Bill Clinton Reinvents His View on the War in Iraq
[Guest post by DRJ]
Bill Clinton tried to give a boost to wife Hillary’s campaign by reminding Iowa voters of his Presidency (‘back to the future!’), but his efforts may have fallen flat when he claimed he always opposed the War in Iraq:
“Hillary Rodham Clinton will bring America ‘back to the future,’ husband Bill says, promoting his own legacy in public life almost as much as his wife’s presidential campaign.
Showing inconsistency on an issue that has dogged his wife, the former president also told Iowa Democrats that he “opposed (war in) Iraq from the beginning.”
However, Clinton did not clearly oppose the Iraq War and he was forced to explain his inconsistent statements:
“He has not clearly opposed the war from the start. Like his wife, the former president has been critical of the Iraq war in recent months, but at one time he gave President Bush the benefit of the doubt. “I supported the president when he asked for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq,” he said in May 2003, the same year he was quoted praising Bush’s handling of the war.
Asked about the discrepancy, Clinton aides said Tuesday’s comment was a short-handed explanation of his long-held views that weapons inspectors should have been given more time in Iraq. “As he said before the war and many times since, President Clinton disagreed with taking the country to war without allowing the weapons inspectors to finish their jobs,” said spokesman Jay Carson.”
Clinton also complained that he wasn’t taxed his share for the War in Iraq:
“On Iraq, he told the crowd that wealthy people like he and his wife should pay more taxes in times of war. “Even though I approved of Afghanistan and opposed Iraq from the beginning, I still resent that I was not asked or given the opportunity to support those soldiers,” Clinton said.”
President Clinton: Please feel free to make a generous Gift Contribution to Reduce the Public Debt.
— DRJ
I think he is hurting her campaign much more than helping at this point.
voiceofreason (83f66f) — 11/28/2007 @ 5:20 pmWhy would he reinvent his position this way just as the major media is reporting U.S. Iraq war strategy is finally working? I don’t get it.
What VOR said.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 11/28/2007 @ 5:27 pmBecause Hillary needs Iowa and many Iowa Democrats don’t support the war. Bill will take the heat for being inconsistent while she stays on the fence.
DRJ (a6fcd2) — 11/28/2007 @ 5:29 pmClinton could double the current year’s donation just by coughing up this year’s speaking fees.
What is he, some kind of greedy rich white guy? His donation would help future generations avoid paying on the debt; it’s for the children!
Kevin Murphy (805c5b) — 11/28/2007 @ 5:56 pmAnd let’s not even consider how much Warren (“Tax me more”) Buffet could bump that donation. Great link.
Kevin Murphy (805c5b) — 11/28/2007 @ 5:57 pmSo Billy…I am confused…since Hillary voted for the Iraq war, does that means Hillary is suitable or unsuitable to be President?
Perfect Sense (b6ec8c) — 11/28/2007 @ 6:05 pmEven E.J.Dionne on HH’s show shook his head when asked about Bill’s flip-flop on supporting our actions in Iraq. It is not understandable considering the ease of finding all of the comments he made in ’03 (and earlier) about the neccessity of removing Saddam Hussein. He is starting to look like another Jimmah.
Another Drew (8018ee) — 11/28/2007 @ 6:39 pmIts hard to believe that the Democrats will willingly put those two back into power.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/28/2007 @ 7:34 pmYou haven’t read the quote correctly.
When he says “wealthy people like he and his wife should pay more taxes in times of war”, he doesn’t mean “he and his wife”, he means “people like he and his wife”.
Pretty clear if you ask me.
Marshall (19f225) — 11/28/2007 @ 8:49 pmIsn’t Hillary’s spin that she voted for the authorization not because she actually wanted an invasion, but so there would be a credible threat of force to pressure Saddam to let the inspectors in? Maybe Bill is trying to align himself with her spin.
Moops (444e9b) — 11/29/2007 @ 8:14 am