was properly obtained.In wartime, of course, we should concentrate on prevention and worry about court headaches later.Survival is the first priority now.Clinton did not understand that point.I will grant you: Bush did not understand it fully until after 9-11.Come on folks,Clinton claimed Bush 1 had “The worst economy in 50 years” and that was false.Clinton can dish it out but he cant take it.It was Clintons bearing that I question.Clinton did not do himself any favors.He did not help Hillary much either.I respect Clinton as a politician. I disagree often with his views.He is great at speach making and his memory is impressive. He has his good points.Looking angry and defensive does not show off his good side.This is what Rhonda was trying to say, I am thinking.I find myself in rare agreement with her.
Paul?
Rhonda is a bush shill.
We will drag out her “fainting couch” for her. She gets dizzy headed sometimes.
You can “lie” down with her.
Republicans were so worried about Clinton having sex, they didn’t even see the real issues, which Clinton continued to focus upon, like the bombings at the Embassy in Kenya. He was adammant in rooting the terrorist out of their various little cells throughout the region and going after Osama in earnest. Do some research at CNN, MSNBC, Washington Post, New York Times, and various other sites on the web, it’s all there for anyone to read.
Meanwhile, Republicans were adammant about wondering how much head Clinton was getting in the Oval Office. As if Clinton was the only President to have sex in the White House. God knows how many politicians had sex in the place. And if my memory serves me correctly, during that trial, a few Republican politicians stepped down from their position for cheating on their wives as well, out of fear of being found out. So much for that dumb arguement.
What Republicans need to do is put personal attacks aside and do their damn job in protecting this country, instead of attempting to make a complete mockery out of everything the other party does. Sophmoric jokes won’t get this country anywhere anytime soon. Clinton was in office for 8 years. Republicans had all the time in the world to protect this country against terrorists, Between Reagan, GHW Bush and his dummy of a son the Republicans voted for. That’s a total of 5 terms between Republicans to act on protecting this country from potential terrorist.
AND THEY DIDN’T DO ONE SINGLE THING.
Go ahead, show me where George HW Bush went after Osama. How about Reagan? Did he send any warnings against terrorists or was he too busy cutting health care plans and building up money for Star Wars programs? And don’t even bother with using Dubuya Bush in your arguement. He hasn’t protected this country anymore than you have sitting on your rearend talking trash online.
Speakign of George W bush. Tell me, has anyone here realized the links he has with Haliburton, Enron, QWest and various other organizations? Or are we still harping on what Clinton did with Monica?
JR? (and others)
I don’t think I can agree with your assessment of Ms. Holman, for I cannot remember any proposed or realized expansion of government that she was not in favor of.
It is true that President Bush has greatly expanded government spending, so maybe she is in harmony with him once in a while.
But overall, I would rate Rhonda (and most of the other Eagle editorialists) as quite liberal.
As many of the posters on this blog are even farther to the left, I guess I can see how they might call her a “bush [sic] shill.” But that’s an extreme view; one not shared by many.
george w bush couldn’t carry Bill’s jock strap. Yeah, he’s an idiot for being a serial womanizer, but by God, every day that we’re stuck with The Worst President Ever makes Clinton’s time in office seem like a gift from Jesus.
Hank Price,
Likewise. I’m sure we’ll get along famously.
NoJoCo,
What I was said was offensive but funny. What you said was, well, kind of nauseating. Penises are funny; vaginas are generally not.
Republicans,
Your spin on Clinton is laughable. It just goes to show how out of touch you are and have always been. Remember Clinton’s impeachment-era 73% approval ratings?
It must suck to be a Republican apologist when the shit piles up faster than you can shovel it.
Go easy on NoJoCo, CF.
He’s “special” as in “special education” if you know what I mean . . .
Or to put it another way he’s one brick shy of a full load, all eyes and no sight, a few cards short of full deck, not the sharpest knife in the drawer, full of sound and fury signifying nothing, not so much brain as ear-wax, someone who thinks manual labor is a Mexican guy, who doesn’t have all his oars in the water, who if you put his brain in a matchbox it’d rattle like a BB in a boxcar, who thinks that millionaires live in two-story trailers, rides the short bus, would get himself stabbed in a shoot-out, once believed Johnny Cash was a pay toilet, was the model for Cletis on “The Simpsons.”
In a war of wits, he is truly unarmed.
It’s really not fair to make fun of him.
http://www.leaderu.com/issues/fabric/chap19.html
http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/Comment/DickMorris/092606.html
Some comments many of you havent seen yet.
Paul F. Rosell,
One link that’s broken, another that’s irrelevant to the thread. You’re in fine form today, Paul F. Rosell.
Are you or are you not a member of AIPAC?
“Why didn’t the CIA and FBI realize the extent of bin Laden’s involvement in terrorism? Because Clinton never took the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center sufficiently seriously. He never visited the site and his only public comment was to caution against “over-reaction.” In his pre-9/11 memoirs, George Stephanopoulos confirms that he and others on the staff saw it as a “failed bombing” and noted that it was far from topic A at the White House. Rather than the full-court press that the first terror attack on American soil deserved, Clinton let the investigation be handled by the FBI on location in New York without making it the national emergency it actually was.
