Wednesday, September 27, 2006
Reaching Back for the Clinton Years
With his ranting and finger wagging at Chris Wallace on Fox News last Sunday, ex-president Clinton reminded all who watched that he is still in denial of reality, and cannot speak the truth.
Floundering Democrats in some backward plan, are hoping to gain traction by rekindling memories of republican's attacking Clinton during the '90's which at times made Clinton's approval numbers go higher, at least according to the media then. But last Sunday, Clinton looked and sounded like a mad-man making irrational comments while pointing his finger at Wallace and poking his leg as his face turned beet red in anger, a side of Clinton he has kept hidden until now.
Jeff Jacoby's "A war we have to win" in The Boston Globe wrote:
"Could 9/11 have been prevented? That in essence was what Chris Wallace asked former President Bill Clinton during his interview: ``Why didn't you do more to put bin Laden and Al Qaeda out of business when you were president? . . . Why didn't you . . . connect the dots and put them out of business?"
From the ferocity of Clinton's response, you would have thought he'd been accused of using a 22-year-old White House intern for sex. Purple-faced with rage, he blasted Wallace for doing a ``nice little conservative hit job on me." He fumed that he had ``worked hard to try and kill" bin Laden and that ``all the right-wingers" who criticize him for doing too little ``spent the whole time I was president saying, `Why is he so obsessed with bin Laden?' "
But Wallace's question was no ``hit job." No one ever accused Clinton of being too obsessed with bin Laden. On the contrary: The eight years of his presidency, like the first eight months of Bush's, were marked at the top by a tragic inattention to Al Qaeda. The 9/11 Commission Report records the exasperated reaction of a State Department counterterrorism officer to Clinton's refusal to retaliate for the bombing of the Cole: ``Does Al Qaeda have to attack the Pentagon to get their attention?""
Clinton told Wallace, “There is not a living soul in the world who thought that Osama bin Laden had anything to do with Black Hawk Down.” But nobody said there was. The point of citing Somalia in the run up to 9-11 is that bin Laden told Fortune Magazine in a 1999 interview that the precipitous American pullout after Black Hawk Down convinced him that Americans would not stand up to armed resistance.
It is likely Clinton believes we've forgotten about his impeachment and punishment. However, the disgrace of Clinton's era is still burnished in the memories of most American's, along with knowledge of his doing little to fight terrorism since the first WTC attack in '93, where as president he did not even visit, fluffing it off as a small incident.
According to Richard Miniter's article, "What Clinton Didn't Do . . .
. . . .and when he didn't do it." in the Wall Street Journal, Sept. 27, 2006:
"In his Fox interview, Mr. Clinton said "no one knew that al Qaeda existed" in October 1993, during the tragic events in Somalia. But his national security adviser, Tony Lake, told me that he first learned of bin Laden "sometime in 1993," when he was thought of as a terror financier. U.S. Army Capt. James Francis Yacone, a black hawk squadron commander in Somalia, later testified that radio intercepts of enemy mortar crews firing at Americans were in Arabic, not Somali, suggesting the work of bin Laden's agents (who spoke Arabic), not warlord Farah Aideed's men (who did not). CIA and DIA reports also placed al Qaeda operatives in Somalia at the time.See the terror list here.
By the end of Mr. Clinton's first year, al Qaeda had apparently attacked twice. The attacks would continue for every one of the Clinton years."
Back to bashing the war
Now the dems are back to bashing the war on terror and Bush's handling of it, as if they did any good during Clinton's years. Democrat's are desperately at a loss for ideas having to conjure up and spew more anti-American deceptions in order to get attention from the media and public. What are they thinking?
The papers' headlines were unequivocal, but the stories themselves never actually quoted the NIE. They merely passed along the spin -- and advanced the anti-Bush agenda -- of the anonymous sources who chose this moment to leak secret intelligence for political purposes.
The left claims that new terrorists are being enlisted at a growing rate and that America's presence in Iraq has become a major terrorist recruitment tool.
President Bush has made that point repeatedly, quoting Osama bin Laden's declaration that the war in Iraq is ``the most serious issue today for the whole world " and will end in ``victory and glory or misery and humiliation." Has US military action in Iraq inflamed the global jihad? Undoubtedly. But just imagine how galvanized it would be by a US retreat.
Democrats want to go back to the 1960's-'70's era of when their bashing of America was popular, making them feel so good and superior. Now since they can't go back that far, they want to go back to the Clinton years of ignoring terrorism when they were pumping up a false economy with massively higher taxes, tearing down our national defense and being politically correct in appeasing our enemies.
Sorry Democrat's, America won't go back!
© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.|