“I remember a lot of criticisms of Clinton, but the criticism that he was ‘too obsessed’ with bin Laden isn’t one of them.”
As we have addressed here and here, Clinton became enraged with Chris Wallace and if the reaction from the viewers is any indication, he did himself no favors!
Allahpundit says the righties are going to have a field day fact-checking him. Points to take away:
1. He showed leadership by not pulling out of Somalia while the bodies were still warm.
2. Contrary to Chris Wallace’s assertion, Bin Laden wasn’t involved in Mogadishu. Which, actually, wasn’t Chris Wallace’s assertion.
3. He was all set to do exactly what Bush ended up doing after 9/11 except that he couldn’t get basing rights in Uzbekistan and the CIA and FBI wouldn’t “certify” that Bin Laden was responsible for the embassy bombings. Really? I’d be curious to know what Michael Scheuer has to say about that. I’d also be curious to know why, if the FBI refused to certify, Osama’s been on their Ten Most Wanted list for his role in the embassy bombings since June 1999.
4. He had eight years to confront Islamic extremism, four years to address Bin Laden’s declaration of war on the U.S., and two and a half years to respond to the embassy bombings, yet somehow Republicans had “three times” as long as Clinton did to get him.
5. Despite the fact that it’s central to a debate that’s been raging for weeks, Wallace’s question about whether he did enough to eliminate Bin Laden is a “conservative hit job” designed to appease Fox’s right-wing viewers, who’ll all be very, very sore when they find out Rupert Murdoch is working with Clinton on climate change. Presumably Wallace should have stuck to the script followed by Meredith “Giggles” Vieira, CNN schlockmeister Larry King, who bombarded Clinton with tough questions like “How’s your health?” and “Have you seen Gore’s movie?”, and of course Keith Olbermann, who played his part perfectly except for the lack of a blue dress.
6. The “entire military” was against using special forces to go in and get Bin Laden, thereby rendering Clinton powerless under the “Entire Military” exception to the Constitution’s commander-in-chief clause.
7. John Warner, Lindsey Graham, and the rest of the McCain anti-belly slap contingent are proof that some Republicans still believe in the Constitution.
8. Republicans will do well in November if terrorism is the central issue because Americans know the multicultural left is hopelessly ideologically compromised on Islamic extremism. Which is to say, because Americans will be “scared.”
Jim Pinkerton thinks Clinton was looking for an opening to bash Fox.
Byron York takes Clinton’s advice and reads Richard Clarke’s book. Money:
[I]t’s not quite accurate to say that Clinton tried to kill bin Laden. Rather, he tried to convince ” as opposed to, say, order ” U.S. military and intelligence agencies to kill bin Laden. And when, on a number of occasions, those agencies refused to act, Clinton, the commander-in-chief, gave up.
Clinton did not give up in the sense of an executive who gives an order and then moves on to other things, thinking the order is being carried out when in fact it is being ignored. Instead, Clinton knew at the time that his top military and intelligence officials were dragging their feet on going after bin Laden and al Qaeda. He gave up rather than use his authority to force them into action.
Wallace says he’s surprised at Clinton’s nutrootsy “conspiratorial view.” He also wants to know, as I do, why he was the only one on Clinton’s media tour to put this rather pertinent question to him.
Jonah Goldberg points to NR’s editorial after the cruise missile strike in ‘98 as proof that plenty of conservatives were happy to see Billy Jeff take a shot at Osama.
Patterico discovers, contrary to Clinton’s belief, that Chris Wallace has asked these questions of Bush administration officials. So “conservative hit job” really is Clintonspeak for “tough but fair.” Surprise.
September 25, 2006 - 03:06 PM on September 25th, 2006
Facts are those nasty lilttle things that always got in Slick Willie’s way…
I see they still do.
September 25, 2006 - 11:31 PM on September 25th, 2006
Yeah and if the facts get in Billy’s Way, they are the bain of the Bush administration that seems to always be able to make 1 + 1 = 7. There has not been a more lying dishonest administration in the history of the world.
If W (Witless) Bush had been president on Dec. 7 1941 we would have attacked Russia and declared war on Whimpisim.
Not only is dubya incompetent, but he has less presidential presence than Sponge Bob.
September 26, 2006 - 05:10 AM on September 26th, 2006
2- when you find some link to Clinton telling the truth, you let us know! Hey maybe you can explain to us why we were attacked repeatedly throughtout Clinton’s 8 years.