In my frequent phone and personal conversations with both Clintons in 1993, there was never a mention, not one, of the World Trade Center attack. It was never a subject of presidential focus.
Failure to grasp the import of the 1993 attack led to a delay in fingering bin Laden and understanding his danger. This, in turn, led to our failure to seize him when Sudan evicted him and also to our failure to carry through with the plot to kidnap him. And, it was responsible for the failure to “certify” him as the culprit until very late in the Clinton administration.”Dick Morris
Dick Morris was not a member of the Clinton Adminstration at the time of the World Trade Center bombing. Clinton sought him out after the 1994 elections for help in the 1996 re-election campaign.
Upshot: Dick Morris wasn’t a member of the Clinton Administration, and wasn’t in a position to know shit about what was and wasn’t being done about bin Laden. He was a political consultant.
His subsequent political affiliations casts serious aspersions on his credibility. As does his dalliance with prostitutes.
CF
As opposed to Clinton being credible?
The man lies in such a manner that leads me to believe that he actually believes the lies that he tells. Very sick.
Condi and others cut him to pieces yesterday by the way.
Heckler,
Speaking of lying-ass bitches, you mean Condi “we don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud” Rice?
She didn’t lay a glove on the Big Dog. Not a glove.
She has nothing. But she doesn’t have to. All she has to do is lie and know that the media will repeat whatever she says as if it were the truth.
CF
Perhaps you could refute what she had to say about Clintons assertions to Chris Wallace.
Here’s some of what she said to the NY Post, just to save you looking for it-
The notion somehow for eight months the Bush administration sat there..is just flatly false,” the former national security adviser told The Post’s editorial board yesterday. “What we did in eight months was at least as aggressive as what the Clinton administration did in the preceding [eight] years,”
Firing Clarke? Far from it, she noted: He “was the counter-terrorism czar when 9/11 happened, and he left [in 2003] when he did not become deputy director of homeland security,” as he wanted.
That’s a critical point.
Clinton insisted that his version is backed both by Clarke’s book and public testimony before the 9/11 Commission.
In fact, Clarke told the commission a very different story during hours of private testimony behind closed doors – one that jibed with a 2002 background briefing he gave to reporters.
Back then, he said: “There was no plan on al Qaeda that was passed from the Clinton administration to the Bush administration. . . . [a] plan, strategy – there was no, nothing new.”
Indeed, Clarke said, the Bush team in 2001 “changed the [Clinton] strategy from one of rollback [of] al Qaeda over five years to a new strategy that called for the rapid elimination of al Qaeda. That is in fact the timeline.”
Bush, he added, took action on several “issues that had been on the table for a couple of years,” such as instituting a new policy in Pakistan that convinced Islamabad “to break away from the Taliban” and boosting “CIA resources…for covert action five-fold to go after al Qaeda.”
In fact, a 1999 Clarke after-action memo – the one top Clinton aide Sandy Berger later stole from the National Archives – identified national-security weaknesses so “glaring” that only sheer “luck” prevented a cataclysmic attack back then.
What part of this is lies CF?
Heck and paulfrossel, you can just take your sound bites from this list. That should save some time.
THE REPUBLICAN “BELIEFS LIST”
Franklin D. Roosevelt was a communist and a terrible president.Jimmy Carter used to be a waffler, now he’s a traitor.Walter Mondale is a flip-flopper.Michael Dukakis is a waffler.Ronald Reagan was the best president in history.The media is liberal.Bill Clinton is a flip-flopper.Hillary Clinton murdered Vince Foster.Bill & Hillary Clinton are radical leftists.Al Gore is a waffler.Al Gore claimed he invented the internet.Al Gore is boring, stiff and wonky.George W. Bush is a great guy to have a beer with.George W. Bush is a Texan.George Bush was a successful businessman.Bush won Florida in 2000.Losing by 2 million votes in 2000 is a mandate.This administration will hold itself accountable.Bush will restore honor and integrity to the White House.The Clinton administration trashed the White House before the Bush administration took over.Bush will make health insurance affordable for low-income families.The Healthy Forests Initiative will help forests.No Child Left Behind will help children.The Clear Skies Initiative will reduce air pollution.Republicans are compassionate conservatives.It is executive privilege not to reveal the members of the energy task force.Vice President Cheney no longer has ties with Halliburton.Bush is not that familiar with Ken “Kenny Boy” Lay.There is no global warming.There is global warming, but humans aren’t causing it.If there is global warming, it’s actually good for us.There are legitimate scientists who dispute the “liberal” theories about global warming.Sex education causes STDs and increases pregnancy rates.HPV vaccine will cause teen sex cults.Unemployment numbers have never been so low.Outsourcing will create more jobs.The vast majority of Bush’s tax cuts go to the bottom end of the spectrum.Tax breaks for Hummers are good for the economy.Tax cuts increase federal revenue.The estate tax hurts family farms.Privatizing Social Security will save Social Security.Citizens will earn more money for retirement with “private accounts.”Republican proposals to change Social Security are not plans to “privatize.”They are not “private accounts,” they are “personal accounts.”The budget deficit will be cut in half in four years.The economy is doing great.Nothing is more important in a time of war than cutting taxes.Bill Clinton is