Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 10/01/2001 12:24:07 PM PDT by Mia T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last
To: Mia T
It's fine with me to examine Clinton's complicity in wrecking our national security. Let's not fool ourselves about the complicity of Republicans,though, particularly when they controlled both houses of Congress. The last time I checked, Congress still had oversight responsibilities.
2 posted on 10/01/2001 12:34:26 PM PDT by independentmind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
So, Billy Klinton was NOT your favorite President?(/humor)

Good job, Mia

3 posted on 10/01/2001 12:37:24 PM PDT by Mark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
Mia, your posts are so welcome at this time. Thank you
4 posted on 10/01/2001 12:38:49 PM PDT by OldFriend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
You really have THAT guys number don't you?

Looking backward, you were not alone, especially here at FR. We really believed that the damage done would turn out to be monumental. Remember ***** THIS ***** piece? It postulated all or nothing with Clinton. In retrospect, it really DID hit the nail on the head.

Now it looks like we're in for years of deep deadly water while we struggle to correct the influence of the Clintons, and the excesses of the spiteful crypto-Marxist left that not only did so much to support and appologize for WJC, but to undermine the very foundation that not only all of us stand on, but also saw off the the VERY tree limb the America-Hating liberal appologists hung their own hats. Looks like a few are waking up to the fact.


5 posted on 10/01/2001 12:41:00 PM PDT by Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
Cool graphics! Love the Magritte!!!! How about doing up a Delvaux in one of these. Fish! parsy.
7 posted on 10/01/2001 12:47:07 PM PDT by parsifal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
Nice. Thanks Mia.
8 posted on 10/01/2001 12:50:01 PM PDT by Octar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
Bump

For truth !

10 posted on 10/01/2001 12:59:23 PM PDT by DreamWeaver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
Nice post. It speaks volumes that the liberal establishment types even ask the question if it's Billy Jeff's fault. And Billy thought he would be remembered just for avoiding impeachment. He got his wish - a legacy!
11 posted on 10/01/2001 1:06:58 PM PDT by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T parsifal Lurker Noumenon Clinton's a Liar Askel5 colorado tanker
Some excerpts from a piece written just after Clinton was acquited by the Senate, and first published here at FR....

....But what's worse is that only a remnant recognizes that when we wake up from this long drunk on the collectivist gin of social democracy, we're going to find ourselves in bed with a very bad hangover. We're going to find ourselves with one monumental headache, and hopelessly married to one of the most blood-thirsty, ruthless demons ever to rise from Satan's pit....

[snip]

So I just can't help myself on this one. And my comments go directly to every jerk from Hollywood to Manhattan, from London to Brussels, who insists on shoving the Fascist demon of totalitarian collectivism onto our sons and daughters. To every puffed up power broker who has insisted that he is superior to everyone else, and thereby fit to royally rule his own puppet state. To those that insist that the only good monopoly is a state monopoly, especially if it is controlled by them.

[snip]

And of course everybody, but everybody who's stood up against this executive has been subject to the stealth political weapon of the age: the lawsuit. From Matt Drudge at Drudgereport.com to Jim Robinson at FreeRepublic.com.

[snip]

Meanwhile, Slick's gone skating. And we're all going with him, whether we like it or not. We're all going skating on some of the most dangerously thin political ice since the Civil War. And to all you on the left, from Hollywood to Manhattan, now that you've formally unleashed the hounds of the totalitarian collective, I hope you're satisfied with the current darkness. To you who have insisted on freely fornicating with this syphilitic harlot, this queen of the lie, you who are absolutely convinced that your hypocrisy will protect you, that no accident will ever happen to you.

Well, what can we say? Except...sleep well!


That was from ***** ANOTHER ***** one written by someone apparently cursed with a clear nightmare vision of at least the end result on the Clinton years. He only got part of it right though. Because what we ended up with was not just a serial dictatorship of the totalitarian impulse, but serial terror as well. Still, the midnight vision this guy had was so vivid, and in retrospect, so prophetic, few could remain sane. And as I understand it, the author went completely mad shortly after this piece and hasn't been heard from since. Let's just hope that the rest of his vision never transpires.


12 posted on 10/01/2001 1:11:56 PM PDT by Coyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
Could it be that this worm has finally started to turn. I hate to say it in these troubled times, but this just makes me giddy. What goes around comes. How's it feel bubba boy? Great post.
21 posted on 10/01/2001 2:14:00 PM PDT by sweetliberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
Again, a wonderfully talented "ensemble" to digest, Mia T!
24 posted on 10/01/2001 3:07:25 PM PDT by AKA Elena
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
Clearly clinton had no idea how to or inclination to lead, which was one reason why he was always taking polls.

Interesting that in Woodward's book, The Choice, clinton fantasizes about having a big issue to define him, such as a war, "I would have preferred being president during World War II" he said one night in January 1995. "I'm a person out of my time." How ghastly to contemplate THAT scenario. ! Yet he is blind to what he should have done about the repeated acts of terrorism against us.

And we have the absurd Chris Matthews bemoaning that clinton did not have the chance he actually HAD. Note: I only cap real people.

26 posted on 10/01/2001 4:14:54 PM PDT by boltfromblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
As Clinton continured his search, he lamented that he could not see a big, clear task before him. Part of him yearned for an obvious call to action or even a crisis. He was looking for that extraordinary challenge which he could define and then rally people to the cause. He wanted to find that galvanizing moment.

He WAS the crisis.

28 posted on 10/01/2001 4:30:15 PM PDT by StealthChild
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
Atta Girl!
It's been awhile since you fired upon the bastard.
Semper Fi
29 posted on 10/01/2001 7:10:05 PM PDT by river rat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
Interesting compliation.

