Clinton goes to bat for Bush

[vraiblonde]

http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040408-115054-6046r.htm

"We did go into some of the obvious criticisms of the eight years under his tenure," Mr. Lehman told CNN yesterday afternoon.

He added that the former president is now second-guessing some of the decisions, including what Mr. Lehman characterized as "wrong decisions" made at that time.

"He was very frank, very open about talking about some decisions where, had he known some things, [they] might have gone one way or another way," Mr. Lehman said.

Wouldn't it be a scream if the person who gets Bush exonerated on these 9-11 charges is none other than Bill Clinton?

He was on TV a few months ago and the interviewer tried to get him to bash Bush on security. Clinton replied (paraphrasing), "As President, you make the best decisions you know how, based on the information you have, and hope for the best."

He also said that Presidents aren't infallible (and he oughta know) and you can't expect them to predict the future. He talked about his own failed security policies and regrets as an example of the things that can go wrong. Said he's surely sorry he didn't go harder after bin Laden.

PS, he also said Iraq had ALWAYS been a threat and he thought Bush did the right thing in overthrowing Saddam. So to all you libs.

 

[sleuth]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Wouldn't it be a scream if the person who gets Bush exonerated on these 9-11 charges is none other than Bill Clinton?

Won't happen unless he really puts himself out on a limb... he'd have to call a news conference... make a statement... or testify before the commission...

Otherwise it just won't get the media coverage to make a difference... ...stupid lib media...

 

[Tonio]

Wouldn't both libs and cons be disappointed that Clinton didn't get on some partisan high horse? Libs, because they wanted their boy to attack their hated enemy Bush. Cons, because it's one less thing on which they can challenge their own hated enemy.

 

[czygvtwkr]

It probably means that a big blunder that he did that we dont yet know about is about to come out.

With the office comes great power, however the ability to predict the future and read minds is not one of them.

After an election partanship should be put aside, thats why I think persidents should be limited to one 6 year term and the vice persident should be the guy that came in second place to the president, as well as the vp having some official powers other than voting in case of a tie in the senate.

 

[Toxick]

Originally posted by Tonio
Cons, because it's one less thing on which they can challenge their own hated enemy.

Or because they'd have to use Clinton - who most conservatives view as the most dishonest man in the history of the planet - as vindication that Bush is telling the truth.

 

[Tonio]

Originally posted by czygvtwkr
After an election partanship should be put aside, thats why I think persidents should be limited to one 6 year term and the vice persident should be the guy that came in second place to the president, as well as the vp having some official powers other than voting in case of a tie in the senate.

I would go along with that. Virginia has something similar. A lot of constitutions in Southern states have the governor's post as largely ceremonial, with a lot of the executive power in the Lt. Gov. post. That's a relic of the post-Reconstruction era.

 

[Larry Gude]

This is a NONE issue...

...Clinton has been crystal clear from the get go: Saddam had to go sooner or later. He has REPEATEDLY supported Bush.

What is note worthy is that both Clinton AND today Gore have both testified to the 9/11 Commision, IN SECRET and the media are almost ignoring it, especially compared to Rice's testimony.

So, ex-President and VP who were in charge while Al queda ran wild, leading to 9/11 or the current NSA? Whose testimony would YOU rather hear?

 

[FromTexas]

Yes, that is extremely lacking on the medias part, but remember, they aren't liberalized. Don't you dare say that. (sarcasm off)

The media was all over saying Bush should make public presentation because the American people deserved to hear. Yet, not one word on Clinton.

Go figure.