responsible for 9/11.Bill Clinton was offered Bin Laden on a silver platter and turned it down.No one could have anticipated airplanes flying into buildings.We have removed the Taliban from Afghanistan.Pat Tillman was killed by enemy fire.They hate us for our freedom.The creation of a department specializing in Domestic Security isn’t necessary.Refusing to support the creation of a new Department of Homeland Security is anti-American.The Patriot Act is needed to protect Americans.Giving up some freedoms is necessary to defend freedom.”Bin Laden Determined to Strike within the U.S.” was a historical document.You’re either with us or against us.We don’t want the smoking gun to be in the form of a mushroom cloud.The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.Anyone who leaks information will no longer be a part of this administration.There can be no doubt that Saddam has reconstituted his WMD program.The only way to get Zarqawi is to invade Iraq.Saddam Hussein attacked us on 9/11.We’re fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them here.Critics of the war are liberal, left-wing radicals.Opposition to the war gives aid and comfort to the enemy.Democrats hate America.Dissent is unpatriotic.The Iraqis will welcome us with open arms and flowers.It could take six days, six weeks – I doubt six months.Several hundred thousand troops is wildly off the mark.Democrats voted for the war too.Iraq is the central front on the war on terrorism.Yellow ribbon magnets on your car mean you support the troops.Iraqi oil will pay for the war and the reconstruction.US liability for the war shouldn’t be more than a billion dollars.Saddam would not let the weapons inspectors in the country.Saddam would not let the weapons inspectors do their jobs.There is a large international coalition participating in “Operation Iraqi Freedom.”We know where the WMD are. They’re in the area around Baghdad and Tikrit and north, south, west and east somewhat.Those trucks we found in Iraq were mobile biological weapons labs.Iraq sent its WMDs to Syria.Mission accomplished.The violence is the result of a few Baathist dead-enders.The insurgency is in its last throes.Bring It On.No one could have anticipated the Iraqi insurgency.There is no civil war in Iraq.We’ve turned a corner in Iraq.A spike in violence in Iraq is a sign of American success as insurgents resist positive changes.A decline in violence in Iraq is indicative of American success in getting a handle on Iraqi security.If our military commanders need more troops, all they have to do is ask for them.Abu Ghraib was the result of “a few bad apples.”There is no need for a bill banning the use of torture.We do not torture.A “signing statement” freeing the executive branch from having to follow a law is necessary during a time of war.Progress as a result of the “historic” pass of sovereignty, formation of government, election in Iraq will be seen in the next 6 to 8 months.When they stand up, we’ll stand down.A plan to withdraw troops is defeatist.U.S. beliefs that Iraq had WMD was an intelligence lapse.The WMD mistakes were made in good faith.Congress had access to the same intelligence on Iraq.The Founding Fathers were Christians.George W. Bush is a Christian man.America is a Christian nation.There is a war on Christmas.There is a war on Easter.Democrats and the ACLU want to ban the bible.Democrats and the ACLU want to make it illegal to pray.Bush was elected by “values voters.”Dems struggle to attract “values voters.”Jesus would have voted for Bush.Gay marriage threatens the sanctity of marriage.Republicans are pro-life.Democrats are the party of death.Evolution isn’t supported by the facts.There are legitimate scientists who dispute the “liberal” theories about evolution.Man existed alongside the dinosaurs.The earth is 6,000 years old.Terry Schiavo wanted to live.Michael Schiavo wanted to murder his wife.Michael Schiavo abused his wife.Terry Schiavo can laugh, smile & communicate.Terry Schiavo can recover.The country is ‘bitterly divided’ over the Schiavo controversy.George W. Bush is a war hero. John Kerry isn’t.John Kerry shot himself in the leg to earn his medals.Max Cleeland blew off his own limbs.Bush is a war president.Bush is a popular president.The Democrats are weak on national securityBush critics are ’shrill,’ ‘angry,’ ‘bitter’John Kerry was against the $87 million before he was for it.John Kerry is a flip-flopper.John Kerry outed Mary Cheney.Howard Dean is insane.Diebold voting machines are secure.Fox News is fair and balanced.Jeff Gannon is a journalist.Bill O’Reilly looks out for you by cutting through the spin to get to the truth.Chris Matthews will not let anything get by him.Tim Russert asks the tough questions.Dan Rather got what was coming to him.No one could have anticipated the breech of the levies.Kathleen Blanco never asked for federal help.Ray Nagin should have used the buses.All of the president’s nominations should be given an “up or down vote.”John Roberts would be a great Supreme Court justice.Harriet Miers would be a great Supreme Court justice.Harriet Miers is the best candidate to fill the Supreme Court vacancy.It is not necessary to give Harriet Miers an immediate “up or down vote.”Sam Alito is the best candidate to fill the Supreme Court vacancy.It is the duty of Congress to approve the President’s nominations.Tom DeLay is decent Christian businessman.The Delay investigation is the result of a rabidly partisan prosecutor.Nobody at the White House knows Jack Abramoff.Democrats took money from Jack Abramoff too.The Corruption scandals are bipartisan.The 9/11 plot would have been discovered with the NSA domestic spying program.Press reports about warrantless wire tapping undermines American national security.Bill Clinton did it too.Democrats don’t want to wiretap terrorists.Whenever we say “wiretap,” that means we’re going to get a court order.The government is tapping your phone to protect you.Leaks of classified information