Kudos to Bill Clinton

Great Debates
41

Once again, Sam Stone nails it.

I know not everyone is feeling this way right now, but I am feeling pretty damned bi-partisan. I am not a huge fan of the Clintons, or Gore, or some other high-profile political figures. But this week, I am not bitching much about them. And I see I am not the only one - many of us are taking a break from it.

So I am distressed to hear any partisan bitching right now. About Clinton, Gore, Bush, or anyone. I just don’t think there’s much point to it now. We are in this together, we need to stick together. I’d really prefer to see the partisan bitching kept to a minimum, at least for a spell. But that’s just me, I guess. If the rest of you want to nit-pick and use this tragedy as a time to push your own partisan agenda, I guess you can do that. But I have no taste for it at the moment.

42

I don’t like Bush. I never did, and I like him even less now, I think he has been trying to look presidential with a lot more effort than actually BEING presidential. To me being presidential would have been answering matter of factly as to why he made the decision not to go to the white house. He should have axed Ari Fleischer’s press conference. However, that said, he IS the president. We NEED “A” president, and he’s it, whether i like it or not. I support him, he hasn’t said a whole lot that I don’t like on what he plans to do, I agree with him for the most part. I think he has really smart people behind him, that was always one of his strengths apparently. Colin Powell is the only person who I have found any kind of security in during this whole mess and he was appointed by Bush. Bush knows who to appoint, and he seems to genuinely listen to their advice, and that is the makings of a good leader. The President is the head of the executive branch, that makes him an administrator. So in otherwords, if he can manage the people under him and utilize their strengths then he will do well, and we do need to stand behind him regardless of what we think of him as a person.

Erek

43

You know what I’ve gleaned from this thread?

I’ve determined that we should have terrorists bomb a major target every two days, to ensure that everyone in the country remains united.

:rolleyes:

44

( 'Cause otherwise there wouldn’t be a heard. )

If y’all need to believe that this tragedy somehow transformed politicians into figures beyond reproach then we must part company. I see no logical reason to regard them today any differently than one did ten days ago. For me they remain lying whores. I see no need to unite behind Bush’s actions. I agree that something needs done but I see a need to continue to do my duty as a citizen: moniter the steps my government takes in my name. If I approve of our actions I will applaud them, if not I will complain.

To unthinkingly shout down criticism of a leader is not just disgusting and wrong, it is also dangerous.

Just my 2sense

45

Er… That wasn’t an extra “a” in the 2nd line. It’s an obscure pun. Really.

46

I’ve stayed away from the boards these past six months because of small minded people that post drivel like:

And since this kind of thing continues, I’ll leave again. But in the meantime, the gauntlet has been laid and I shall respond.

This thread was created by a doper that, despite his having never been a supporter, offered his compliments to former President Clinton. This is Great Debates where such a statement usually results in a fair amount of similar and opposing views, plus the drivel. I offered an opinion, and when accused of hijacking the thread, humbly explained and bowed out. Yet some people can’t accept that.

So here’s what I really think of the former president, as relates to this thread.

President Bush arranges for special transportation for the former president and vice president. These are truly extraordinary times in which we live – I cannot imagine any sitting president denying such favor. But, once inside the country, Mr. Clinton’s actions of showing up at the devastation and issuing his “I’m just a citizen” comment was wrong. Dead wrong. Those comments should have been directed to the sitting president. Clinton then shows his support by showing up after the president had appeared. Had Clinton’s predecessor taken a helicopter tour of the horrendous Mississippi flooding in '93 every one of you left-leaners would have asked, “what the hell’s he doing there?” And your sentiments would have been right on the mark.

As far the policies referred to in the quote, thats been covered over and over and over. Afghanistan wouldn’t extradite Bin Laden so we shot off a bunch of cruise missles at semi-random locations. It was so effective that we managed to destroy significant private property, little military equipment, some military personnel, and let’s not forget the civilians. I cannot recall the U.S. ever committing such blatant acts of war on any other country simply for refusing to extradite a criminal. (Before you compare the Afghanistan mission of the Clinton administration to the Libya mission of the Reagan administration you need to go back and read your history books.)

Don’t forget how domestic policy affected all of this. in 1996 Clinton deliberately and explicitly limited the CIA’s ability to penetrate, infiltrate, and spy on terrorist organizations. Anyone that states that that had no bearing on the U.S. intelligence community not having a clue that this WTC “mission” had been in the works for the past two years is speaking purely from a partisan standpoint.

