September 23, 2006
9-11 as "Covered" by a Psycho Former President [Updated]
If you had to name a living former President who is a liar and sociopath, who might he be? Well, if you want to see a psycho-president in action, then catch former President Clinton in his interview for FOX News Sunday with Chris Wallace, which discusses the President's failures in fighting terrorism and to dispose of Osama Bin Laden. You'll want to see the entire interview this Sunday, but here's part of it, and I understand that there are other similar exchanges within that interview:
A bit dog barks, and Bill Clinton come across a pit bull when he's questioned. G.M. covered strong reactions of President Clinton and his supporters on recent and related revelations in his posts The Path to 9-11, Inaccurate? and The Path To 9-11: The Left Is A Comedy For Our Times. Wouldn't it have been better to write a good history when one is in office than re-write the actual one after he leaves?
But, I'm not interested in assessing blame. There are far more complications on dealing with terrorists than those to which I'm privy. However, when responsiblility or failure is clear in some areas, why can't Clinton be a man and own up to it and quit trying to cover himself by dragging down others? I don't lose respect for someone, but gain it, when he's honest and admits his failings. I suspect that this will be the pattern for as long as Clinton lives. Students of history and future policy decision makers deserve accuracy to guide them in directing our policies going forward.
(P.S. - To help out you Lefties shouting that President Bush is a liar, there is a difference between out-right lying and passing along information believed to be true from normally reliable sources but later having it questioned.)
[Update]
Bill Kristol, editor of The Weekly Standard, believes that it was partly an act when Bill Clinton "lost his temper" with Chris Wallace.
LET'S DO A THOUGHT experiment: Perhaps Bill Clinton, an experienced and sophisticated politician, knew what he was doing when he made big news by "losing his temper" in his interview with Chris Wallace. Perhaps Clinton's aides knew what they were doing when they publicized the interview by providing their own transcript to a left-wing website as soon as possible Friday evening, and then pre-spun reporters late Friday and Saturday. Maybe it was just damage control. Or maybe Clinton did what he wanted to do when he indignantly defended himself, blasted the Bush administration, and attacked Fox News. What could Clinton have been seeking to accomplish? Three things.Continued in article:
Why Clinton "Lost His Temper"
The former president knew what he was doing.
Maybe Wm. Kristol is right, but I'm not sure that this was all an act. It's probably true that Bill Clinton did intend to produce spin for the Democrats and for his legacy, but I still have to believe from experiences that psychopaths cannot help their rage, and I have to think that even Bill Clinton couldn't turn purple simply on cue, although his bullying was surely intended. He's cunning, but he's still nuts.
Posted by Woody M. at September 23, 2006 10:20 AM | TrackBackThis pretty much says it all:
"Clinton committed the greatest treasonous act perpetuated by a president. He sold the Chinese technology for nuclear weapons for campaign contributions, pure & simple. They made it easy for the Chicoms to steal the W-88 warhead. Loral, Hughes, Boeing all got permission from the "commerce" department (against the wishes of defense) to sell advanced technology for missles to the Chinese. See who was the top contributors to the dems in the 90's- Bernie Swartz of Loral #1 & Hughes #2. Nukes now pointed at us courtesy of Clinton.
They also erected the "wall of separation" between law enforcenment & the various agencies so they could not communicate. They erected 4 layers of bureaucracy for agencies to go through to share information. Why? SO they could control the flow of information when the FBI & CIA started to investiagte the chinese espionage.
So then when they find out about this terrorist (Atta) in Sept 2000, no one can be told of it.
Yeah, he was just a philandering liar....."
Vox Populi (comment) - Aug 18, 2005
Posted by Vulgorilla at September 24, 2006 08:16 AM
Our nation will pay for his sins for a very long time.
The sad fact is he is everything you have said and more.
Even sadder is how he has a cult like followering.
Posted by patty at September 24, 2006 08:23 PM
It also bears witness that Fmr.Pres.Clinton did lie to a Judical Panel, and the results of said DNA evidence are now locked away for 50 years. I wonder, IS there a statute of limitations for perjury? If there is not, can there be a way for the DNA evidence be released through the Freedom of Information Act? Or is this another one of those "scortched earth" policies that Mr.Clinton is famous for?
Posted by cat_herder at September 25, 2006 06:02 PM
I think Kristol is wrong. Clinton lost his cool. Some of what he said has already been debunked and most see it as unfair to compare his eight years to Bush's eight months.
Posted by Oyster at September 26, 2006 06:20 AM