[Dolphy]

The retired general added new details to his charge that President Bush was responsible for leaving America vulnerable to the 9/11 attacks, saying that President Clinton tried to warn Bush about Osama bin Laden but Bush wouldn't listen.

If this is his tortured logic, then someone needs to tell him that it doesn't work both ways. If Libya is Clinton's doing then so was September 11.

[mishka]

If Clinton knew enough to warn Bush, he knew enough to do something about it.
So what Clark is saying is "...Clinton was too afraid to get Bin Laden, so he handed it off to a braver man...of course, now he's you're problem now that he's hiding because I lobbed a few cowardly missiles toward him."

> "...if you're the captain of a ship, and it runs aground, they only ask two questions: Did it run aground, and were you the captain?

No, if the FORMER captain mined the waters, sabotaged the keel, and hired enemies to work the engine room...it would be the FORMER captain who'd be in the brig.

I'm actually LOVING all the things these Democratic hopefuls are saying.
We have Dean saying he needs "permission" from Europe to go to war.
We have Clark saying "shows that you don't need to use force..." when it's clear to everyone else that Bush's plan is working.
They are giving the voters the rope that they will hang from!
They're making it so easy.

Of course, it was all said more succinct by FR'r "Dolphy", who said:
"...it doesn't work both ways. If Libya is Clinton's doing then so was September 11."