Wednesday, November 28, 2007

Yet Another Shameless Clinton Whopper


From The New York Times:

Bill Clinton Flatly Asserts He Opposed War at Start
By PATRICK HEALY
Published: November 28, 2007

"During a campaign swing for his wife, former President Bill Clinton said flatly yesterday that he opposed the war in Iraq “from the beginning.”

BUT

From a 2004 Time Magazine Inteview:

"That's why I supported the Iraq thing. There was a lot of stuff unaccounted for. So I thought the President had an absolute responsibility to go to the U.N. and say, "Look, guys, after 9/11, you have got to demand that Saddam Hussein lets us finish the inspection process." You couldn't responsibly ignore [the possibility that] a tyrant had these stocks. I never really thought he'd [use them]. What I was far more worried about was that he'd sell this stuff or give it away. Same thing I've always been worried about North Korea's nuclear and missile capacity. I don't expect North Korea to bomb South Korea, because they know it would be the end of their country. But if you can't feed yourself, the temptation to sell this stuff is overwhelming. So that's why I thought Bush did the right thing to go back. When you're the President, and your country has just been through what we had, you want everything to be accounted for."

Like husband, like wife.

Are we seriously talking about letting this guy back in the White House? Seriously?

One can only hope that this continued pattern of deception and evasivness will be recocnized by the American people, and remind them of the scandal ridden Clinton years, when bold faced lies became a standard part of the Democratic playbook.
The Clintons are attempting to build a political dynasty on their ability to take both sides of every issue. For the sake of the nation, let's hope we see through it this time.

Also, one of the talking heads who I like to listen to made a great point the other day.

While Bush was wrong in his assertion that Saddam had WMD's, Hillary has been wrong twice on Iraq. The first time with Bush regarding the weapons and again when she opposed the Surge strategy. And , she's not even the president yet.

Sphere: Related Content

4 comments:

Shannonymous said...

That really is the bottom line; I agree with the Clintons on a lot of their policies and stances on issues, but I just DON’T TRUST THEM!

imsmall said...

HIS WIFE HE DID NOT IMPORTUNE (BILL)

Bill says, during the rush to war
(It surely was a rush)
The haste of it he did deplore,
The frantic forward push,

Which I believe is true; however,
Not ever did he speak it,
If now, post facto, seeming clever
He slyly tries to "tweak it."

Now he says, "I opposed the war,"
But had he clearly done so,
As stridently as--say, Al Gore--
None need to play the dunce so.

His words were clear--from Maine to Aukland
Recall them in my rhyme:
Quoth he, "it's possible to walk and
Chew gum at one same time,"

By which he meant, to bomb Iraq
While chasing old Osama--
Tacit approval of attack
He gave, no Dalai Lama.

Today Bill changes all the tune,
How he opposed it so;
His wife he did not importune
To vote against it, though.

Anonymous said...

How can shannonymous agree with the clintons on a lot of their policies? They are always into saying yes before they say no....Like "I would end the war in Iraq, but I'm not going to pull the troops out...."
-thineprof

Shannonymous said...

I agree with a lot of the policies they've used to improve healthcare for children and education. I didn't say anything about the war.