Monday, September 25, 2006

Bill Clinton vs Fair & Balanced

Okay, The Man Cub got me up at 4 am, as usual, so I’ve had time to check out Clinton’s interview on Fox yesterday.

First off, let me just say that Chris Wallace is one smug, preening little prick. Seriously, I did not know they stacked shit that high, even at Fox News.

And to be fair, Clinton let him get his dander up. At times, I thought he was gonna hop up off his chair and squash that little Fox News fucker like the insect he is.

Wallace even pulled the same craven trick to pose the question that set Clinton off as the Pope did in his mea culpa about writing off Islam – it wasn’t his words, it was somebody else’s and he was just the hapless go-between. Wallace began by saying that Fox News fans emailed him overwhelmingly with one question for Clinton: Why didn’t he do more to catch bin Laden when he was President?

[Allow me to digress about the Pope thing – he made a big speech containing an earlier Pope’s blanket condemnation of Islam, and as soon as the lunatic fringe of that religion pointed out that the Vatican would make a dandy terror target, he’s been retracting his words daily since then, claiming “those weren’t my words, I was just repeating them!” What a load of horseshit. You don’t quote someone in the middle of a major speech unless you agree with them or are setting up a rebuttal. And this rebuttal didn’t come till after the Pope had placed the Vatican treasures in the cross-hairs of Muslim extremists. That shows you what the Vatican really values – its possessions.]

Whenever Clinton talked about the comprehensive anti-terror plan he bequeathed to the Bush administration – which they completely ignored till 9/11, just like they did the Israeli/Palestinian peace process because they saw it was a political loser for Clinton – Wallace smarmily asserted that all he [Wallace] wanted to talk about was Clinton’s current Global Something Initiative. It was a repeated, smirking display of hubris worthy of the current President himself.

Whenever Clinton talked about Richard Clarke’s allegations against the Bush administration – Clarke, who had served under two Republican presidents before Clinton and wasn’t kicked to the curb till he began to blow the whistle on W’s anti-terror inaction pre-9/11 – once again, all Wallace wanted to talk about was Clinton’s new Initiative.

Clinton also made an excellent point (admittedly repeatedly, as is his wont) that the very neocon geniuses who egged W into invading Iraq were the same bastards who criticized the Clinton administration’s anti-terror efforts as “wag the dog” tactics to distract the public’s attention from the shitstorm of empty investigations they spent the 90s throwing at him. Turns out now that the partisan investigations were tactics to distract the President from doing his job, not vice versa.

No wonder Clinton was pissed. Every American should be.

7 Comments:

Blogger Carrie Lofty said...

Chris Wallace is one smug, preening little prick

OMG yes!

4:28 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

And to think he got hung out to dry for a blow job and the rodeo cowboy is covered in teflon Is 2009 that far away?

A fellow Christmas Orphan

Be strong man cub is youg yet you have a long journey ahead....

6:39 PM

 
Blogger Jeff Mather said...

First off, another excellent post. Wallace is a preening little prick.

Clinton did more abroad to combat terrorism (on balance) than GWB has after you factor in the disastrous Mess 'O Potamia. But he could have done so much more, and he really should have. I am glad that he owned up to that publicly. (Rest assured, he's still my favorite president by far. The worst is still Andrew Jackson, but GWB is pulling even.)

In particular, the foreign intelligence services were adrift after the Cold War ended and too focused on remote intelligence. The State Department lacked engagement with most of the world -- with the commendable exception of Palestine. The FBI was wicked broken. The CIA, State, and White House all strung along the various factions in Afghanistan, continuing the policy from Reagan and George I.

All that probably would have been forgivable except that there were signs of clear danger everywhere, which the White House responded to poorly: the first WTC attack in 1993, bin Laden's anti-US fatwas, the embassy bombings, the millennium plot, and the Cole. Several times Clinton had options to go after OBL with people (not bombs), but so little effort was put into it, that it never would have worked.

Clinton got religion too late, and by then it was Wag the Dog time. It's a shame...

So I'm glad to hear Clinton giving it to Wallace, but it still struck me as self-serving when I heard the big guy talk about all the plans they had at the 2001 transition.

(Fang, you like to read well-written nonfiction. You might like The Looming Tower. Or you can suffer through my synopsis.)

8:06 PM

 
Blogger Jeff Mather said...

Argh, that last link should have been this one.

8:12 PM

 
Blogger Heather Clisby said...

At great urging by those I respect, I'm reading "The Power of Now" - some New Agey stuff to help me let go of the past.

Along these lines, why are we digging up the past when Today so urgently needs our attention? I notice this Yesterday mentality only works one way. If you bring up the argument "So why did we invade Iraq? was our aim just off? to red staters, all they can mumble is, "Well, we're there now so we just have to support our troups."

So convenient not to look backward unless you already know you like the view.

11:22 AM

 
Blogger Mark Dowdy said...

The wingers are doing everything in their power to turn Clinton's angry response into another Dean scream. Will it work? Perhaps, but do they really want to call to much attention to Clinton right now? It invites a very unfavorable comparison with the fucking moron currently squating in the Oval Office. Remember when he lost his shit a couple of weeks ago with a reporter during the Rose Garden press conference? You wanna compare that to "Let me address the merits of each of your points, but first let me say something about the dishonest context in which they were raised." I'm paraphrasing a bit, but the point is, for such a supposed hot head, Clinton was as lucid as a well-edited book in his response.

I have my issues with Clinton (best Republican prez since Abe Lincoln, but his successor isn't worthy of clipping his toenails.

12:01 PM

 
Blogger Fang Bastardson said...

Right on, Tamburlaine (except that mean part about Mr. Clinton). Lucidity in the C&C - wotta concept!

Well said.

12:07 PM

 

Post a Comment

<< Home