Sep 26 2006
The Clinton Screw Up – And The ‘Unhinged’
When I saw Clinton go off on Fox News Sunday I felt a bit of pity for a man who had been trapped in situation where his own weaknesses had been perfectly matched with the DC bureaucrats’ fear of doing anything bold and had realized later the opportunities he missed. Clinton was always, in my opinion, a man with great gifts who had no idea how to use them. He was too young when he came to DC and fight the bureaucracy.
That was my initial reaction and the most positive I have been able to muster for Clinton and the left. When the liberal media made the claim this was a strategic move choreographed to ‘energize the base’ (by tearing down the rest of the country and their support for Bush) my opinions quickly hit rock bottom. As we get nearer to the election and the left realizes there is no hope of changing anything at all the frustration and emotion is hitting a fevered pitch. Keith Olberman was just short of drooling as he spat out one outrageous comment after another. And I saw it repeated over and over again on various shows as Clinton’s meltdown WAS emulated over and over again. It was a sad day for the left as they imploded over their own warped fantasies about what is going on in the world.
And so we come to the response today, which is devastating. The person to lead off is the hyper intelligent and classy Condi Rice. One of the best people to take on Clinton is Rice. She is soft spoken and her words are always well chosen. She also represents the coming break for the Democrats – women and minorities. Talk about standing up to power! Her response to Clinton sets an amazing juxtaposition between a serious career woman and a ranting womanizer. A successful minority who now selflessly represents this nation to the world in times of war against a man obsessed about his image as a former President. The rantings from the left about the evil Bushies (because they are out of power) verses the pragmatic, down to business right trying to deal with a deadly enemy.
And so from these two opposing footings Condi steps up to rip Clinton for being what he has apparently always been. Because if this was a premiditated act, then Clinton is still a finger-wagging liar:
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice yesterday accused Bill Clinton of making “flatly false” claims that the Bush administration didn’t lift a finger to stop terrorism before the 9/11 attacks.
…
“What we did in the eight months was at least as aggressive as what the Clinton administration did in the preceding years,” Rice added.
The secretary of state also sharply disputed Clinton’s claim that he “left a comprehensive anti-terror strategy” for the incoming Bush team during the presidential transition in 2001.
“We were not left a comprehensive strategy to fight al Qaeda,” Rice responded during the hourlong session.
…
“I would just suggest that you go back and read the 9/11 commission report on the efforts of the Bush administration in the eight months – things like working to get an armed Predator [drone] that actually turned out to be extraordinarily important,” Rice added.
She also said Clinton’s claims that Richard Clarke – the White House anti-terror guru hyped by Clinton as the country’s “best guy” – had been demoted by Bush were bogus.
“Richard Clarke was the counterterrorism czar when 9/11 happened. And he left when he did not become deputy director of homeland security, some several months later,” she said.
The last part about Richard Clarke is very telling. It is clear Clarke has felt hurt because he was not given what he thought was his due and went on a payback tour so common here in DC. Clarke’s delusions of granduer are evident in the Path to 9-11, the ABC show that supposedly Clinton was all upset about. The entire show was a disaster because the end showed Dick Clarke, superman, telling a stunned and paralyzed Cheney and Rice what to do, order the President to take to the air and directing Generals who had were portrayed as completely lost without Clarke. It was such a joke ending it had to be from Clarke’s view of events an no one else’s. Clinton cannot be serious that we should listen to a jaded bureaucrat for the ‘truth’ of what happened? As many have pointed out, when we do listen to Clarke’s mixed messages he too says Clinton failed to act and did not pass on any plan.
Stepping back from the flase claims and details of the liberal whining, the overall effect is still stunningly bad for a party that already has a poor reputation on foreign policy and defense. If this election (or the one in 2008) is going to be about Clinton’s legacy the party is going to be rejected horribly.
When is the Democrat party going to show some inkling of sacrifice for the common good? When is it going to stop obsessing about Bush and come up with some ideas that are better for all of us. Why is hate a bad plank for a party? Because the opposition simply stakes out all the positive ground and leaves the haters to place themselves in the muck by their knee-jerk oppposition. That is why the opposition in this country is against fighitng the insurgents in Iraq, monitoring their communications with their agents here in the US, monitoring their financial transactions world wide, detaining these killers, questioning these killers and trying these killers. They oppose these things because Bush supports them – nothing more. They try and rationalize their irrational hate with false premises and rewritten history. And now President Clinton has joined Mad Al Gore in the Keith Olberman world of blind rage. And this is going to win votes because it is supposed to make us safer? How bad is this going to get for the Dems if this trend is buildin?. Rice provides the perfect summary to the mess on the left:
Transitioning to the global war on terror, an animated Rice questioned, “When are we going to stop blaming ourselves for the rise of terrorism?”
Indeed, when is the left going to end its obsession with being out of power?
Update: Only liberals would feel being ‘unhinged’ is a good thing for a national leader. You think I am kidding?
Did Clinton come across a little unhinged? Sure, but that’s an advantage in a midterm election where party passion matters. Liberal activists want to see their Washington representatives fight back the way Clinton did.
Kim Il Jon and Hugo Chavez are ‘unhinged’ folks. The ‘unhinged’ liberals may want to see people unglued on TV, but not America. The fact you have to act certifiable to get the attention of the liberal base is a form of insanity in of itself. And let’s not miss the fact this is a strategy! I am not sure this is going to help defend America or bring international allies to our side if we are one second for lick-spittle ‘unhinged’.
So if you are for the ‘unhinged’ vote Democrat and if you are for the serious, professional dedicated to our nation’s safety vote Republican. I think we can all understand those two choices. The democrats are the proud party of the ‘unhinged’. That is what they meant by their ‘New Direction’ for America. We all just go ‘unhinged’. What a plan!