authorized by the President are ok because he can de-classify anything at will.Leaks of classified information to the press by a whistleblower to expose illegal activity are treasonous and will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.You cannot have Civil Liberties if you are dead.Anyone who thinks Dubai shouldn’t control our ports is racist.No one who thinks we should build a wall along the Mexican border is racist.The national anthem should only be sung in English.Mexicans must be stopped from taking jobs Americans won’t do.George W. Bush is a decider.Dick Cheney is a sober shooter.Joe Wilson admitted that Valerie Plame wasn’t covert.Valerie Plame is a traitor.Joseph Wilson is a traitor.Patrick Fitzgerald is going to indict Joe Wilson.Karl Rove has a faulty memory.Scooter Libby has a faulty memory.Gas prices are high because of liberal environmentalists.Gas prices are high because of taxes.Drilling in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge will lower the price of oil.High gas prices are the result of increased global demand.Capping gas prices interferes with the free market.Gas is still cheaper in America than in Europe.Windfall taxes on high oil company profits is socialism.It’s surprising that Bush’s poll numbers are so low since people like him so much.Basically everybody likes the president except for a few wackos on the left.George Bush doesn’t read the polls.The Democrats are in disarray.The Democrats are struggling to take advantage of opportunities even with a weakened GOP.Some Democrat party insiders are concerned the party is too liberal.Some Democrat party insiders say Howard Dean is destroying the party.Howard Dean can’t raise money.The Republican Party is the party of ideas.Democrats lack new ideas.Democrats are struggling to articulate ideas.Democrats take a political hit criticizing Bush when he has strong poll numbers.Democrats look like they are “piling on” if they criticize Bush when he has weak poll numbers.Al Gore is an angry madman.John McCain is a maverick.John McCain is a straight shooter.Hillary Clinton will be the Democrat nominee in 2008.
War is Peace.Freedom is Slavery.Ignorance is Strength.
Maybe you wingers could just number these, then whenever I post the truth, you can just put down your lie number.Very efficient.
Sucks to be a Bush supporter, doesn’t it?
Bill Clinton, who identified terrorism as the major post-Cold War threat and acted to improve our counterrorism capabilities, who (little known to the public) quelled anti-American terorism by Iraq and Iran and defeated an al Qaeda attempt to dominate Bosnia, but who, weakend by continued political attack,could not get the CIA, the Pentagon, and FBI to act sufficently to deal with the threat. – Richard Clarke, “Against All Enemies”
Tracy
Your starting to sound more like KFG. If you take that as a compliment you have my sympathy. Go on changing the subject.
WHAT’S YOUR POINT???
Heckler,
Watching you play along with Rice’s equivocation on the word ‘plan’ is like watching Bill Clinton equivocate on the meaning of the word ‘is.’
This is from Time Magazine, Sunday August 4, 2002:
“Berger had left the room by the time Clarke, using a Powerpoint presentation, outlined his thinking to Rice. A senior Bush Administration official denies being handed a formal plan to take the offensive against al-Qaeda, and says Clarke’s materials merely dealt with whether the new Administration should take “a more active approach” to the terrorist group. (Rice declined to comment, but through a spokeswoman said she recalled no briefing at which Berger was present.) [HERE'S THE MONEY QUOTE] Other senior officials from both the Clinton and Bush administrations, however, say that Clarke had a set of proposals to “roll back” al-Qaeda. In fact, the heading on Slide 14 of the Powerpoint presentation reads, “Response to al Qaeda: Roll back.” Clarke’s proposals called for the “breakup” of al-Qaeda cells and the arrest of their personnel. The financial support for its terrorist activities would be systematically attacked, its assets frozen, its funding from fake charities stopped. Nations where al-Qaeda was causing trouble—Uzbekistan, the Philippines, Yemen—would be given aid to fight the terrorists. Most important, Clarke wanted to see a dramatic increase in covert action in Afghanistan to “eliminate the sanctuary” where al-Qaeda had its terrorist training camps and bin Laden was being protected by the radical Islamic Taliban regime. The Taliban had come to power in 1996, bringing a sort of order to a nation that had been riven by bloody feuds between ethnic warlords since the Soviets had pulled out. Clarke supported a substantial increase in American support for the Northern Alliance, the last remaining resistance to the Taliban. That way, terrorists graduating from the training camps would have been forced to stay in Afghanistan, fighting (and dying) for the Taliban on the front lines. At the same time, the U.S. military would start planning for air strikes on the camps and for the introduction of special-operations forces into Afghanistan. The plan was estimated to cost “several hundreds of millions of dollars.” In the words of a senior Bush Administration official, the proposals amounted to “everything we’ve done since 9/11.”"
http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101020812/story.html
So, Clarke had ‘proposals,’ but no ‘plan.’ Condi is every bit as mendacious and empty as I’ve said she is.
When you align yourself with people who lie, equivocate, and are full of shit, Heckler, then by extension, you lie, equivocate, and are full of shit.
Heck,To be told you sound like KFG is a high compliment.
“I still say if Democrats would run Bill Clinton as the Vice Presdiential candidate, they would win hands down.”
Nobody would be the presidential candidate in that arrangement, because they know a month into the term, they would mysteriously die in office, so the bent one could take over.