Law enforcement in the U.S. was headed by Freeh, who spent his entire tenure covering his own ass, and Reno, who spent her entire tenure covering everybody elses.

Poor decision making by the Clinton administration is directly responsible for our not being able to discover and thwart this attack. And poor decision making by the ex-president put him in a spotlight that is no longer his.
Now drivel all you want. I’m outa here.

47

I suppose, Southern Style, that your definition of “drivel” and “small minded”-ness is partisan comments from the other side and your definition of “profound wisdom” is partisan comments from your side. So be it. And regarding your exit from this thread, to be honest, I am not sure you will be missed.

I will not get into partisan debates here about who in the past might have been more responsible for the present state we are in…I am sure there is a lot of blame to go around. But, ultimately, the only ones we know are to blame are the ones who committed the acts.

At any rate, I am willing to give Clinton, and Bush for that matter, the benefit of the doubt at the moment. Both seem to be reacting as best they can in very difficult circumstances. My opinion may change with the course of future events…but that is where I am now.

48

I can see why you left, with posts like that you must have gotten a bit of heat.

I had a good chuckle over this one. Ever hear of a little country called Panama? Isn’t Bush pretty much threatenning invasion for the same thing right now?

You are really not in much of a position to be tossing out accusations of partisanship.

49

Clinton is a class act when he isn’t being an asshole. One of his very special gifts is a truly genuine love of all women. This has gotten him in trouble in the past, but his shoulders absorbed a lot of tears when he visited the site the other day. Women can sense his compassion and concern,(my authority on this is from my wife) and despite his notoriety, feel comfortable to gain solace in his arms. I have not seen anyone else able to console complete strangers in this manner. The man truly has a big heart, and I’m sure that is why Hilary keeps him.

50

You’re kidding, right?

51

I was watching Clinton speak on the news last night.

If I’m not mistaken, his daughter was standing beside him. He said that she was in Lower Manhattan when the WTC was attacked. Jeez, people, his daughter was in danger.

Bill Clinton is involved in this as much as everyone else in the nation. It’s just so frustrating.

However sad it seems, I have to agree with you, SPOOFE.

:rolleyes:

52

If I recall, we actually got Noriega after he ran and hid in a church. We didn’t exactly sit off the coast and fire missles at suspected targets in Panama and hope that we got our man. Not to mention that Panama declared war on the US.

You may have a point, but I’m not sure that Panama is the best example to use to illustrate it.

53

No Demise, I was quite serious.

Hey Ludo, pretend I reposted the dangers of mindless support here.
What exactly is the reason to unify behind Bush?

Just my 2sense
If you listen to fools, the mob rules! - Black Sabbath

54

Uh, it’s to help the war against terrorism succeed, so that you and I aren’t blown up in the next attack. :rolleyes:

55

Do you bother to read your replies before you post december?
If so, how can you not notice the superficial nature of your “answer”?

Open your eyes and look at America. There is no need to build a consensus for responding to these attacks. Only a tiny minority oppose doing so. Allow me to restate the question for those who obviously aren’t keeping score at home. Given the massive public outrage, Bush has no choice but to do something. That doesn’t mean that he will chose the best possible something. Why should he or his actions in this matter be above criticism?

Just my 2sense

56

Thank you for the Panama example. Let us also not forget our current situation. This is still about extraditing a criminal, a much more successful criminal by the way.

57

Uh, cite? I don’t seem to recall Panama ever declaring war on the US.

58

It’s called “Google”.

December 15, 1989

59

Its called google and checking more than the first couple of links.

60

I think Clinton has acted appropriately. The walk through NYC is perhaps debatable, but only because people want to ascribe motives to his actions. Clinton might have done a lot of cynical things in his day, but I’m not sure I see a lot of cynicism in what he did. It was wise for Bush to stay away from NYC because presidential visits are way too disruptive and might have hindered what was still considered a rescue operation. Clinton, as ex-president, was able to lift morale without causing a similar disruption.

But I never expected any less of all of the ex-presidents. All of them have united behind Bush in a crisis. That’s exactly what they’re supposed to do. The person who I think is not getting enough attention in this thread is Al Gore. He’s not an ex-president so his absence at the church service would not have been as obvious or telling. And, having lost an acrimonious election to Bush, Gore has the most right to hard feelings – certainly more than Clinton. Despite that, Gore has shown class throughout.