Hear! Hear! Nice post AJ!! But don’t clue in the Lefties, leave them right where they’re at! We can’t afford another Clinton Administration, and I’ve come to the conclusion, sadly, because we do ned a viable “opposition” party!, that the current Democratic party, should never hold power again. They’ve lost their collective minds….
As a former Democrat, I have to wonder if the left is intentionally trying to go the way of the Whigs and Tories. What happened to the party of FDR and Truman, a party that cared about the average American, who wanted a strong military to protect us from foreign threats, that realized that the average American was working hard, providing for their families, attending the church of their choice on Saturday or Sunday and just wanted a government that allowed them to do those things the way the founding fathers intended? When did the Democrat party take such a hard left turn where it only appeals to the latte drinkers who make obscene amonts of money and really have no clue what Joe Common thinks?
“Unhinged”? I don’t agree. Call it controlled insanity. But with no plans for American other than talking points like “a new direction”, Americans will turn away and start listening to those who do have a plan for a safe, prosperous and strong America.
Retire,
“What happened to the party of FDR and Truman, a party that cared about the average American, ”
First I agree with what you said, but I just want to point out that actually the party of FDR and Truman hasn’t changed at all. A lot has been said about how great FDR was, but have you ever really looked at many of the things he did? Do you know that he said: “Maybe living under the domination of the Russians for 10 or 20 years will do them some good.”
This was said while talking to Churchill about whether Russia would dominate Eastern Europe after the war. In fact he conceded eastern europe to that fate just to go against the Empire of Britain.
There has been a lot of false goodness attributed to FDR. I think it’s only fair that some of the real facts come out about him also.
I won’t say anything bad about Truman tho. I liked him.
Secretary Rice Sets Clinton’s Mis-Record Straight…
And voila! the truth is made known-this time by Condi Rice who sets the record straight on just one of the multiple lies uttered by Bill Clinton on national television Sunday:Clinton said he had “battle plans†drawn to go into Afghanistan, overthro…
Rick Moran shows little support for Keith Oberman’s take on Clinton
A recommended read
http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2006/09/26/appalling-dishonesty-from-olberman/
One wonders if Strata is doing his own “Baghdad Bob” act.
I was no Clinton fan, but “Clinton’s legacy” might be looking
good to the majority of likely voters who believe Bush lied about
the WMDs and plunged the now-spread- too- thin military into a
no-win quagmire.
There’s Ken, banging his pots and pans again…
I didn’t buy the phoney outrage over Path to 9/11 and I’m not buying Willie Wagger’s phoney outrage BS now. I’ve seen this too many times.
Here’s what I got out of it. BC blew up with phoney outrage to draw attention to himself then he went into full “SPIN MODE” for a news story that hasn’t made the news yet. When it does make the news in a few days or weeks, BC will be vindicated because what he did was bad, but what Bush did was much worse.
From what I heard out of BC, and what I.ve picked up from the news in the last year, my guess is that we will learn that UBL/al Qaeda has now established it’s home base in Africa, then classified documents will be leaked proving that Bush did in fact allow UBL to escape Tora Bora.
The reason I say UBL/al Qaeda has moved to Africa comes from the statement from The Southern Poverty Law Center back in July, that the military is becoming the training grounds for White Supremist.
When Bush sends troops into Africa after al Quada we will have a never ending drumbeat about Bush’s White Supremicy Army slaughtering BLAAAAAAAAAK people.
The reason I say Bush allowed UBL to escape Tora Bora is because BC said Bush had 8 mths. to get UBL and he didn’t. The democrat talking point is that Bush has had 5 years to get UBl and he hasn’t. BC let it slip that after 9/11 Bush couldn’t kill UBL because if he had every turd in a turban and his momma’s bed sheets would have been trying to carry out a terrorist attack against the US so they could become the big dog on the block. BTW this was proven to be true just a few months back when we learned about the terrorist attack that was planned for Ny tunnels. That was Zarqawi’s (?) terrorist attack, not UBL’s. When UBL found out about it, bye bye Mr. Z.
There’s Ken again, with those DNC (untruthful) talking points…Yawn.
Those who believe those DNC (untruthful) talking points will have to live with their consciences as their belief in those (untruthful) talking points is an indictment on them, imho.
Vote *for* the brave Iraqi’s in November: Vote republican.
Bill Clinton is a Big, Fat Liar…
It is unusual for an administration to criticize a former president in this way, and vice-versa for a former president to criticize a sitting presidentÂ’s administration. Cranky old Jimmy Carter does it, but you would have never seen Ronald Reagan enga…
I can not believe that I used to defend Bill Clinton, now he just makes me sad.
Ken, it’s not the conservatives fault that the majority of voters are mis-informed.
majority of likely voters who believe Bush lied about
the WMDs
You don’t believe their were WMD’s ? What “was” in those shells they found over there this year? Oxygen?
What was in those convoys to Syria and Lebanon in the last two weeks before the war started? Food Supplies?
You must really be looking for waterfront property there in Central France.
Send our regards to Jacque.
For Enforcement-
France at least is Earthbound, while your kooky beliefs
misdefining WMDs then using the Syrian myth Israeli
intelligence and the neocons created (and Powell and Bush ultimately
repudiated) shows you could be space cadet.
Ken, thanks for the laugh.
France at least is Earthbound, yea……. right…..
Misdefining WMD’s, poison gas in artillery shells is not WMD. All righty. Shows where your head is.
Syrian myth. I notice you did’t say what was in the trucks.
You are partially right, Astronaut, not a cadet.
Forgot tho ask, How are things there in France?
Give my regards to Jacque. (you are on first name basis, right?)