So funny to watch the Clinton-haters carry on, six years later.
Get over it.
Heckler,
Maha over at Mahablog has a documented, point-by-point refutation of Condi’s lies in the New York Post interview. Read it and weep.
http://www.mahablog.com
Lying-ass bitch should be in jail.
CF
So Clinton lies out his ass and you go cherry pick that old bone of contention between Clarke and Rice. Very nice, but hardly conclusive. Who were those unnamed officials referenced and why were they unnamed.
It’s a good article you linked to. Here let me cherry pick a few pieces from it myself.
-The winter proposals became a victim of the transition process, turf wars and time spent on the pet policies of new top officials. The Bush Administration chose to institute its own “policy review process” on the terrorist threat. Clarke told Time that the review moved “as fast as could be expected.” And Administration officials insist that by the time the review was endorsed by the Bush principals on Sept. 4, it was more aggressive than anything contemplated the previous winter. The final plan, they say, was designed not to “roll back” al-Qaeda but to “eliminate” it.-
-Berger was determined that when he left office, Rice should have a full understanding of the terrorist threat. In a sense, this was an admission of failure. For the Clinton years had been marked by a drumbeat of terror attacks against American targets, and they didn’t seem to be stopping.-
You see I can cherry pick from that article and give all kinds of impressions but none of it is conclusive.
So go call someone else a liar and go worship to your little BJ Clinton shrine in the closet.
WELL KFG IS MY GIRLFRIEND,AIN’T YA’ GIRL.
Whadya’ mean what’s your point?All I did was list your points.I suggest we number them to streamline the mud fight.You dent unnerstan?
Heckler,
It’s funny and a little sad to watch you tinker around the edges of the narrative and try to spin the context. But it gets you nowhere, as your obsession with fellatio involving Bill Clinton demonstrates.
-First point:there’s an old saying, Heckler: “don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good.” Rather than undertake effective measures aimed at containing a threat, the Bush Administration sat on its hands for nine months while a threat built up and did nothing in order to come up with the perfect plan to “eliminate” al Qaeda. That the Bush Administration thought al Qaeda would stand still and wait to be hit shows how seriously they misunderstood the nature of the threat. Also, the fact that Richard Clarke says that review took the “expected” amount of time doesn’t mean that he approved of it in the first place, over against pursuing the points laid out in his action plan.
-As for your second point, you can’t have it both ways. If Berger hadn’t briefed Rice, he’d be accused of denying the threat. By briefing Rice, you declare him a failure. Please.
The lack of intellectual honesty is beneath you, Heckler. But I realize this is what you’re forced to, given the bankrupt position you’ve chosen to defend.
Yup, sad, isn’t it, how far the tighty-righties have to go to try to make Bush look competant and blame everything on Clinton.
Heckler, let’s cut to the bottom line, shall we?
Clinton responded to the embassy attacks with massive bombardments. He attacked Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
Both times, he was roundly CONDEMNED by right-wingers now in power that you support.
After 9-11, the same right-wingers condemn him again for not doing enough.
But that’s not the worst of it.
If Clinton “didn’t do enough” when we WEREN’T attacked on our own soil, then how can you say that Bush did enough in the nine months preceeding 9-11.
Nine months when the counter-terrorism committee that Dick Cheney took over NEVER MET.
Nine months during which the Bush administration said the biggest threat to the US was a missile strike
Nine months when BushCo NEVER RESPONDED to the attack on the Cole.
Bottom line–Bush f*cked up royally. Even assuming you’re right (and you’re not) that Clinton did “nothing,” that doesn’t explain the massive 9-11 failure under Worst. President. Ever.
“competent” hell, I’m incompetent at even spelling competent
I was just watching a little more on this. Actually got to see for myself the interview, at least the clips where Clinton freaked out.Why is he so sensitive if he knows he believes what he did was right would be my biggest question?The man was Commander in Chief for 8 years. I’d expect him to have a thicker skin if there wasn’t some truth to it or if he didn’t have second thoughts on the job he did on this subject.He sounded like an 10 year old. Yea but they did this this and this. Sounds like one of my kids.As I tell my kids, well I’m not interested in what so and so did. I’m interested in what you did. You are accountable for your actions (as Bush is accountable for his and is beat up daily in the media about). No one else. The difference I see if Bush believes he is right. And he is sticking to and defending his decisions.Clinton is passing the buck.Wasn’t it a Democrat (Harry Truman) who said “The buck stops here”?
Clinton’s not passing anything.He’s unspinning GOP bullshit that tries to rewrite history.What about GW’s gay male prostitute that he had installed as a phony newsman?Tell me there ain’t some lying shit coming out the repugs mouths.
Mr KIA,
Watch the interview. Clinton takes responsibility for not getting Osama bin Laden. Repeatedly, in fact.
If you think Bush has taken responsibility for anything, that’s a decision on your part to disregard evidence to the contrary.
Clinton told the “Big Lie”, ‘I didn’t have sex with that woman’, that’s all it comes down to for some!
My apologies on the links above.Try these, but they are older now of course:http://www.nypost.com/seven/09252006/news/nationalnews/rice_boils_over_at_bubba_nationalnews_.htm
and Dick Morris:http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/Comment/DickMorris/092606.html
“Clinton claims “the CIA and the FBI refused to certify that bin Laden was responsible [for the Cole bombing] while I was there.” But he could replace or direct his employees as he felt. His helplessness was, as usual, self-imposed.
