Monday, September 19, 2005

 

Yet More Clintonian Lies

The Permanent Revisionist is the personification of selfishness

Former President Bill Clinton attacked President Bush in an interview with George Stephanopoulos. As usual, most of Clinton's statements were distortions or outright lies. For example:
Breaking with tradition under which US presidents mute criticisms of their successors, Clinton said the Bush administration had decided to invade Iraq "virtually alone and before UN inspections were completed, with no real urgency, no evidence that there were weapons of mass destruction."
Contrast that with this Clinton quote from 2002:
"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons."
John Hinderaker comments:
This has never happened before. Until now, both parties have recognized a patriotism that, at some level, supersedes partisanship. Consistent with that belief, former Presidents of both parties have stayed out of politics and have avoided criticizing their successors. Until now. The Democrats appear bent on destroying every element of the fabric that has united us as Americans.

Clinton's vicious attack is even worse in the context of his wife's Presidential bid: it is fair to assume that he was motivated not only by partisanship, but by his own desire to re-occupy the White House, and, most likely, wield once more the levers of power.
--------------------------
This attack was false in every respect. The invasion of Iraq had the support of dozens of nations. The UN's inspections could never be "completed," but the UN itself had reported that large quantities of WMDs remained unaccounted for. On the other hand, Clinton's suggestion that there was "no real urgency" about the situation in Iraq was probably sincere, as it typified Clinton's approach to terrorism: he perceived no urgency after the first bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993, or after al Qaeda's attempt to simultaneously destroy a dozen American airplanes over the Pacific in 1995; or after the attacks on American embassies in Africa in 1998; or after Saddam's attempt to assassinate former President Bush; or after Saddam repeatedly tried to shoot down American aircraft; or after the Cole bombing in 2000; or after the Taliban took over Afghanistan and converted it into a training ground for anti-American mass murderers; or after any number of other provocations. So, naturally, Clinton saw no urgency with respect to dealing with Saddam's regime. Of course, had Saddam facilitated a post-9/11 attack on the U.S. using chemical or biological weapons, you can imagine how harshly Clinton would have criticized Bush for his lack of foresight.
Hinderaker has much more. Bryan Preston comments:
Clinton is nothing if not an opportunist. He is driving a knife into Bush's back to finish him off and benefit himself. He senses some personal and political profit in renouncing everything he has said over the past ten years regarding Iraq to adopt a line that is 180 degrees out of sync. Recall that Clinton is perhaps the most cautious President we have ever had. He never made a move without consulting polls, and after the failure of HillaryCare he never introduced initiatives more daring than the V-Chip and school uniforms. Clinton is not by nature a bold man; the damage done to Bush after Katrina signals that he sees an opportunity and is willing to seize it.

Clinton is also, with his Clinton Global Initiative, simultaneously using the legitimacy that Bush gave back to him to seize the initiative on his ultimate quest, which is to become either the actual or de facto head of the United Nations. Having ended the Bush presidency as a center of global authority, should Clinton seize the UN mantle he will hold enormous sway on the world stage.
Clinton is selfishness personified. He has conclusively demonstrated that he is loyal to his own political ambition above all else, no matter the harm done to our institutions, political traditions, or national security. He wants to be President of the World. Nothing is more important to him. His whole presidency and ex-presidency have been dedicated to fulfilling this goal.

|

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?