Bill Clinton is Mad As Hell....
SUNDAY SEPTEMBER 24 2006 3:00 PM
Submitted by legionnaire. Edited By legionnaire.
TAGS: Bill Clinton, terrorism, Fox News
and he's not gonna take it any more!" (See the transript here)
WALLACE: …may I just finish the question sir. And after the attack, the book says, Bin Laden separated his leaders because he expected an attack and there was no response. I understand that hindsight is 20/20.
CLINTON: No let’s talk about…
WALLACE: …but the question is why didn’t you do more, connect the dots and put them out of business?
CLINTON: OK, let’s talk about it. I will answer all of those things on the merits but I want to talk about the context of which this arises. I’m being asked this on the FOX network…ABC just had a right wing conservative on the Path to 9/11 falsely claim that it was based on the 9/11 Commission report with three things asserted against me that are directly contradicted by the 9/11 Commission report. I think it’s very interesting that all the conservative Republicans who now say that I didn’t do enough, claimed that I was obsessed with Bin Laden. All of President Bush’s neocons claimed that I was too obsessed with finding Bin Laden when they didn’t have a single meeting about Bin Laden for the nine months after I left office. All the right wingers who now say that I didn’t do enough said that I did too much. Same people.
Bill Clinton, now effectively removed from any real political constraints, goes fucking ballistic (for lack of a better phrase) on Chris Wallace, Fox News's resident GOP pit bull, calling him on pretty much all the bullshit that he's shoveling and making a case that while he admittedly failed in capturing Osama bin Laden, Bush did an even worse job, firing Richard Clarke and moving US priorities away from terrorism (if you all remember, the burning issue in August of 2001 was how to limit embyonic stem cell research.)
He calls out Fox News on its pro-Bush bias:
CLINTON: But at least I tried. That’s the difference in me and some, including all the right wingers who are attacking me now. They ridiculed me for trying. They had eight months to try and they didn’t…I tried. So I tried and failed. When I failed I left a comprehensive anti-terror strategy and the best guy in the country, Dick Clarke… So you did FOX’s bidding on this show. You did you nice little conservative hit job on me. But what I want to know..
WALLACE: Now wait a minute sir…
CLINTON:…
WALLACE: I asked a question. You don’t think that’s a legitimate question?
CLINTON: It was a perfectly legitimate question but I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked this question of. I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked: Why didn’t you do anything about the Cole? I want to know how many you asked: Why did you fire Dick Clarke? I want to know…
WALLACE: We asked…
CLINTON:…
WALLACE: Do you ever watch Fox News Sunday sir?
CLINTON: I don’t believe you ask them that.
WALLACE: We ask plenty of questions of…
CLINTON: You didn’t ask that did you? Tell the truth.
WALLACE: About the USS Cole?
CLINTON: Tell the truth.
Think Progress fact checked Wallace's claim about the bin Laden brief and about the USS Cole, and unsurprisingly, Wallace is a bald faced liar.
Clinton then goes on to talk about the guy everyone loves to hate, Karl Rove, and finally reveal that the emperor really is naked.
WALLACE: Let’s talk some politics. In that same New Yorker article, you say that you are tired of Karl Rove’s B.S., although I’m cleaning up what you said.
CLINTON: But I do like the — but I also say I’m not tired of Karl Rove. I don’t blame Karl Rove. If you’ve got a deal that works, you just keep on doing it.
WALLACE: So what is the B.S.?
CLINTON: Well, every even-numbered year, right before an election, they come up with some security issue.
In 2002, our party supported them in undertaking weapons inspections in Iraq and was 100 percent for what happened in Afghanistan, and they didn’t have any way to make us look like we didn’t care about terror.
And so, they decided they would be for the homeland security bill that they had opposed. And they put a poison pill in it that we wouldn’t pass, like taking the job rights away from 170,000 people, and then say that we were weak on terror if we weren’t for it. They just ran that out.
This year, I think they wanted to make the questions of prisoner treatment and intercepted communications the same sort of issues, until John Warner and John McCain and Lindsey Graham got in there. And, as it turned out, there were some Republicans that believed in the Constitution and the Geneva Conventions and had some of their own ideas about how best to fight terror.
The Democrats — as long as the American people believe that we take this seriously and we have our own approaches — and we may have differences over Iraq — I think we’ll do fine in this election.
But even if they agree with us about the Iraq war, we could be hurt by Karl Rove’s new foray if we just don’t make it clear that we, too, care about the security of the country. But we want to implement the 9/11 Commission recommendations, which they haven’t for four years. We want to intensify our efforts in Afghanistan against bin Laden. We want to make America more energy-independent.
And then they can all, if they differ on Iraq, they can say whatever they want on Iraq.
But Rove is good. And I honor him. I mean, I will say that. I’ve always been amused about how good he is, in a way.
But on the other hand, this is perfectly predictable: We’re going to win a lot of seats if the American people aren’t afraid. If they’re afraid and we get divided again, then we may only win a few seats.
This last bit is what the more cynical among us have been acutely aware of for years; that there are ongoing security threats against the US all the time, but they seem to magically intensify in both media coverage and Republican rhetoric when there's an election approaching. It's not that Republicans are actively creating problems where they didn't exist before, but using these problems to try and scare voters into thinking that voting for Republicans is the only way they're going to feel safe.
Clinton's take throughout the interview is refreshing in that he no longer feels the need to be conciliatory and pay deference to the media and an opposition party that refuses to reciprocate. It would be nice if other Democrats could show the same cajones that Clinton does, but the party seems to be stuck with the perpetual problem of its politicians showing the most spine and eloquence after they've left office.

















PAGE:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
Skism
I'm lost
September 2005
SEP 24, 2006 03:10 PM
Skism
I'm lost
September 2005
SEP 24, 2006 03:11 PM
evlbaMbee
United Kingdom
February 2006
SEP 24, 2006 03:11 PM
DieWhiteGirls
Madison, WI
July 2005
SEP 24, 2006 03:15 PM
Weso
Santa Cruz, CA
July 2002
SEP 24, 2006 03:17 PM
DieWhiteGirls
Madison, WI
July 2005
SEP 24, 2006 03:24 PM
Akrasia
Ireland
August 2004
SEP 24, 2006 03:30 PM
MschfMayhemSoap
Phoenix, AZ
April 2006
SEP 24, 2006 03:35 PM
MschfMayhemSoap
Phoenix, AZ
April 2006
SEP 24, 2006 03:36 PM
DieWhiteGirls
Madison, WI
July 2005
SEP 24, 2006 03:51 PM
darwinsjoke
Virginia Beach, VA
July 2003
SEP 24, 2006 04:04 PM
DieWhiteGirls
Madison, WI
July 2005
SEP 24, 2006 04:07 PM
Drama
Pittsburgh, PA
January 2003
SEP 24, 2006 04:11 PM
NickFaust
USA
April 2004
SEP 24, 2006 04:15 PM
Vestril
Coronado, CA
February 2003
SEP 24, 2006 04:36 PM
PAGE:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5