Comments on: Chris Wallace Has Indeed Grilled A Bush Official About Failing to Get Osama Before 9/11

By: Obama Administration Provides Visas for Terrorism Suspects - Marcus_Traianus’s blog - RedState

Thu, 21 Jan 2010 15:21:15 +0000

[...] irony to those affected by 9-11. That is based largely on her husband’s various actions or lack of action which directly provided terrorist the ability to perpetrate those [...]

By: Sister Toldjah » Al Gore confuses Bush with Bubba

Sister Toldjah » Al Gore confuses Bush with Bubba — Wed, 06 Dec 2006 23:39:56 +0000

[...] What the hell? Excuse me, but where on earth did Al Snore get the idea that the President was more concerned with his legacy than whether or not we win in Iraq? The only president in recent history obsessed with his legacy was the chap Gore was second in charge to: former Prez. Bill Clinton. Clinton was (and is) so obsessed with keeping the lid on his administration’s counterterrorism failures (afterall, the 9-11 Commission all but gave him a pass) that his lawyers demanded that ABC not just change but pull the 9-11 docudrama Path to 9-11 because he thought it unfairly portrayed the Clinton record on counterterrorism (it didn’t). This is also the same guy who expected softballs about his charity work be thrown at him when Fox News’ Chris Wallace did an interview with him back in September. When the topic of the interview switched to the Clinton administration’s record on counterterrorism, Clinton became red-faced and essentially accused Chris Wallace of a ‘conservative set-up’ – simply because Wallace asked him the same type of tough questions about Al Qaeda under his watch that he did of then-Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. [...]

By: BuzzTracker.com

BuzzTracker.com — Wed, 11 Oct 2006 15:00:02 +0000

Featured on BuzzTracker…

…

By: EJ Dionne: Clinton’s Falsehood-Littered Blow-Up On FOXNews Was Fighting Propaganda « The Hippy Conservative

Sun, 01 Oct 2006 00:07:10 +0000

[...] And lie Clinton did. Lied and lied and lied again. Read the links for a more in-depth analysis, but for one example of those many lies, Clinton repeated the mantra that Clinton left behind a “comprehensive war plan” against al-Qaeda for the Bush administration when he left office. In fact, according to both former Clinton National Security Adviser Sandy Berger and former Clinton and Bush official Dick Clarke (who Clinton cites as an authority on his terrorism record elsewhere in the interview), that isn’t true. [...]

By: Art

Art — Thu, 28 Sep 2006 19:17:58 +0000

Bush’s legacy will be “Responsibility without Accountability.” Adolf had twelve years to muck about
and George will have eight.

Whether Bill had a “meltdown” on camera depends on your news source and POV. Looking for bitching points about either party makes everybody stupider than ever daily. Odds are you will be killed by your appendix or a drunk driver long before Al Quaida ever takes a shot at you. Neither party has their priorities straight or you best interests in mind as they worry about upcoming elections.

By: The Anchoress » Dick Meyer: talkin’ ’bout his g-generation…

Thu, 28 Sep 2006 19:13:50 +0000

[...] Or, beyond calling the Clinton/Wallace debacle the soap opera it is, Meyer might have addressed how no one in the mainstream media – those “mediating intelligences” – thought it necessary to do a little fact-checking on Clinton’s claims (and heaven knows the blogs would have made the checking very easy for them) beyond reporting that he “defended himself vigorously.” Nope. No reason to check up on a Clintonian claim. If he said it, it must be true! [...]

By: The Ace

The Ace — Thu, 28 Sep 2006 17:53:33 +0000

So now you’re trusting one Berger quote as the definitive source vs. the Commission Report?

Um, the commission report never said Bin Laden was the or a target. Merely that he was “missed.”

I would think you’re intelligent enough to read and comprehend, but apparently not.

So you’re saying it’s better to wait until an attack to do something

No, I never said that.
Again, reading and comprehension.
Not your strong suit.

Find one tree and use it to represent the forest. Your quote does not disprove mine.

Huh?
I never said it “disproved” anything?
It is representative of the Clinton approach.
Plan, not act.
Or more appropriately, talk about plans, don’t
act.

W’s legacy forever is the loss of America’s twin towers.

Well, considering you can’t read simple sentences, I’ll take this with a grain of salt.

By: Billrog

Billrog — Thu, 28 Sep 2006 17:46:26 +0000

Bin Ladin was a target, Ace. Fact.
So why did Sandy Berger say he was not?
So now you’re trusting one Berger quote as the definitive source vs. the Commission Report? That’s funny. In any case, it’s a distinction without a difference. For the sake of argument I will yield on this point, argued by you with Clintonesque word-parsing. The larger point is that C sent 60 missiles at a prime al Quaida target. That still qualifies as being serious.

Re smears of Blumenthal: He was an eyewitness and a respected journalist. It really saddens me when anyone subverts political discourse with the Rovian tactic of when you don’t like the message, smear the messenger. And I resent your many snide remarks aimed personally at me.

Logical fallacy. So you’re saying it’s better to wait until an attack to do something. Three thousand souls beg to differ.

…standby force… There’s a real logical fallacy for you: Find one tree and use it to represent the forest. Your quote does not disprove mine. It’s like saying because the Yankees lost one game, that means they’re not a great team. (And I hate the Yankees.)

The bottom line remains that the 9/11 attacks happened on Bush’s watch, not Clinton’s. W’s legacy forever is the loss of America’s twin towers.
Not to mention almost another 3,000 US service and 40,000 Iraqis dead in a pointless, dangerous war. But that’s another topic for another day.

By: The Ace

The Ace — Thu, 28 Sep 2006 17:13:14 +0000

And that Clinton gets smeared instead of thanked for being the first president to really give anti-terrorism some muscle. From the link you provided:

The standby force gave Clinton the option, never used, of an immediate strike against targets in al Qaeda's top leadership.

By: The Ace

The Ace — Thu, 28 Sep 2006 17:09:00 +0000

And at least you now acknowledge there was a strike.

I never said or implied otherwise.

How much lethal objects did Bush launch? The score is still 60 to 0.

Logical fallacy.

See, Clinton was acting in response to us being attacked (allegedly).

So Clinton post-attack:
60
then waffle and do nothing.

Bush:
Thousands/decimate al Qaida.

Not only are you keeping the wrong “score” you’re looking at the wrong game.