Why didn’t the CIA and FBI realize the extent of bin Laden’s involvement in terrorism? Because Clinton never took the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center sufficiently seriously. He never visited the site and his only public comment was to caution against “over-reaction.” In his pre-9/11 memoirs, George Stephanopoulos confirms that he and others on the staff saw it as a “failed bombing” and noted that it was far from topic A at the White House. Rather than the full-court press that the first terror attack on American soil deserved, Clinton let the investigation be handled by the FBI on location in New York without making it the national emergency it actually was.
In my frequent phone and personal conversations with both Clintons in 1993, there was never a mention, not one, of the World Trade Center attack. It was never a subject of presidential focus.
Failure to grasp the import of the 1993 attack led to a delay in fingering bin Laden and understanding his danger. This, in turn, led to our failure to seize him when Sudan evicted him and also to our failure to carry through with the plot to kidnap him. And, it was responsible for the failure to “certify” him as the culprit until very late in the Clinton administration.
The former president says, “I worked hard to try to kill him.” If so, why did he notify Pakistan of our cruise-missile strike in time for them to warn Osama and allow him to escape? Why did he refuse to allow us to fire cruise missiles to kill bin Laden when we had the best chance, by far, in 1999? The answer to the first question — incompetence; to the second — he was paralyzed by fear of civilian casualties and by accusations that he was wagging the dog. The 9/11 Commission report also attributes the 1999 failure to the fear that we would be labeled trigger-happy having just bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade by mistake.”
Dick Morris knows Clinton better than any of us on this Blog, and better than most people other than Hillary.Morris Says Clinton was not engaged.
CFMorris WAS a member of the Clinton administration, none of us were.And, Morris says that George Stephanopolis and others have told him that the first WTC bombing was never really taken that seriously by the Clinton White House.Clinton never did visit the WTC after the bombing, never called the victims.Come on, he was not engaged.
Paul F. Rosell,
No, he was not. Not at the time you say. Here’s Wikipedia.
“Morris first worked with Bill and Hillary Clinton during Bill Clinton’s successful 1978 bid for Governor of Arkansas. Though he did not work on Bill Clinton’s unsuccessful re-election campaign in 1980, Morris helped him win back the governor’s office in 1982 and continued to work with him in subsequent gubernatorial campaigns. Morris did not have a role in Clinton’s successful 1992 presidential campaign, which instead was headed by James Carville, George Stephanopoulos, and Paul Begala. After the 1994 mid-term election where Republicans took control of both houses of Congress and gained considerable power in the states, Clinton once again sought Morris’ help to prepare for the 1996 presidential election. It was Morris who proposed a strategy of “triangulation,” where Bill Clinton would appeal to a diverse group of voters by distancing himself from both the Democratic and Republican parties. Many perceived this as a move to the center of the political spectrum, and it disappointed some people who had hoped Clinton would pursue a more progressive policy.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Morris
“Not engaged?” You mean like George W. Bush and the hunt for Osama bin Laden? THAT kind of “not engaged?”
Paul, once again you bring out Dick Morris as your proof? Dick Morris has an appropriate first name because his credibility sucks. He had an adulterous affair and yet your smug Republicans revere his words now? Did you ever think that he might be playing you Republicans for fools?
Paul, you need to get your information about Clinton from somewhere reliable, not a fake “docudrama” shown on ABC.
Pakistan was informed of the missle attack while the missles were already in the air. That would give Pakistan minutes to respond. It’s in the 911 Commission’s report, and “The Path To 911″ was barely based upon that report.
Now what did Bush do for his first 8 months regarding Bin Laden? I mean, other than giving the Taliban millions of dollars that eventually went to weapons to fight the Northern Alliance and American troops?
Oh, and Paul, visiting the WTC means dick other than an opportunity to get a photo op. I know that’s more important for Republicans. Clinton was busy actually arresting, trying and convicting those responsible for the attack.
Bush’s solution to the 911 attack was to get all the members of Bin Laden’s family out of the United States when all other flights were grounded. That way they wouldn’t be available for questioning thereby making it easier for Bin Laden to get away with his crimes.
Didn’t Bush or Texas even have the front man, PR guy over as a guest of the U.S? If I remember correctly that was before 9/11, or the public would have went wild.
I forgot to include the Front man PR guy of the Taliban.
Ah, Dick Morris. The man who owes Bill Clinton everything, because of all the money he [Dick] has made tearing up Clinton’s reputation in the court of public opinion. Dick Morris’ record as an advisor is spotty, and although he is an insider, scandal sells more books than mundanity.
Paul, don’t you know that they don’t pay you posters for more than a couple of posts a day? Or did you get one of those lucky gigs where they pay per post, more than two sentences, no max?
Speaking of which, has Paul ever categorically denied being a paid poster?
Paul Rosell, Outlander, and, most of all, Heckler,
Condoleez Rice is a lying-ass fucking cooze. Turns out Richard Clarke gave her a set of plans for getting al Qaeda out of Pakistan. Here’s the link from Rawstory.
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/2001_memo_to_Rice_contradicts_statements_0926.html
Game. Set. Match. Fucking cooze.
