Posted on 12/04/2002 7:08:11 AM PST by geedee
Clinton Speaks
If you were a Democrat, wouldn’t you just want to shake Clinton? Here’s what I’d be saying: “Hey Bill: You decided not to retaliate forcefully when Saddam Hussein tried to murder your predecessor, our 41st president. You decided that the right way to stop North Korea from getting a nuclear bomb was to lavish them with aid – and then you decided to ignore the evidence that they were cheating. You issued the rules that crippled our intelligence agencies.”* You decided that your top priority for the military was to social engineering, not fighting. You refused to take custody of bin Laden when he was offered up to you. You decided to fight terrorism by, as President Bush 43 so vividly put it, by firing million-dollar missiles at $10 empty tents and hitting a camel in the butt. And now you tell us that we lost the Congress because we’re seen as soft on national security. Ooooooooooooh.” It does make you wonder why there isn’t a word for chutzpah in Arkansan.
On the other hand: Clinton is right of course. Whatever else you say about the Big He, he is a shrewd student of American politics – much shrewder than his would-be successor John F. Kerry, who hopes to win the presidency in 2004 on the issue of faster train connections between New York and Boston. National security is the issue, and it is amazing that none of the likely Democratic candidates in 2004 except Joe Lieberman have anything worthwhile to say about it.
I have this theory about politics: when a political party offers the voters ham and eggs, and the voters say no thanks, its first instinct is to say, “OK then – how about double ham and double eggs?” It’s as if defeat liberates parties to say what they reallythink – and what the Democrats really think is that the voters are just as bored with the whole subject of national security as they are and would really prefer to drop the whole subject. It often takes two elections – and sometimes three – to teach a party to stop talking about what matters to itself and start talking about what matters to the voters. Republicans went through this dismal cycle in the 1990s; now it looks to be the Democrats’ turn.
* If you haven’t done so already, be sure to see Heather Mac Donald’s report on the impact of Clinton-era Political Correctness in the current issue of City Journal: "Why the FBI Didn't Stop 9/11." It's guaranteed to make your blood boil.
He *finally* shows up with something to say in repsonse to their thrashing...as ludicrous as it is.
Went to Costco and got my popcorn. I'm ready.
What a sorry loser to have had as president for 8 years. We need to wake up to the fact that we live in very perilous times. To place a guy like that in control is unbelieveable.
They are their totem for bad or for worse... they raise tons of cash for the party.
I'm convinced HRC wants to be picked as VP in 2004.
If things sour for Bush, she might even run herself.
Early in the Revolutionary war, one "highly respected" Boston area loyalist traitor was stripped naked, dipped in hot tar, covered with feathers, and carried out of town strapped to a split-log rail.
Of course, the 41st president moved a large military force to the outskirts of Baghdad, then stopped and went home, leaving Saddam where he is today. What a waste of Gulf War I.
You have got to be kidding. Hillary isn't going to pay second fiddle to anyone else. Sheesh...I bet her running mate (the presidential candidate) would die of a unusual illness (or perhaps natural causes) only days after the inauguration!
No, Hillary doesn't want to be VP and I really doubt anyone wants to be the President with her as the VP!
Quite true - and we are making progress. However, it infuriates me just how self-inflicted the Clintons are on our society. The enablers and apologists remain blinded to them even today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.