There He Goes Again
Rememembering The Meaning Of Is
By California Yankee Posted in 2008 Presidential Campaign | Dog Bites Man | Evasive | False | Hillary Clinton | Iraq Bill Clinton | War — Comments (15) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Bill Clinton made a political blunder of monumental proportions when he claimed that he "opposed the war in Iraq 'from the beginning,'" A statement even the New York Times found "is more absolute than his comments before the invasion in March 2003."
Is More Absolute?
"It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is" - President Clinton
At Time, Mark Halperin reminds us that Mr. Clinton said he supported the War in 2003. On April 14, 2003, Clinton praised President Bush:
“In his first speech in Minnesota since leaving office, former President Bill Clinton on Sunday praised President Bush’s handling of the war in Iraq. But he criticized Bush’s domestic priorities and urged the administration to offer North Korea aid and a pledge of nonaggression in exchange for an end to that country’s missile and nuclear weapons programs." [Minneapolis Star Tribune, 4/14/03]
On May 19, 2003, the Associated Press reported Clinton said he supported President Bush:
"Former President Bill Clinton accused President Bush of spending more time fighting the war on terrorism than on domestic issues during a commencement speech at Tougaloo College. 'I supported the president when he asked for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but we can’t be forever strong abroad if we don’t keep getting better at home,' Clinton said Sunday to a crowd of about 8,000. […] The Bush administration, Clinton said, 'is still focused on defeating terrorism and weapons of mass destruction, and that’s good, but not good enough. The power of our example is just as important as our military might.'"
Clinton may have questioned the timing of the invasion, but Clinton didn't oppose it "from the beginning."
On June 23, 2004, CNN reported Clinton revealed that he continues to support President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq:
[There's more, including a video.]
"I have repeatedly defended President Bush against the left on Iraq, even though I think he should have waited until the U.N. inspections were over," Clinton said in a Time magazine interview that will hit newsstands Monday, a day before the publication of his book "My Life."
Clinton, who was interviewed Thursday, said he did not believe that Bush went to war in Iraq over oil or for imperialist reasons but out of a genuine belief that large quantities of weapons of mass destruction remained unaccounted for.
Noting that Bush had to be "reeling" in the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001, Clinton said Bush's first priority was to keep al Qaeda and other terrorist networks from obtaining "chemical and biological weapons or small amounts of fissile material."
"That's why I supported the Iraq thing. There was a lot of stuff unaccounted for," Clinton said in reference to Iraq and the fact that U.N. weapons inspectors left the country in 1998.
"So I thought the president had an absolute responsibility to go to the U.N. and say, 'Look, guys, after 9/11, you have got to demand that Saddam Hussein lets us finish the inspection process.' You couldn't responsibly ignore [the possibility that] a tyrant had these stocks," Clinton said.
The former president's blunder could not have come at a worse time for Hillary's race for the presidency. Her campaign has stalled. In Iowa Obama has tied Hillary in the most recent polling, some are predicting Obama will beat her in Iowa, and Hillary is bracing for defeat.
As Hillary campaign teeters on defeat and needs to rely upon the political prowesses of the infamous "comeback kid," he stumbles. Clinton reminds everyone, as Hillary's Democratic opponents continue to repeat - the Clinton's have trouble giving straight answers - Clinton admitted that answers he gave about Ms. Lewinsky during a 1998 deposition were false and that he "knowingly gave misleading and evasive answers."
For the extremist Liberal/Progressive Democrats Defeatocrats the timing is even worse. Now, on top of all the reports about the progress in Iraq Clinton has provided an opening to refute the left wing's attempt to rewrite history with the false allegation that we were mislead into the war. Thanks to Clinton's latest lie, we will be reminded again and again that everyone thought Saddam was much too dangerous to be allowed to keep the weapons of mass destruction everyone believed he still had at the time of the invasion.
« Obama's Real Record: Public Housing — Comments (17) | Huckabee Plays The Religion Card — Comments (44) »
There He Goes Again 15 Comments (0 topical, 15 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
as in total, completely bald-faced lie, is the number of people who are willing to believe it. Close behind that is the ability to lie with a straight face. Elmer Gantry would have paid good money for the ability to lie like that. The Clintons can dissumulate faster than the Soviets. Good today, bad tomorrow, bad today, good tomorrow.
And actually, you don't have to fool all of the people all of the time. You only have to get the MSM, the racemongers, the unions, and traitors (as in Congress, for example) on your side, and let them drive the dialog.
Words fail at an adequate description of this dregs of human filth. For now I'll get off, I wouldn't want to say something nasty about Bill, Hillary, and the Democratic party that has supported them both.
"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville
I saw him speak at Georgetown a few years back for a youth conference of some sort, and when he took questions he kept avoiding to take the bait to bash Iraq and Bush and actually stood up for him a bit.
He might be lying, but hey, at least he's not Carter.
“I think we are the team to beat in the NL East -- finally.” - Jimmy "MVP" Rollins, 1/23/07
It should have been obvious with his past statements expressing support for President Bush re: Iraq were half-harted and insincere. It's really not fair to hold what he actually said against him, when we all know he was just saying what he had to for political purposes at the time when things looked like they were going well in Iraq.
Surprise! Surprise! Surprise!
A man convicted of perjury found to be lying.
--------------------
Vista really sucks!
The Clintons are over-rated. If it wasn't for Ross Perot, we would not have the Clinton's today.
I am also beggining to seriously doubt the Hillary wins the Primary. Its looking more and more like Oboma will give her a race for her money.
Also, remember, this, dirt doesn't stick in the Democrate Primary, since they are all dirty. IMHO.
For the Democrats, the Ends justifies the means.
Clinton lies...in other news,the sun rose in the east this morning....dog bites man....
doth signal a Whopper!
1998, re Monica

and
now, re Iraq

"No compromise with the main purpose, no peace till victory, no pact with unrepentant wrong." - Winston Churchill
Founder and contributor to The Minority Report and Senior writer for The Hinzsight Report
Right now, they're both running, it seems. Or at least, they're staking out somewhat different positions on various issues. The question is whether the American people will say that "two are too many to run" and write them off, or whether people will vote for Hillary because they're really voting for the one who's view they like better in the hope that that view will pervail.

The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC.I've been usurped!