It’s been a great day for America. Now, if y’all will excuse me, I’ve gotta get home for “King of the Hill.” Last night they replayed the pilot episode, I tell you what…
The problem is, CF, you can beat these people over the head with cold hard facts and they will claim that the documents are leftist propaganda.
These people root for their party like it’s a damned high school football game. Their side is the best, win or lose.
Too bad it’s not a game….
Postal,
Indeed. It’s well beyond high school. The Right is pure tribalism. Hence their return to torture and physical abuse.
But I’m tribal, too. My tribe is global, a multitude. We got the facts, we got the arguments, we got reason–and we got humor. Real humor. Gotta have that.
No Right-Wing fascist is ever a happy warrior. Ever. They’re too afraid to ever be happy. But every man and woman on the Left can be a happy warrior if they choose.
CF – they can be happy. It’s easy. Just take a big handful of “Limbaugh whites”!
KIA says that Bush gets beat up in the media “daily” for not having done more to prevent the 9-11 attacks.
That was exactly Clinton’s point. HE gets beat up daily for it, but Bush never does.
As somewhat of a newshound, I keep a close eye on the mainstream media–and except for salon.com and democraticunderground–I don’t hear anybody asking any questions about what Bush did or didn’t do.
I don’t see any one even asking the basic question of what goals Al Qaeda hopes to achieve by killing themselves to hurt us.
“You’re either with us or against us,” is not a problem-solving strategy.
CF (most of all)
I read Richard Clarke’s “PLAN”-http://www.rawstory.com/images/clarkeatt.pdf
If that is what sufficed for a “plan” in the Clinton administration then thank GOD 9/11 did not happen on Clinton’s watch.
That’s not a plan, and that’s essentially what Rice said.
“We were not left a comprehensive strategy to fight al Qaeda,” Rice told a reporter for the New York Post on Monday. “Big pieces were missing,” Rice added, “like an approach to Pakistan that might work, because without Pakistan you weren’t going to get Afghanistan.”
What Rice said essentially was that Clarke’s plan SUCKED. After reading it I have to agree, I kept wondering when I was going to get past the outline and get to the real plan. Never happened.
If that’s your idea of a lie CF well go on with your bad self, you win, in your own feeble mind.
Heckler,
Redefine, spin, redefine, spin, redefine, spin.
You may want to get a new playbook. The present one isn’t working so well.
CF
Explain the lie you claim Rice made.
Wow, THAT sounds like nathan, no?
“that is not a plan”
heheheheheh
“that is not a pipe”
heheheh. Same tactics, different day.
Hi Girl!Heck, even a plan that you think sucks is 100% better than what the Grand Old Pricks had,NOTHING! NADA!Right now they’re working on NADA version 2.0
The one thing I seem to notice, Heckler and your ilk, is that your opinion on the Clarke plan and the handling of national security is refocused through the lens of 9/11. You are ALL monday-morning quarterbacking the issue. Constantly. You present your opinions as if Bill Clinton KNEW that 9/11 would happen. And should have known 9/11 would happen. Damn near as if he FLEW THE PLANE HIMSELF.
Clinton did not get bin Laden. He did attempt to get bin Laden; although the Republicans had a tendency to question his motives since they were all over him about the whole BJ thing. Clinton is guilty of having his presidency go to hell in a handbasket over something that many other presidents have done but they got away with it. Or, we had the common courtesy to pretend we didn’t notice. The Republicans (who controlled congress, saw the NIEs of the Clinton era, and could have called for military action at ANY TIME) were way too busy going impeachment-happy to pay attention. Accused him of inventing a war to distract America from his personal problems.
The non sequitur in all of this is the malice that the Republicans imply Bill Clinton had in all of this. That he should have done more because 9/11 happened and if Bill Clinton had captured bin Laden then it wouldn’t have happened so the blood is on his hands.
Bullshit.
That’s like if I were a hockey goalie and someone scored on me, and I said that it was the forward’s fault because if he had gotten the puck at center ice, then the puck wouldn’t have made it into the net.
Of course, continuing the analogy, Bush essentially took a swing at the guy who scored on him, then jumped into the stands and beat up the marching band while defecating on his teammates. Completely ignored the responsible party, and took the cakewalk to Iraq to finish “daddy’s war.”
Of course, it’s hard to wage war on Saudi Arabia, the home of your REAL enemies, when they’re your friends and business partners.
Gallup: Bush Blamed More Than Clinton for Failure To Capture Bin Laden
The recent firestorm over former President Bill Clinton’s culpability for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks was fueled on Tuesday when Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice contrasted President Bush’s efforts to pursue al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden with Clinton’s efforts. Clinton has strongly denied various suggestions that his administration missed key opportunities to kill bin Laden and left the Bush administration without a comprehensive anti-terrorism strategy. However, Bush — whom Clinton says did nothing about al-Qaeda for the first eight months of his presidency — has the bigger image problem with Americans on the issue.
According to a recent Gallup Panel survey, the American public puts the primary blame on Bush rather than Clinton for the fact that bin Laden has not been captured. A majority of Americans say Bush is more to blame (53%), compared with 36% blaming Clinton.continued….
