in the wrong era. Soundly refuting
liberals online since 2000. :)
| CNN | 0 | |
| Mark H’way | Update: IRS’s Lerner Had History of Harassment, Inappropriate Religious Inquiries at FEC |
0 |
| NYT | Liberal Icons: Apple’s Web of Tax Shelters Saved It Billions, Panel Finds |
0 |
| Buzz Feed | #FacePalm: Obama Went Off Script To Address Gay Grads Directly At Morehouse College |
0 |
| KFOR | Prayers: LIVE OKC UPDATES: Crews switch to recovery at Plaza Towers elementary |
0 |
Audacity of Truth
Move Along:
""The whole issue of this - of talking points, frankly, throughout this process has been a sideshow. The whole thing defies logic. And the fact that this keeps on getting churned out, frankly, has a lot to do with political motivations."
Pres. Obama on GOP demands for Benghazi answers, 5/13/2013
Clinton legacy revision watch
Former prez Bill Clinton was quoted in an interview with New York magazine as saying he “wished” he could have been president long enough to find out that OBL was behind the USS Cole bombing so he, rather than GWB, could have attacked Afghanistan:
“I also wish” he continues, “I desperately wish, that I had been president when the FBI and CIA finally confirmed, officially, that bin Laden was responsible for the attack on the U.S.S. Cole. Then we could have launched an attack on Afghanistan early. I don’t know if it would have prevented 9/11, but it certainly would have complicated it.”
Right, Bill. As Ace points out, that was already established.
Besides, why did it take you until the Cole bombing to figure out that handling OBL and his terrorist band of thugs was more than a law enforcement issue? How about the first WTC attack? Or the embassy bombings? Remember those?
Besides, take a second look at the wording used by the consummate lawyer in his assertion to Jennifer Senior. He would have “launched an attack”. That is what he did after the embassy bombings; in the words of his successor, Clinton launched a two-million dollar missile at a ten-dollar tent and hit a camel in the butt. Did it disrupt anything else that al-Qaeda had planned? Not at all.
The long record of gross ineffectiveness based on the faulty premise that terrorism required indictments and civil trials created the Clinton legacy on al-Qaeda, not a lack of opportunities. Clinton’s whine about “proof” demonstrates that very clearly. He had all the “proof” he needed to order military action in November 2000 to retaliate against bin Laden and the Taliban for sheltering him and chose not to do so. His attempt now to recast himself as a terrorism hawk who had the misfortune of bad timing makes him even more pathetic than ever.
Exactly.
If you want to read a book that really exposes the Clinton administration’s less than stellar efforts against OBL, I once again recommend Richard Miniter’s Losing Bin Laden : How Bill Clinton’s Failures Unleashed Global Terror. Don’t let Clinton’s revisionist tactics (along with those of many of his supporters) fool you.
Hat tip: Outside the Beltway
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Somewhere, Bill is celebrating himself.As usual.
Like the new skin!
You know, when Bill Clinton left office, I took cold comfort that at long last, after eight years, at least I wouldn’t have to wade through right-wing obsession with the man.
Sigh. Wishful thinking, eh?
Chris: thanks both for the compliment and for stopping by
Jack: Well, let’s see. As soon as Clinton and has faithful followers stop obsessing over re-writing his legacy, the right will stop ‘obsessing’ over correcting it.
AMEN Sista!!!
To paraphrase Margaret Wolfe Hungerford , “obsession is in the eye of the beholder.” Is it more obsessive for a disgraced ex-prez to keep poking his head through the stage curtains to spout “ifs” and “but, ifs” to an ever adoring MSM, or for others to point out, in response, the fallacies in his assertions? If Bubba and his surrogates could bring themselves to stay off stage, the spotlight would stay on current actors. I, for one, would be happy to forget Slick Willie and let History judge him.
Seems like Bubba’s sitting there in his office in Harlem with nothing to do, so he’s decided to follow in the footsteps of his butt-buddy Jimmuh Cahtuh and revise his bio to make him look like he just might have a sliver of respectability in him someplace and, dubiously, some microscopic vestige of patriotism.
What a schmuck!
With all due respect Seth, Clinton isn’t a ‘schmuck’. For example, Woody Allen is a schmuck!!!
Jimmah Cahtah is the quintessential ‘schmuck’.
Just a fine point.
OK. I’ll bite. Why Shooter is Jimmy one but not Wille?
Lorica: Good to see you back!
It’s been a few weeks since you last posted.
Bachbone: Absolutely! Believe me, there’s no one more obsessed with Bill Clinton than BC himself.
Bak: Off topic – I’m enjoying the latest discussion at La Shawn’s about the abortion issue. Something tells me that’s going to be a hot one this afternoon
As a New Yorker (I was born there, I didn’t choose it) ‘Schmuck’ had a certain meaning, hard to define. Its for a bumbling fool who continues to carry on convinced he’s right even as everybody is laughing at him. Al Gore is a schmuck for example. Only a man can be a schmuck, BTW.
