Posted on 02/07/2006 11:32:39 AM PST by pillut48
"Thousands Remember Coretta Scott King" ---------- I was watching Fox News and they showed Jimmy Carter speaking at Coretta Scott King's funeral, and sure enough, he started talking about illegal wire-tapping and other examples of government run amok. I am appalled that he would use this opportunity to bash the President, but not really surprised. :-(
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Clinton had the easiest foreign policy burden of any president since Hoover, and, like Coolidge, presided over a strong economy through almost his entire two terms. We are fortunate that this nation did not experience any major foreign or domestic crisis during the Clinton presidency.
I HAD forgotten about that! And 45's! Now I feel old.
".........putameister........."
I've never seen that word before. It's great!
Al Sharpton was on O'Reilly last night--Bill BLASTED him for the political potshots during the funeral. Al came back with an insult for the President, saying he couldn't be bothered to stay and listen to Bernice's (Coretta's daughter who is a preacher, IIRC) eulogy--d'oh, Al!! Clinton and his wife didn't bother to stay either! But no mention of that. Can you imagine the security nightmare if all 4 presidents and their wives had stayed until the funeral was over (IIRC, there were over 10,000 people in that building alone, not counting the ones milling about outside)?? I don't blame them ALL for leaving early. I'm sure Bush has Tivo at the White House, duh!
President Bush can't win with the libs no matter what he does, so I think his view of staying above it all is a very good one. Just makes them look more like the undignified dolts the
libs are!
"We are fortunate that this nation did not experience any major foreign or domestic crisis during the Clinton presidency."
Uh, did you not see the newspaper reports about Waco or Oklahoma City or the first bombing of the WTC in 1993?
It WAS there, Clinton just blew it off and President Bush and America are STILL paying for that...
Wait, let me rephrase that-
;-)
The first was the result of overreaction on the part of the FBI and the other Federal agencies. Overreaction is nothing new; you can go back to the Wounded Knee massacre in 1890, where US cavalrymen massacred unarmed Indians or the police assaults on peaceful civil rights marchers in Birmingham, Alabama, in 1962, to witness other instances. In 1999, there was the predawn paramilitary assault by Federal LEOs in Miami to seize Elian Gonzales, to take this refugee boy to the loving embrace of Fidel Castro. Lawmen and soldiers sometimes go over the top, and the Branch Davidian case is another example of overkill.
As for the Oklahoma City case, Nichols and McVeigh may or may not have been tied to Middle Eastern terrorists. But they were tied to domestic radicals, the white supremacists of Elohim City. There is a long history of terrorist activity on the part of domestic dissidents: anarchist, Marxist, white supremacist, pro-labor, anti-labor, etc. We can go back to the Haymarket Square bombing in 1886 by anarchists that killed eight Chicago policemen. Anarchists assassinated William McKinley and attempted to assassinate both Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt. During the 1960s and 1970s, Marxist groups like the Black Panthers, the Weathermen, and the Symbionese Liberation Army committed numerous terroristic acts, burning ROTC facilities and bank buildings, for exanple. The Ku Klux Klan also engaged in terrorism during the 1950s and 1960s, most notably the killing of three civil rights workers in Mississippi. The Oklahoma City bombing, like the Branch Davidian situation, was tragic, but in line with a long pattern.
As for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, this was an act of international terror. However, it was poorly executed and did minimal damage. The 9-11 assault, on the other hand, was well planned and almost flawlessly executed. It involved 19 trained men, with very good communication, access to large amounts of cash, and effective planning. In comparison, the 1993 bombers were basically do-it-yourself terrorists.
You are correct in saying that the Clinton Administration took the threat of terrorism too lightly, even after the bombing of the USS Cole in 2000. Their negligence did contribute to the 9-11 tragedy.
Clinton had the benefit/restraint of a republican controlled congress for six of his eight years that kept him from driving the country into ruin. Jimmy had no such restraints and look at what happened.
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.