Posted on 09/26/2006 1:10:16 PM PDT by Uncledave
Bush dismisses Clinton critique as "finger-pointing"
By Matt Spetalnick 52 minutes ago
President Bush on Tuesday dismissed as "finger-pointing" criticism from his predecessor Bill Clinton of his counter-terrorism efforts in the months leading up to the September 11 attacks.
Clinton, angrily defending his own administration's attempts to capture or kill Osama bin Laden, had accused the Bush administration of doing far less to stop the al Qaeda leader before the 2001 hijack plane attacks.
Bush, who is trying to stave off a Democratic takeover of Congress in November, seemed to bristle when asked about Clinton, only to sidestep his assertions.
"We'll let history judge all the different finger-pointing and all that business. I don't have enough time to finger-point," he said at a news conference with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.
"I've got to do my job," he added, "and that is to protect the American people from further attacks."
Bush spoke two days after "Fox News Sunday" aired a heated interview in which Clinton defended steps he took after al Qaeda's attack on the USS Cole in 2000 and faulted criticism by "right-wingers" of his efforts to capture bin Laden.
"They had eight months to try, they did not try," Clinton said of the Bush administration response. The September 11 attacks occurred almost eight months after Bush succeeded Clinton.
Clinton also said when his term ended he left the new Republican administration "battle plans" for going into Afghanistan, overthrowing the Taliban and launching a full-scale search for bin Laden.
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice disputed Clinton's statement. "We were not left a comprehensive strategy to fight al Qaeda," she told the New York Post.
Asked about Clinton's comments, Bush said, "I've watched all the finger-pointing and namings of names and all that stuff. Our objective is to secure the country. We've had investigations. We had the 9/11 commission, we've had the look-back this, we had the look-back that."
Bush also said it was "preposterous" for opponents of his Iraq war strategy to call for a swift U.S. troop withdrawal.
He has sought to rally public support for the unpopular Iraq war by framing it as an extension of the "war on terrorism" he declared after the September 11 attacks. Many Democrats say Iraq is a distraction from the broader fight.
(Additional reporting by Caren Bohan)
Wagging..pointing... same difference!
He's right. Let the Democrats become unhinged! Bush has more important things to do.
No bias by Reuters here is there?
My guess is Bill won't be with GHWB for Thanksgiving.
Bristle? Did anyone think the president "bristled" at the question?
Very wishful thinking on the part of Reuters.
Has anyone written about Hillary's comments? In writing ... not YouTube.
Why not?
W's comment is priceless. Glad it made it into the headline.
You have to allow that Reuters believes all the news they print. Given that basis it is no wonder they believe that:
1) Al Gore won in 2000.
2) John Kerry won in 2004.
3) Democrats are going to win in 2006.
4) Bush's foreign policy is on the ropes.
5) Iraq is in a full blown civil war.
Of course, journalists aren't supposed to believe anything except the facts - but since when were journalists anything but human? The elevation of journalists to some level of inhuman impartiality is unintentionally disingenuous at best, and an outright fabrication and dishonest at worst. I vote for the latter. They're pulling their own tails and wagging themselves.
Heehee. If they're trying to equate Pres. Bush's "bristling" with Clinton's angry tirade they're going to die trying.
What were Hillary's comments?
Spoken like a true pro. Way to go Mr. Pres.
What would be the point of that? All they ever do is spew out their conspiracy theories, then curse and swear when you set the record straight.
Is that a modern ex-presidential first? Sailing a brick right at your successor's head?
I know Carter said some things, and early in the last century, Theodore Roosevelt ruffled the waters by voicing his disappointment with the policy agenda of William Howard Taft -- but Roosevelt and Taft were of the same party, and I don't think Carter ever said anything this trenchantly partisan.
Memory check, anyone? I think this is a first -- and Slick, true to his nature, has not merely foot-faulted, but stomped what had been a modern presidential custom.
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.