How does it feel to have Hillary representing you, Shooter?
I got smart about 30 yrs ago and moved to NJ so my kids could go to a decent school. Now look! Lautenberg (no, he’s not dead) and Corzine representing me. Man am I smart! But hey, I helped pay McGreevy’s boyfriend’s salary too. NJ is the most corrupt state in the USA. I might even prefer Hillary…NOT!
Jack Roy: I’ll gladly stop commenting on Bill Clinton if he’ll simply stop commenting on himself.
Like you, when Clinton left office, I was hoping not to hear of him again.
That’s a nice standard: You’ll stop talking about Bill Clinton when Bill Clinton stops talking about Bill Clinton? What if Bill Clinton says that Bill Clinton is hungry? Does that mean you can blame him for 9/11? What if Bill Clinton arranges for Bill Clinton to speak at somebody’s graduation? Does that open the door for you to opine that Bill Clinton was the biggest narcissist in American history?
The point, as should be clear, is that Bill Clinton’s life and legacy isn’t really relevant to most people in the same way that it is to Clinton himself. When Clinton talks about his administration, it’s merely ordinary human behavior. When someone on the internet keeps bringing him up out of context, it reeks a little obsesssss-ive!
The thought of another Clinton in the White House is almost enough to give a good conservative a case of the clocktower syndrome.
“That’s a nice standard: You’ll stop talking about Bill Clinton when Bill Clinton stops talking about Bill Clinton? What if Bill Clinton says that Bill Clinton is hungry? Does that mean you can blame him for 9/11?”
Did I make the leap from a comment on hunger to 9/11? No. He commented on bin Laden and so did I. Nice try though.
The sad irony in your comment is that the liberal MSM would likely bore us with stories of Clinton’s hunger.
“What if Bill Clinton arranges for Bill Clinton to speak at somebody’s graduation? Does that open the door for you to opine that Bill Clinton was the biggest narcissist in American history?”
Again, your response is moot, because the comments were made in direct response to the topic Clinton raised. Period.
“The point, as should be clear, is that Bill Clinton’s life and legacy isn’t really relevant to most people in the same way that it is to Clinton himself. When Clinton talks about his administration, it’s merely ordinary human behavior. When someone on the internet keeps bringing him up out of context, it reeks a little obsesssss-ive!”
Is it “merely ordinary human behavior” to give interviews to national media? Notice we don’t post about Clinton’s morning bathroom ritual, bathing habits, sleeping position or favorite toothpaste. We comment about his lies relating to his administration’s failure to respond to terrorism.
You’re the only one bringing up stuff that’s out of context. Obsess much?
Actually, I was being extremely polite by referring to Bubba as a “schmuck”. I, too, grew up in NY(Forest Hills, home of the Ferraro menace). I’ve lived in Manhattan, too.
However, Shooter, you’re absolutely right. Carter is a better example of a “schmuck”. To describe Slick Willie in a word, I’d probably have to consult the Justice Department.
Shooter: Heh. I wonder if that has anything to do with the influx of northerners we’ve seen here down in the south the last ten or so years?
Jack Roy: Jason hit the nail on his head in the comment after yours but I’ll add my .02: It’s not “obsession” to comment on public figures who keep inserting themselves and their thoughts into the public arena. For someone so critical of obsession, you seem quite obsessed with our ‘obsession.’ On a related note, I don’t suppose you find Clinton’s comments that he was “obsessed with OBL” comment-worthy either?
Seth: *grin* While you’re consulting them, make sure to clarify what the meaning of “is” is, for Clinton’s sake
any problem = Clinton’s fault
This is another example of Clinton narcissism.
The reason we conservatives obsess over Bill Clinton is because…well, because Bill Clinton is a poohpooh-head. And we get very annoyed at poohpooh-heads.
But seriously: Reading through the section of the 9/11 Report dealing with the U.S.S. Cole, one gets the impression that Clinton would accept nothing less than a picture of OBL with his arms around the suicide bombers, and a big sign that said, “These are my homies!! They’re gonna blow up an American destroyer for me!!” In Arabic, of course.
Clinton knew he wasn’t going to take any action and risk doing something stupid. He was a lame-duck president, too preoccupied with issuing last-minute pardons to his cronies. Better to leave the mess for Dubya to deal with.
Sloan: “Clinton knew he wasn’t going to take any action and risk doing something stupid. He was a lame-duck president, too preoccupied with issuing last-minute pardons to his cronies. Better to leave the mess for Dubya to deal with.”
Absolutely. That conclusion becomes more and more cemented every day, it seems.
Iam a native New Yorker, and worked for the Port Authority of N.Y.& N.J., the builders of the World Trade Center. On February 26, 1993, Islamic terrorists set off bombs in a rented van parked under 1 WTC. Their intent was to have one tower topple and knock the other one down, like dominoes. The result: seven people killed (I count Monica Smith’s unborn child) and a hundreds of injuries. President Clinton was in New Jersey at time, and didn’t deem it necessary to cross the Hudson to see the damage for himself!