Heckler,
Here’s another falsehood to which Condi the lying cooze gave her approval: that the air in lower Manhattan was safe to breathe in the days after 9/11.
http://www.nypost.com/news/regionalnews/rice_okd_claim_of_safe_air_after_9_11_regionalnews_susan_edelman_______heather_gilmore_____and_brad_hamilton.htm
I eagerly look forward to your explanation, Heckler, of how Condi really isn’t a filthy, lying whore.
Clinton’s little outburst was nothing short of being politically motivated. He wants to show America that he was/is “tough” on terrorism. If nothing else, he is a damn good politician; he even convinced the left that he meant it.
Slick Willy told the truth this time.You can handle that can’t you will?
Heckler and Joe have gone missing.
CF, cindykduckett labeled me POTTYMOUTH in your absence.Now that you are back in a loud and proud way, I intend to relinquish my title to you.I am honered to have held the title while it lasted, but you are clearly superior in this area.I bow in your presence, oh great warrior of the pottymouth tradition.All hail CF, reigning King of the mystical land of Pottymouth.LONG LIVE THE KING!
I just saw on Olberman, a film clip in which a mid-eastern reporter asked Ari Fletcher ” There are reports the Taliban has offered to deliver Ossama to Saudi Arabia, if the sanctions were dropped, will America take them up on it?” Ari responded “I’ll take that under advisement and get back to you”. He never did. That was in the first quarter of 01! After the Cole attack. Did Rhonda ever consider that there was and is a vast Right Wing Conspiracy in America?
steve that’s great.I’m gonna’ look for that.
And of course let me just say this:Bill Clinton!!Bill Clinton!!It’s all his fault.He was too busy waggin’ the ol’ weiner dog.
Even Rudy Giuliana backs Clinton on this:
Giuliani defends Clinton on 9/11 effortsMATT SEDENSKYAssociated PressFORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. – Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani defended Bill Clinton on Wednesday over the former president’s counterterrorism efforts, saying recent criticism on preventing the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks is wrong.
Political bickering over which president – Clinton or George W. Bush – missed more opportunities to prevent the attacks has been escalating since Clinton gave a combative interview on “Fox News Sunday” in which he defended his efforts to kill Osama bin Laden.
“The idea of trying to cast blame on President Clinton is just wrong for many, many reasons, not the least of which is I don’t think he deserves it,” Giuliani said in response to a question after an appearance with fellow Republican Charlie Crist, who is running for governor. “I don’t think President Bush deserves it. The people who deserve blame for Sept. 11, I think we should remind ourselves, are the terrorists – the Islamic fanatics – who came here and killed us and want to come here again and do it.”
http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/breaking_news/15623737.htm
According to a recent Gallup Panel survey, the American public puts the primary blame on Bush rather than Clinton for the fact that bin Laden has not been captured. A majority of Americans say Bush is more to blame (53%), compared with 36% blaming Clinton.
–Hey never underestimate the stupidity of the American public right Tracy? Afterall we elected Bush twice!And I wouldn’t “blame” either of them. 9/11 was bound to happen sooner or later. The only thing I’ll say is Clinton had a lot more time to get him prior to 9/11 than Bush did.
Kia Kia Kia,
I still hold out hope for ya. You are on board the bush bus for social issues is my take.
He is failing you by the way. Welcome to the club. bush is failing us all.
Well Kia, the dif is, Clinton had eight years but no legally justifiable reason to “get” bin Laden. He did TRY to make bush aware of the problem. But bush was too busy smirking that a “president of the United States is a president of all the people”. This was his way of saying to those who opposed him “I am President whether you like it or not! I invite you to suck on it.” No doubt this attitude colored his admininstrations treatment of anything left over from Clinton.
So bush has since had five years and has INVENTED reasons to get bin Laden……and by way of that just about anybody else. But bin Laden remains free.
Summary? Clinton did what he could within international law and WHILE he was being hounded by a right wing witch hunt.
bush is either criminally negligent, stupid, or willfully complicit in bin Laden NOT getting caught.
And there were those ties between the bush and bin Laden families.
Hmmmmmmm………
KIA, Clinton had to start from scratch because Republican presidents have a history of ignoring terrorism. Terrorists kill numerous marines in Lebanon and Reagan invades Grenada. Bush Sr. and Reagan would sell weapons to Iran and use that money (plus drug money) to fund terrorists in Nicaragua.
The terrorists attacks in 1993 were a response to Bush Sr. putting American military in Saudi Arabia. Clinton wasn’t given any intelligence from the previous administration yet managed to catch all of those responsible. Bin Laden financed the operation and as a result Clinton cut off as much of his funds as possible. So to say he did nothing is inaccurate.
It doesn’t matter how many facts you point out to a Bushie about Clinton’s successes – they always come back with that sex thing.
Why, because Republicans have nothing else to say bad about the man. And they know that sex will get all their Christians riled up again.
Wonder what this guy was saying about impeaching the perv Clinton a few years ago! http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060929/pl_nm/usa_politics_foley_dc_2
And this guy was involving underage boys!
At least he knew where to find his child-targets!
“A spokesman for Foley, the chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children, said the congressman submitted his resignation in a letter late this afternoon to Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert”
Sounds kind of like a predator. Wonder if he and Todd are buds? I did see the both served on some committee.
And they complain about consensual relationships between adults!