Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

(This is the forums archive - If you want to get back to the main site simply click the banner above and you will be taken to our homepage.)

Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums is the Ultimate Online Resource for Owners and Enthusiasts of American Luxury Cars. Feel free to browse through our archive - but make sure you make it back to our main site - Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

Cadillac XLR : Cadillac CTS : Cadillac : 2005 Cadillac STS : Cadillac Forums : 2000 Lincoln LS : Lincoln Mark VIII : Lincoln Mark VII : Car Wax
Lincoln Town Car : Lincoln Air Suspension : Lincoln Continental : Lemon Law : Do It Yourself Car Repair : Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums : Mesothelioma

Back to the Archive Main Page

Pages: 1

Rice nails Clinton to the wall

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: fossten

Tuesday, Sept. 26, 2006 7:08 a.m. EDT

Rice Challenges Clinton's Terror War Claim
http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/...250.shtml?s=ic

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice challenged former President Clinton's claim that he did more than many of his conservative critics to pursue al-Qaida, saying in an interview published Tuesday that the Bush administration aggressively pursued the group even before the 9/11 attacks.

"What we did in the eight months was at least as aggressive as what the Clinton administration did in the preceding years," Rice said during a meeting with editors and reporters at the New York Post.

The newspaper published her comments after Clinton appeared on "Fox News Sunday" in a combative interview in which he defended his handling of the threat posed by Osama bin Laden and said he "worked hard" to have the al-Qaida leader killed.

"That's the difference in me and some, including all of the right-wingers who are attacking me now," Clinton said in the interview. "They ridiculed me for trying. They had eight months to try, they did not try."

Rice disputed his assessment.

"The notion somehow for eight months the Bush administration sat there and didn't do that is just flatly false - and I think the 9/11 commission understood that," she said.

Rice also took exception to Clinton's statement that he "left a comprehensive anti-terror strategy" for incoming officials when he left office.

"We were not left a comprehensive strategy to fight al-Qaida," she told the newspaper, which is owned by News Corp. (NWSA), the same company that owns Fox News Channel.

In the interview, Clinton accused host Chris Wallace of a "conservative hit job" and asked: "I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked, 'Why didn't you do anything about the Cole?' I want to know how many people you asked, 'Why did you fire Dick Clarke?'"

Rice portrayed the departure of former White House anti-terrorism chief Richard A. Clarke differently, saying he "left when he did not become deputy director of homeland security."

The interview has been the focus of much attention - drawing more than 800,000 views on YouTube and earning the show its best ratings in nearly three years.

Rice questioned the value of the dialogue.

"I think this is not a very fruitful discussion," she said. "We've been through it. The 9/11 commission has turned over every rock and we know exactly what they said."

Posted by: TheDude

"What we did in the eight months was at least as aggressive as what the Clinton administration did in the preceding years,"

She should really get a better hammer then; she's saying the Bush cabinet did no less than what the Clinton cabinet did... If you are one of the 'Clinton Scapegaoters' that firmly believe Clinton didn't do a single thing, then you must believe that Bush is just as guilty for being lax in the eight months preceding 9/11. Not much of a challenge at all...

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

"What we did in the eight months was at least as aggressive as what the Clinton administration did in the preceding years,"

She should really get a better hammer then; she's saying the Bush cabinet did no less than what the Clinton cabinet did... If you are one of the 'Clinton Scapegaoters' that firmly believe Clinton didn't do a single thing, then you must believe that Bush is just as guilty for being lax in the eight months preceding 9/11. Not much of a challenge at all...

Um...wrong yet again.

She's saying that the United States did as much in eight months as Clinton did in eight years. In other words, much more aggressive.

You must have missed the part where she said that we didn't even HAVE a terrorism plan before Bush took office. Evidently your ability to connect the dots is as good as Clinton's.

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Um... no.

She said "What we did in the eight months was at least as aggressive as what the Clinton administration did in the preceding years,"

Key phrases: 'at least as aggressive' meaning equal (but maybe greater) It's subjective. & ‘preceding years' meaning time before, not Clintons two terms in their entirety as you would like to imply. So stop adding meaning to Rice's speech, if she had meant to say "We did more in 8 months than Clinton did in 8 years." she would have outright said it, no? She isn't shy or reserved about expressing her feelings as we both know.

No... yet again. I did read that part; do I believe Condi would admit that Clinton left the Bush Admin a 'how to' manual and they failed to comply? I doubt she would.

Posted by: Calabrio

It's pretty broadly recognized that NO ONE truely was addressing the terrorist threat adequately prior to 9/11.

What is important is how the two men responded to acts of domestic terrorism. Underboth Presidents, the WTC was attacked within months of them taking office. They responded very differently.

Under Clinton we were hit about 8 more times. We haven't been hit again under Bush. This isn't coincidence and it needs to be noted.

This is an old opinion piece by Byron York, but relevant to the discussion.
http://www.nationalreview.com/york/y...ue112901.shtml

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

Okay, we disagree on this part.

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

No... yet again. I did read that part; do I believe Condi would admit that Clinton left the Bush Admin a 'how to' manual and they failed to comply? I doubt she would.

Wrong again. Richard Clarke himself asserts that there was no comprehensive plan left for the next administration. He's Clinton's hero, and he contradicts Billy and now his wife Billary. What do you say to that?

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

Okay, we disagree on this part.

Wrong again. Richard Clarke himself asserts that there was no comprehensive plan left for the next administration. He's Clinton's hero, and he contradicts Billy and now his wife Billary. What do you say to that?

If what you say is true, then Clinton lied about leaving "comprehensive plans".

A question though, was Clinton left a how-to anti-terrorist manual when he took office from the previous admin? Is that a normal procedure?

Posted by: fossten

Quote:

Originally Posted by 95DevilleNS

Obviously we weren't on a war footing with terror until after 9/11. Everybody knows that. This question is a lame attempt at misdirection.

Ah, I see...you attempt to say it wasn't his fault because Bush 41 didn't leave him anything. So once again you try to change the topic from Clinton to Bush.

Posted by: TheDude

Quote:

Originally Posted by fossten

What? What lead to 9/11 started long before Clinton, do you think Osama and the Middle East was fine and dandy with the U.S. and then when Clinton took office he just then and there decided to start his attacks?

No, for the 50th time, I have repeatedly said that Clinton isn't faultless, I was just asking a question if it was/is standard operating procedures for the out going admin to leave 'how-to' manuals for the incoming admin? Since as far as I know, new administrations tend to disregard previous policies and implement their own. Once again you think that in pre-Clinton times everything was peachy keen perfect and then Bill came and it all went down the drain...