Kudos.

However, Andrew Sullivan (about the first article, above) is not himself from the political left.

BTW, "Pro-Terrorist ersatz Pacifist Krypto-Nazi Camel Butt Traitors Demand America Surrender to Terrorists."

31 posted on 10/01/2001 8:41:56 PM PDT by FReethesheeples
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
The DEMS and LIBS have a new stategy. They are saying "See we need Big Government after all".

What horse manure. The DEMS - when given the choice of guns or butter.....choose butter 100% of the time.

Conservatives have long preached the main duty of government is protection of the nation. All else is secondary.

36 posted on 10/02/2001 3:51:16 AM PDT by The Raven
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
BTTT
44 posted on 10/03/2001 2:00:32 PM PDT by hattend
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
Excellent!
45 posted on 10/03/2001 2:12:08 PM PDT by aculeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T

Silence becomes him
Paul Greenberg (back to story)
October 4, 2001

 

It was good to see George W. Bush's predecessor rallying with the rest of America to support the commander-in-chief in these tense times, but we do wish Bill Clinton would avoid discussing issues of national security. Loose lips still sink ships, and they can also down airplanes and destroy tall buildings.

When the former president was asked about a report that he'd authorized an attempt to take out Osama bin Laden after American embassies were destroyed in Kenya and Tanzania back in 1998, Mr. Clinton not only confirmed the report, but couldn't resist the temptation to present his administration's record in the best light.

It's a record he might not want to shine too much light on. Because as president, he mainly only talked against terrorism. ("America will never tolerate terrorism. ... Defeating these organized forces of destruction is one of the most important challenges our country faces.") The talk was never matched by policy -- at least not a determined, focused, consistent policy. To call it a weak policy would be to overstate its strength; it was showy but pitiful.

To quote Paul Bremer, who chaired the National Commission on Terrorism back in the '90s, "The Clinton administration basically had a very episodic approach to fighting terrorism. And then it acted essentially in a feckless fashion, particularly in 1998 when Clinton used words about a long war and his action was to send a couple of cruise missiles to destroy a couple of mud huts in Afghanistan." He also blew up an empty factory in Khartoum. The plant was supposed to be connected with Osama bin Laden, but in the end the Clinton administration didn't even contest the owner's claims when he came for his assets in court.

As The New York Times' Michael Gordon pointed out, there was no risk to American personnel in this kind of long-distance war against terrorism, but there was little risk to the terrorists, either.

"We did what we thought we could," Bill Clinton now tells NBC. "I made it clear that we should take all necessary action to try to apprehend (Osama bin Laden) and get him. We never had another chance where the intelligence was as reliable to justify military action."

Rather than make excuses, a simple No Comment would have sufficed. Indeed, it would have shown an appropriate modesty on the part of a president who, when it comes to terrorism, has much to be modest about. Which becomes clear when one reviews the low points of the Clinton administration's war on terrorism, which wasn't much of one. The Clinton crew dropped the ball from the beginning, when one of its first decisions was to downgrade the State Department's office of counter-terrorism.

The Clinton administration also responded to Saddam Hussein's attempt to assassinate President George Bush with a barrage of cruise missiles. They hit the headquarters of Saddam's intelligence agency -- in the middle of the night. (When it came to bombing terrorists, this commander-in-chief was Hell on empty buildings.)

Barred from running for president again, Bill Clinton seems to be running for ex-president, burnishing his record whenever he can and sometimes just inventing it. He would do better to follow Jimmy Carter's example by simply doing good deeds; Mr. Carter has been so exemplary at it that a lot of us have just about forgotten his failed presidency.

Let it be noted that Congress did pass some strong and needed legislation against terrorist organizations during the '90s, but often enough over the Clinton administration's opposition. Unfortunately, that administration then failed to enforce those laws with anything like consistent rigor. It played up to terrorist regimes like Iran's and made excuses for Yasser Arafat even after the Palestinian leader had unleashed his bomb-throwers. A month after Camp David had collapsed, the Pollyannas in the Clinton White House were still looking for ways to appease the man who had resurrected terrorism as an instrument of policy in the Middle East.

But the most telling action Bill Clinton took against terrorists, or rather for them, was to offer clemency to 16 convicted Puerto Rican bombers, part of the group that had waged a nine-year war in Puerto Rico and on the mainland. Their toll: six killed and 70 wounded in more than 70 bombings. In offering these terrorists clemency, Bill Clinton overruled the recommendations of his FBI director (which he did with some regularity) and various law enforcement officers.

That he chose to confer clemency on this homicidal bunch while his spouse was angling for Puerto Rican votes in New York's Senate race only added to the injury -- and insult.

George W. Bush can also be criticized for the state of the country's defenses against terrorism during his brief months in the Oval Office before September 11, 2001. But he doesn't ask for it by trying to defend his record. Since September 11th, he's had other things to do, and has been doing them rather well. He's been too busy and too focused to make excuses for what went before -- an omission that would become another president just now. Save it for your memoirs, Bill.

 

 

 

©2001 Tribune Media Services


47 posted on 10/04/2001 11:42:24 AM PDT by Mia T
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Mia T
Mia,

The thought of someone 'fingering' BillieBlobSlick is more than I can take following a lovely Sunday supper.

Accordingly, I snapped a shot of my close friend hurling his cookies, just to make everybody else just as sick.

Please no email on the picture. I do limit it's usage to only the 'as needed' basis. Now is such a time. Close your eyeballs, should you not like it.

My identical twin brother, first seen atop the WTC, agrees with everything I type, sort of my human truth syrum.

Slop lecker!

50 posted on 11/04/2001 3:50:56 PM PST by jws3sticks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-25 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson