Bill Clinton Rewrites History on Iraq?

Now really…is it really news that Bill Clinton is LYING. I mean how many times must he be CAUGHT telling falsehoods before the STUPID people who support him and the Mrs take their blinders off?

“A spokesman for Bill Clinton tried to downplay the former president’s comments by distinguishing between the authority to go to war, which both Clintons supported, and President Bush’s decision to use that authority when he did.”
We are not stupid Bill, you don’t give authorization unless you expect it to be used.

Yeah, its sort of like giving the car keys to an irresponsible spoiled brat. How can you not expect he’s not going to do something stupid with the car. Their fault lies in expecting Bush to act like a responsible president should.

I distinctly remember seeing a clip on the news, Bill Clinton giving a commencement speech (I do not remember which university) of telling the students to “support this war”. I’m 99% positive he was referring to Iraq (not Afghanistan). Does anybody else remember this?

The guy can’t wait to lie.

Let’s face it … this guy isn’t exactly known for telling the truth!

Diane, Yep..I remember that. It’s the same one where he said he saved SS, though he disbanded the committee and didn’t enact a single recommendation.
For you Clinton loving fools, he and his wife are liars. He got impeached, she will be if she is elected. Has Rove been indicted yet? Bush been impeached yet?

Wow – what difference does it make who is lying? Or how big a liar one is? A lie is a lie. Some of you guys are like the 2 kids at the end of the street trying to decide who’s daddy can whip the other one. We put up with Clinton’s crap, we are putting up with Bush’s crap, and God knows what we will get next. You can be sure of one thing – the next one is not likely to be any better than what we had and what we have.

Only foolish people continue to be hostile to Bill Clinton for his past mistakes. And I am sure most who hold this hostility in their hearts are living in their own mistakes … like voting twice for Bush!

Come on, everyone knows Clinton lied, they all do. But just because you supported and enjoyed the prosperity this country had during the Clinton years, does not make one a “Clinton Lover”. He lied about the affair, but how did it get to that? It was groundbreaking rulings that were being handed down during the Republican congressional years; does anyone remember when not even the secret service agents were immune to testifying on conversations they overheard? Just in a failed attempt at overturning the election, Repuplican hypocrites! Right now Miers and Rove won’t even answer a supeona, where is the Republican outcry or Democratic witchhunt? Neither exist.
Take a look at this country NOW, it is a disaster. Has anyone seen where US now ranks as 12th best place to live? We are in bad shape. Does’nt anyone remember how things were during Clinton? Sure had the drama about the scandals, but everyday Americans had better lives. Sorry to see that most people don’t even see that happening and will not hold the Republicans in power accountable. They just want more of the same. And this level of intelligence is supposed to compete on a Global market, heaven help us.

Here is Hillary Clinton’s statement on October 10, 2002 addressing the Senate on the use-of-force resolution:
“The facts that have brought us to this fateful vote are not in doubt,” she declares, citing Saddam’s record of using chemical weapons, the invasion of Kuwait, and his history of deceiving U.N. weapons inspectors. “As a result, President Clinton, with the British and others, ordered an intensive four-day air assault, Operation Desert Fox, on known and suspected weapons of mass destruction sites and other military targets,” she continues, adding that Saddam “has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members.”

Many here are arguing that its okay for Bill to lie, because Bush is a bigger liar. That is like one inmate complaining that he shouldn’t be in jail for killing one man because his cell mate killed 10 men. He is still a murderer!
And Bill is still a liar.

“We are not stupid Bill, you don’t give authorization unless you expect it to be used.”
no,actually, you ARE pretty stupid if you don’t understand that when you give the president to authorization to go to war you TRUST that he will NEVER USE IT unless he has solid hard evidence AND there is no way around war. Bush had NEITHER!!!

Granting authority to ONE PERSON to decide on war is horribly, horribly wrong and unconstitutional. PERIOD !! Nevermind that the Attack on Iraq was despicable. Everybody could foresee all through 2002 that Bush was determined to go to war against Iraq. Iraq was in BushCo’s crosshairs. So for anyone to claim that they didn’t know that Bush was planning his war is too stupid to be president. Or maybe these politicians making such absurd claims think that WE are too stupid and that we actually might consider voting for them. Hah!

john Kerry is another one who gave a long speech when he voted for authorization for the war and he kept saying over and over, this is NOT something we need to do under the evidence we have now, he specifically said Saddam is NOT an imminent threat, he reminded bush that JFK NEVER needed to go to war with an even more ominus threat but basically, the president said he needed this, he promised he’d only use it if it was absolutely necessary, so what can I do???? this is a vote as to whether we trust our president or not….well, sill us. We trusted him. honestly, we should have known better. Very bad precedence that we cannot trust the president of hte united states, but clearly, in this case, we should not have.

Do show us a quote where Bill clinton said that we should ATTACK IRAQ and go to WAR with Iraq!!!! good luck trying to find it!!! He never did. PERIOD!! end of story. WE all trusted bush when bush ASKED For authority to go to war just like JFK Did!!!! Why does NO ONE who claims that voting to give bush authority to go to war equals war comment on how JFK did NOT go to war when there was a REAL WMD Threat!!! Even IF there was a REAL WMD threat…STILL that does NOT automatically mean war unless you have NO BRAIN and have no capacity to imagine a way around it!!! I take it all of you who can’t imagine a way around are simply too simple of mind to get that other things HAVE WORKED during REAL crises and that in doing so, in being intelligent enough to do so, saved hundreds of thousands of lives.

Dick Cheney said the same thing eight years before, and all his reasons were still valid when bush launched this war. Strife between sunnis and shiites would still be problem. Disbanding the army only made them worse. Why cheney decided he was wrong back in Bush1′s term, who knows. He got the stupid bug that seems to permeate the Bush whitehouse??? maybe. But bill NEVER said we should “GO TO WAR”!!!! Those THREE WORDS. only “GO TO WAR” means “GO TO WAR”. having wmd, beign dangerous..NONE Of that means “GO TO WAR”. NEVER did Bill or HIllary say we should “GO TO WAR”. Apparently they had other ideas of how to handle hte crises, had either one of htem been i n office, war would not hav been their option.

Ask Joe Biden and he’ll still tell you that if he had it to do again he would vote the same way-I bet Dodd would agree-Even though the far left won’t listen-a President needs to be given authority- 2002 & 2003 the media and the American people (in the high 70′s) agreed. Revisionist history is not remembering this feeling of threat- Many of us “knew” that we couldn’t trust Bush but we did not have the responsibility or the intel (including thee part time state senator Obama) American President’s need to be trusted -that is why we mustn’t let the media and pundits twist the storyline so that we vote for someone inexperienced and unprepared to handle the stress and responsibilities of the job. Uniter not divider, Jesus Christ as someone they would like to have dinner with, work across the aisle-all sounds familiar- we’ve heard it before- We can’t be fooled again.

Its funny how when war goes bad those who bail out when voting for it abandon their first beliefs.If the war had gone peachy keen then Bush would be the hero and all those who didnt bail would be going “Yeah!”All this politico still amongst the population still breeds contempt for one side or the other.I myself believe a dream of where the people take back from those we hired.With the ever expanding European theater and its monetary system.I think we have much bigger issues on the table than the near ending war.Which by no means or way is unimportant, but it will end soon and the real threat of a nations return to the nineteen thirties and possible subject to foreign rule deems a threat far larger death toll than the war.It may be hard to even fathom this but recent trends and policies by European nations as well as the dollar dropping out of existance and more Americans and other nations of the world buying Euros seems to hold this view intact.A lot of foreign investment in America is in large companies that employ many.I could go on but im treading off the path off the issue which is old policos attacking the present.I believe it keeps us offgaurd to the real issues at hand.Bringing the troops home,resolving our thought that an emerging power from the east is in our backyard and our lack of recognition of it and a no plan for escaping its grip.Politico endeavours are just argueing sides which solves nothing. Results ? Thats whats needed.

, I think the characterization of Bill Clinton, as one who favored a war with Iraq is just plain wrong. Anyone who knows anything about how Washington works will tell you that giving the authority to the president to go to war if he deems it necessary is something that is granted by congress as a quasi executive prerogative. To now say that Bill Clinton is being inconsistent is disingenuous to say the least. But that’s the MSM for you

On December 15, 2003, while addressing the Council on Foreign Relations and talking about her vote, Hillary Clinton said:
“I was one who supported giving President Bush the authority, if necessary, to use force against Saddam Hussein. I believe that that was the right vote.”

I find it very funny that all these republicans have enough nerve to keep calling Bill Clinton a liar when all he did was lie about an affair with another women. And GWB lied to the world about WMD’s in Iraq and now 4000
american service men and women are dead because of GWB lies.Get your prioritys straight …..

Huffpo has got to stop this circular firing squad. It`s obvious they have a grudge against Hillary,but this is going to hurt in the long run.

hmm, as I recall, most of the population of the US supported the invasion of Iraq at the time it occurred. In fact, I recall being called “unamerican” or worse for speaking out against it as Iraq had nothing to do with 911 or Osama. Now, how many of you deny supporting the Iraqi invasion. Oh yes, remember “freedom fries?” Seems the French were correct after all.

ALso one more thing. Those who voted this moron president to office are bigger morons. You have a cult-like mentality brainwashed in your heads by your uninformed and ignorant educational system.

After reading many of these comments, referring to Clinton as a “liar”, I’d like to know….Where did we find those “weapons of mass destruction” and on what date? How long ago did we pass the $50 billion budget Bush promised to stay with-in? Where is Osama Bin Laden? PERSONALLY…I don’t call anyone else’s kettle “black”, until I’ve checked my own “pot”.

This kills me. Where was he when all this
was going on? If I knew there were no
WMDs then Bill Clinton knew it.

The Clintons are liars. Period.

Wow, I’m shocked. Bill Clinton lying again? I dont believe it!
He voted for it before he voted against it. Of wait, is it the other way around?
I remember when this happened. Both Clintons were crowing about how Bush needed authority to be taken seriously, etc. What a bunch of crap. Clinton voted for the stupid war, thats all there is to it.

Wasn’t he the same fellow that looked into the camera, and into the eyes of the American people and said that….”I did not have sex with that woman”?
Isn’t he the same former president that said that the HillaryCare fiasco was his fault?
Wasn’t he the same impeached former president that claimed that Hillary was ‘swiftboated’ by those bad boys after the debate?
If you believe everything that ‘slick willie’ says, then I’ve got some ocean-front property in Omaha, Nebraska that I would be willing to sell you at good price.
The Clintons will say anything, and do anything to get elected.
No thank you. I prefer to have as our next president, someone who will tell us the truth, and who will bring respect and dignity back to the White House. I’ll take Biden, Obama, Edwards, Richardson, over Hillary.

We give police officers guns, but we don’t expect them to shoot suspects just because they can. We expect them to exhaust all alternatives first.
Quickdraw Bush didn’t. He fired and claimed America supported him.

SCA, you are exactly right. Giving the president authorization doesn’t mean he supported the way it was handled. Now there is a report about Karl Rove saying, it was actually Congress who pushed for war. Unbelievable.

Clinton ignored Mr. Laden, (when he had a chance to take him out) how can we take him seriously. President Bush would not make such a mistake. No, I will not take anything to heart what the Clinton’s say. I don’t trust them. I want what is best for the United States and not for China or who ever contributes to their campaign’s.

Sure.
He only supported the idea of an invasion, not the invasion itself, just like all the Dems. They just supported the IDEA, not the real invasion!
That’s why there is so much evidence of Bill and Hillary speaking out against the invasion when it was starting, right?
No? They weren’t on TV shouting “no invasion!” ? On radio? Not a word? Are you sure? Write letters – did they write letters? No?

“One day they may wake and realize that the rest of have long realized that Clinton was a far better pres, than Bush was even on his best day, if there ever was one!!, someone help me out here if you can.”
Yeah, someone help him out. I can’t think of “long realized” reason that Clinton was better than Bush. President Bush at least realized there was a threat to out national security and is trying to address this situation. What did Bill do? Nothing…

The Mainstream Media are happy to usher the Clinton’s back to office. Files and tapes, legwork’s done for spending the next 4-8 years reopening whitewater, filegate, troopergate, chinagate, pardongate… etc.
They can drag the American People back through the old mud and save on news, and reporting costs.
Great for profits.

We shouldn’t worry so much about the people who write these over-the-top dismissals of the Clintons and other progressive voices. They are of an irrational mind-set and blind to many of the good qualities of all he people who disagree with them. Clinton was/is an infinitely more informed, balanced, and objective arbiter of policy than anyone in the Bush administration has ever tried to be. Not that he didn’t have his political leanings. We all do.

Did Bubba Create A Hubba-Bubba For HillaryHub?

Bill Clinton rewrites history on Iraq from Political Radar reports that former President Bill Clinton may have nuanced himself into more problems for his wife on the campaign trail – blurring his record on support of the war in Iraq.

AllI can say is remember White Water.Read the facts and you will NOT be able to vote for either of them ever AGAIN. TRUST? NEVER

“All I can say is remember White Water.Read the facts and you will NOT be able to vote for either of them ever AGAIN. TRUST? NEVER”
Posted by: George Bollhorst | Nov 27, 2007 11:49:25 PM
Wow George thats the best you came up with? Whitewater? Or Monica? Have you forgotten Alberto Gonzales? Or can you not recall? How about Katrina? Scooter Libby? Rumsfeld? How about our soldiers dying for what? Lets not forget that Bush has not been able to find Bin Laden, and now there is Iran.
Yeah, Clinton was way worse, jeez. Open your eyes

I posted this before so I’ll post it again
I know Clinton supporters are not going to want to hear this but down the road when they rank presidents Clinton will be near the bottom. Look at the other two presidents who got impeached, both near the bottom. What exactly did Clinton do as president? He had a good economy, but a good economy doesnt make you a good president, near the end of it we fell into a recesion. He never once met with his CIA head by himself and you see where that led too. It always seemed like when something major happened Clinton wouldnt do anything. Clinton did so little that when a movie that wasnt pro him came out he had to have it edited…..because he was worried about his legacy! How pathetic is that?

“It all depends on what the definition of ‘is’ is,” right Bill?
If the guy will lie under oath, he will always lie.

hey bill, let me get this straight, monica lewinski was 21 yrs old when you got cought, and you were how old? and how old was monica when you first started with her?

Did any of you see “The Path to 9/11″???????
Clintons didn’t want it ever shown, it finally was after they had parts removed, but then it disapeared….It will no longer be shown, no DVD nothing…….It is too close to the truth, and they have the power to kill it……But Michael Moore can put trash out…..
Lets have an outcry to see this film again…….

Then what “we are not stupid”? What will watching a movie do? We already know Clinton did act as he should have. Get over it. He is gone. Bush had a chance and made things much much worse. Bin Laden is still out there remember.

Depends what the meaning of “oppose” is.

For the record, BOTH Clinton & Bush are LIARS. The only difference: Nobody DIED when Clinton lied.
I think going forward – the only BUSH you should trust is your own.

Vince Foster – yes. It may true however, I meant realities: Clinton did have sex in office and lied about it and GWB did lie about WMD(Weapons of Mass Delusions) which led to 3900 new graves and still more to come…..

you omit any reference to saddam hussein or terrorists, in your world they dont exist. do you think really that being passive would cause the arabs to love us?, how many attacks have been prevented? dont know? ask me how many terrorists have been created. i dont know either? are you right? or am i? you dont know, neither do i. but you cant just sit and let them come after you, if yoiu do that, its like playing a football game without a defense—– or offence!

Geary,
maybe Democrats don’t resign because they haven’t done things that call for resignations. Interesting thought, no? When have we ever seen such an incompetent AG? or Defense Secretary? How about the gay Republican senator who denies he is gay? Or Mark Foley? You know just as well as I do, ANY politician caught doing that would resign. Its just interesting lately its mostly Republicans

Um, Barney Frank doesn’t hide the fact that he is gay, and certainly doesn’t support legislation that would support any anti-gay agenda. Larry Craig did. Mark Foley did, yet they are gay? Sorry, I trust Mr. Frank because he can at least be honest with himself and the american people he serves.

okay yes you won. congrats. its okay, the day of reckoning will come in 2008. The GOP is already falling apart and becoming irrelevant. Of course the Dems aren’t any better. Still the GOP have nobody to blame for their collapse then themselves which is what makes me laugh. They brought their own downfall all by themselves

i think she will win primarily from the votes of males. it is males who take one look at her and then out of sympathy want to get bill back into the oval office where he can date young girls. hes going to need them more than ever now and the oval office is the perfect dating tool. he will finally have enough time on his hands to do it right! go billy!! ALL MEN HELP BILL AND VOTE FOR HILLARY!

Certainly the heathen Bill’s lies to teh world go to the heart of pure EVIL. HE broke one of the ten commandments and was unfaithful. Bush2 on the other hand has broken no commandements by sending our boys into war. His crusade AGAINST evil will be rewarded in heaven one hundred fold.
Posted by: WowNellie | Nov 27, 2007 11:01:08 PM
************************************
This is why politics and Religion don’t go together, even though dragging us into a “Weapons of Mass Destruction War” and adding a few “Acres of Crosses” to Arlington. Bush TECHNICALLY didn’t break ANY commandments? And by comparison, Bush is a “saint that speaks with God”, and Clinton is Satan’s Desciple, THAT’S SCREWED-UP! Pardon Nellie, It’s just MY OPINION, but, THAT’S BACKWARDS! You don’t think it’s WRONG to lie about starting a WAR? Lying is a SIN, killing is a SIN….. Bush is every bit as much a SINNER! PS, the movie “Path to 9-11″, was FICTION, there was even a disclaimer before the movie to tell you it was FICTION! Any MORON can look-up FICTION in the dictionary to get this definition…..

Bill did NOT rewrite history although I’m sure Limbaugh will spin it that way.

to whom EVER DARED compare JFK To Bush….HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!! JFK had PROOF POSITIVE of WMD AIMED AT US!!!! For those of you with very little brain THAT Is a threat!!! A VERY REAL threat and it was NOT one that could be sustained. Would you EVER allow someone to hold a loaded weapons at your head and the heads of everyone you loved???? that is EXACTLY What we had!!! And did JFK go to war???? did HE INVADE???? Yes or No???? DID JFK GO TO WAR WHEN GIVEN THE AUTHORITY TO DO SO????? DID HE?????? NO!!! NO!! NO!!!!! PERIOD!!! END OF DISCUSSION!! HE had the authority to go to war, he saw weapons POINTED at us a nd while ALL his generals, oh yes ALL OF THEM, every single one of his generals said WE MUST ATTACK there is NO OTHER WAY! JFK said no, not yet. We haven’t exhuasted all options yet. And if you are alive to read this, as I guess you must be, thank GOD Bush was NOT President back then because Bush thought imaginary evidence that NOBODY ELSE IN THE WORLD BELIEVED was enough to go to war. Can you imagine if he actually saw war heads pointing at us????? john kerry saw bush’s evidence..go ahead and READ what kErry said on the floor of the senate the day he gave the vote. He said, here, have it, BUT DO NOTE, “WE HAVE NO REASON TO ATTACK NOW!” “SADDAM IS NOT AN IMMINENT THREAT” ……….The only revisionist thing that seems tobe going on here is that folks don’t like to remember what people were actually SAYING. READ ALL their comments. NEVER did Clinton say to go to war. NEVER did Kerry say it was time for war. They said hte opposite. They said we must trust our president at this time, but now it NOT time for war.

Just like Reagan used to say, are you better off now than seven years ago? I don’t think so. We have been thrown into a state of perpetual war with no clear objective and through a cloud of lies. Let Bill Clinton be, he didn’t get 3800 americans killed and hundreds of thousands of iraqis like Bush has.

Clinton is, was and will ALWAYS be a LIAR! Case in point: “I did not have sexual relations with that woman – Miss Lewinsky.” He said to the WORLD pointing his finger in the camera. Are we really supposed to believe a thing he or his shrew wife say or said or didn’t say?

i don’t care how much neo-cons hate America and our soldiers, they still prospered under Clinton

sometimes, but not too often, i actually feel sorry for republicans and dumbya…..

Interesting how many comments in this post show why Bush was elected twice. I bet they would elect him a third time if it was possible.
It seems that people just have no idea what politic is about. Perhaps the lack of historical references, lack of reading from multiple sources, lack of critical mind, lack of understanding and knowledge how the world is today…?
Giving the ability to a president to act on a threat posed by weapon of mass destruction from both diplomatic and military perspectives does not mean that the president has to go to war. It simply give him the choice and, furthermore, give him the credibility when facing the opponents. Of course, one would actually expect that the president will behave rationally, and not like a teenager.
Since then, we learned that the Bush philosophy is shoot first and think afterward, or not at all.
The Clintons were right to trust the president but the president obviously disappointed everybody by going to war without having tested a diplomatic solution and military prepared.
Should I remind you that when Clinton left office, we had millions of $ surplus and a plan to use it as a way to solve the looming social security issue? Isn’t that what one would call intelligent planing? And that is just one example.

Edwards Continues To Show Lack Of Respect For Separation of Powers

Usually when politicians make a mistake they will have the sense to either drop the point (or sometimes try to rewrite history such as Bill Clinton on Iraq). One exception is John Edwards, who shows once again why Bob Shrum called him a lightwei…

Those of you who don’t like the Clinton war vote should probably just vote for someone else. That’s what Hillary Clinton advised you a LONG time ago.
The rest of us get it.
–>>>> The inspectors were NOT in Iraq, and everyone went along with Bush to get them back in… because Bush was saying that Saddam HAD wmd’s.
In fact, Dick Cheney said on Aug. 26, 2002 THAT HE KNEW WHERE THEY WERE!!!!!
Bush pulling out the inspectors is the first that anyone knew, pro-Bush or con-Bush, that Bush would invade Iraq even if Saddam didn’t have the wmd’s.
Bush is the liar.
If you don’t believe that, you will never understand and appreciate what many of us see as the leadership of both Bill and Hillary Clinton.
I don’t say that Obama or whoever can’t or won’t be President.
I’m saying that you can call Bill Clinton a liar all you want, but there are many of us who feel the liar is George W. Bush.
If you don’t, so be it.
I proudly support Hillary Clinton for President of the United States.
I never voted for Bill Clinton, but I now believe he will go down as one of our very best Presidents ever.
(And now leave it to a DEMOCRAT to disagree with me. As a general group of fellow teammates, Democrats are absolutely pathetic. You really do deserve to lose elections.)

Bill Clinton Rewrites History on Iraq?
I supported the President when he asked the Congress FOR AUTHORITY to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. I HAVE STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE EFFORTS IN AFGHANISTAN and I would be happy if they would send more troops there BECAUSE THAT’S WHERE THE REAL PROBLEM IS.
A spokesman for Bill Clinton tried to downplay the former president’s comments by distinguishing between the authority to go to war, which both Clintons supported, and President Bush’s decision to use that authority when he did.
“As he said from the beginning and many times since,” said Clinton spokesperson Jay Carson, “President Clinton disagreed with taking the country to war in Iraq without allowing the weapons inspectors to finish their jobs.”
BUT DID BILL CLINTON GROW TWO HEADS SO HE COULD EAT AN ENORMOUS DINNER WITH THE SECOND WHILE GIVING A SPEECH WITH THE FIRST??????????
surprisingly, no.

Come on everyone! the Bushes and Clintons are nothing but a bunch of globalists. What Democrat President would sign into law NAFTA? And, what Republican President would spend us into oblivian? For 30+ years, no President or politian has done nothing to secure our borders or come up with a common sense energy plan. Stop the corperate thieves and vote them all out!

Jan: I can not believe you believe in the Clintons. They lie…they lie at every chance they get. They lied about Vince Foster, Kathleen Willy, J. Flowers, Whitewater, Rose Law firm records (real funny those just happen to show up in the White House residence), Monica, etc., etc, etc. Books have been written solely on this topic. They have no leadership ability at all. Leadership is not sticking a wet finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing. The fact that you support Hillary is a sad comment on your ability to see the issue clearly and are more interested in “the first woman” President than the security and safety of this nation. There are a lot of great women that would make a wonderful President….she ain’t one of them.

So what, they all lie! We never cared if he cheated on his wife, big deal, that’s their business. So, he killed an urge, the other LIE killed lots of troops,and costs us mega millions. The media and republicans will say anything to keep a democrat and “Clinton” out off office. We need them in again, for 8 years we were all working and there was no war. The economy was great from a workers point of view. Clinton was president already! Everyone said Hillary did all the work anyway when Bill was president. She has a guide who knows the ropes. Try it! Tired of the same man in office, my whole life weve had the same man in office, And america has killed all the good ones. I love my country but we need change! Get with it America.
…Neither Democrat or Republican just my point of view…yes, I vote.

GBO..NOT !!! Can fully surmise another parsing and figure thes folks figure the ordinary folks but fools that are willing to keep on swallowing whatever flavor oolaid they offering !! Many were astounded back then to hear Bill go along with the Bush premises of NEEDING to go after Sadam/Iraq and such HELPED Bush pull it off …Rover TOO is REVISING HISTORY plz check his Charlie Rose appearanc where he explained that HIS forthcoming book will DETAIL how the Iraq quagmire/decisons were THRUST upon Bush by the CONGRESS who voted FOR the authorization and thus were THE impetus for marching off and into Iraq despte the BUSH RELECUCTANCE AND WANT TO TRY DIPLOMACY AND GATHERING OF ALLIES AND BLAHABLE ETC’s !!! THESE FOLKS ARE WHACKED OUT IF THEY REALLY THINK WE ORDINARIES HAVE FORGOTTEN and evidently fear nothing of the TRAIL they left of quotables and expositionings and more and evidently figure we ordinaries are incapable of connecting any dots !!! HURUMPH and further cause to NOT vote for HC who has gotten HER ‘credibility” as a possible CIC due to fact folks figure Bill would be there to guide/handle her and advise on the major decision makings…HURUMPH AND THENSOME !!!!

I would have more respect for this man if he said he was for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, but see now that it was a mistake. I could swallow that (no pun intended). But to publicly lie again, as he is accustomed in doing so just proves again what a slim ball he is and so is his wife. People wake up.

Go Bill!! The more you talk the less chance your wife has.

Yah, Yah, Bubba and you “did not have sexual relations with that woman” either. Take your lies and your socialist wife and get the hell out of politics! Go back to Africa and help with the AIDS Crisis. I had more respect for you there and you could do less harm to OUR nation. The ONLY person I trust, is the man who was against the WAR from the beginning- RON PAUL!!!!

Where did the Clintons and Congress get the idea Iraq was an eminant threat??? From the falsified “intelligence” BushCo presented to them. So Congress’s biggest fault was believing Bush.
Lying to people and then criticizing them because they believed you is like stealing a man’s glasses and then making fun of him because he can’t see.
As far as authorizing Bush to go to war in Iraq goes….Bush repeatedly said authorizing him to go to war did not mean he would use that power. He just wanted that option on the table to encourgae Iraq to comply with the UN weapons inspectors. I knew he was lying then, but many others believed. Also remember that Bush implied if Congress did not give him this power then they were traitorous scum.

Clinton was the worst president this country has ever seen. Here are a few things that happened during his presidency:
* 250,000 Rwandans hacked to death with machetes
* Reintroduction of concentration camps in Europe
* Pakistan and India became nuclear capable
* China given most favored nation trading status
* Egypt, Brazil, Iran, and N Korea are now alomost nuclear capable
* dot.com crash
* The Sudan
Do I need to go on? All of this happened on Billy Boy’s watch, and we are dealing with the aftermath today. Bush has had very little to do of his own accord, because he has been cleaning up Clinton’s mess for the passed 7 years. If Hillary gets elected, then the president after her will have to do the same. That is, if mankind even still exists.

A Clinton flip-flopping… now there is a surprise…NOT!!!

I am a democrat that never supported this war. I figure that if we got to war we should have positive evidence to go and we didn’t and as far as Bill Clinton many people have gone to jail or been fined for lieing to a grand jury. It doesn’t matter what he lied about it was still a crime. And if you give someone permission to do something you should expect they will…Bill Clinton is scum just like Bush and i don’t want to see another clinton in the White House. If you people don’t think there will be another scandal if the Clintons get back in the White House you need to wake up. I don’t hate her I just don’t trust her.

I don’t think Hillary or Bill are being completely honest. But the damage done from their lies pales in comparison to the damage done from the endless stream of lies from the Bush administration. There’s just no comparison. How anyone could be so disgusted with the Clintons and so blind to the real damage done by Bush’s lies is beyond me?
Personally, I think Hillary didn’t want to go to war, but voted yes out of political expediency, afraid that if she voted no, she’d never become president. That’s why I’m not crazy about her, but I’d take her over Bush or anyone that thinks like him anyday.

On his worst day Clinton is one million times better than Bush or any of the Clinton-hating wackjobs. I really don’t care what he says. I’d still rather see Hillary in power than any scumbag Republican. Things were great under the Clintons – they are a disaster under Bush. Republicans have proven that they cannot lead the country competently.

when we go to was people die so to authorize a vote for war for political expediency is criminal…any person in congress that voted that was should be jailed!!!!

Here we go. Bill and Hillary think we as americans are all stupid. Just remember we stupid americans vote and we wake up at the booth!!

we will have had 20 years of bush/clinton. its the american voters who have no imagination. its not as though there arent honest capable candidates out there, its that the voters arent looking. they are stuck in a very, very small world that they are creating for themselves. who wants to stay clinton-sick or bush-sick? dont you hear all of this? it will go on and on and on. do us a favor and stop the bush/clinton royalty lines.

Like John Kerry, I am for the war when talking to pro-war people and against the war when speaking to anti-war people. And I have always been firm in that position.

The government is a teaching tool for society. Lying at the top filtered down to this column…”some” posters are lying in their comments.

Interesting that so many are upset with Clinton and what he did in office. Are you this aggressive with our current president? While we should learn from the past and participate in our future, holding our current leaders accountable should be the priority.

The question is whether President Clinton made any public statement opposing the war at the time of the invasion in 2003, such as my letter to the New York Times dated March 17, 2003.

Clinton is a liar.

LoL… perfect title for this story. Finally I agree with the title and story.

The Clinton’s position on Iraq depends on what your definition of the word
“is” is! LOL!
Both Hillary and Bill Clinton have to be
the Most Dishonest People in the World!

Did anyone bother going to the link and read the speech? It reads, “…I supported the President when he asked the Congress for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. I have strongly supported the efforts in Afghanistan and I would be happy if they would send more troops there because that’s where the real problem is.” The majority of negative comments in this piece just show the ignorance of those who wrote them!

Denise:
You’ve never trusted a republican in your life stop saying we trusted Bush. Your just another Socialist ignoring the realities of the world and trying hard to re-create our country into a Godless european look-alike

When George W. Bush requested authorization to use force from the Congress before the invasion of Iraq, he presented it as the surest way to maintain the peace. His claim was that without having authorization to use force, he could not convince Saddam Hussein to disarm or comply with inspectors. We now know Bush was lying– that he intended to invade Iraq all along.
But the important point is that, as it was presented to Congress, a vote to authorize the use of force WAS NOT a vote in support of an invasion of Iraq.
It’s really kind of sad that news organizations don’t make that point in these kind of articles. I guess the story as it’s written generates more hits and more outrage, leading to more advertising revenue.

Today it doesn’t matter who said what, when where. It is what it is now. We are in a mess domestically, in Iraq and all over the Middle East that GWB got us into and he doesn’t know how to get us out. Since all you Bush lovers think he is so wonderful, write to Bush and Cheney and ask them to change the laws of the land, which they are so fond of doing, so that GWB can run for a 3rd term and completely finish us off. Then you won’t have anything to gripe about while you stand in line waiting for someone to throw bread to you off the back of a pick-up truck.

How Pathetic this is?
Bill clinton will do anything to have his wife president at any cost. It is not worth it. We feel already how silly this is and really if she gets elected… shame on the american people.
Shame on US.
I did respect Bill before but now he doesn’t own a single of my approbation.
He might finish pretty bad and all the ggood job he did as president may ternished by lying to the public.
Obama and edward are the only viable candidates.
Go Obama.

Sweet nelly patelly! Clinton seems to forget that they have these new-fangled devices which actually record what you say!

Immediately after he took his first breath, Bill Clinton began his life of lying. This is a man with absolutely not an ounce of honesty in his veins. Vote Obama dems and end this Washington horror story of Clinton-Bush. Don’t be fooled-they have always been in bed with each other-you know Clinton is kinky anyway.

I think he even lied about the “boxers or briefs” question just to keep the streak alive. So, did anyone read the other article where Bill Clinton decided to bomb Kosovo, because Hillary told him too? Wow. I’m not sure which part of that was a lie, but I’m really sure it was. I think he bombed Kosovo, because he promised to let Monica choose that one if she would…

No surprise here. The Clinton’s will say or do anything to get elected. I am astounded that anyone is supporting Hillary at this point. The Hillary supporters know not what they are asking for.

Doesn’t surprise anyone, he is a liar just like his wife. What about Rwanda Bill? 800,000 murdered Africans and he did nothing, yet he is called the “1st Black President?” African- Americans can not be that stupid to believe this or to vote for his “shrill” of a wife (that he consistently cheats on). Go away Bill and take your wife with you.

After reading some of the comments here and at other blogs regarding the Dem primary race, all I have to say is that any Dem, Ind, or any other person who want the Repubs out and the Dems in, are playing right into the hands of the GOP if they think anyone other than Hillary Clinton can beat either of their top runners, Giullianni/Romney. The Repubs love all of you who want them out and the Dems in when you say you are not voting for Hillary and voting for Obama. They know they can chew Obama up and spit him out during their “attack and take no prisoners” method of campaigning for the general. They are rabid, ruthless, mad dogs who will stop at nothing and Hillary is the only one strong enough to stand up to them and win. After all, what else can they do to her? They have said and done it all to and about the Clintons, there is nothing left for them to attack. The Clintons have been beaten up so much by the GOP they have become immune to their dirty tactics. Hillary is the only winner the Dems have against this ruthless bunch of blood-suckers.

RON/ If I understand right you support Hillary and Billy??
You call the REPUBLICANS blood suckers?
But you forget the flesh eaters who where in office prior to Bush!! Bush has not left any questions out there. If you remember, he did tell the world this war would not end soon and that it would exceed his tenure in office. He stated this in an televised speech to the nation before we went!!
He got authorization from congress and funding. They all had the Intell and could have tabled it if they had questions. Now its all the republicans fault?? Who holds the power in congress? Do you think maybe these flesh eaters need to get off the rears and vote to end the war and stop Bush?? Or because we have gained ground overthere perhaps they are leaving the door open now so they can use it by saying they where with this thing all the way.
I think the congress needs to put there vote where their mouths are do what they threaten instead of playing a game with all our lives.
I do not care if this makes any since in what I have Typed out!! The flesh eaters are in power its time for them to throw up some of that flesh and use the power or get away from the table.

Just because I said I supported the war when things were going good doesnt mean that I really supported it, it means i dont support the war now and anything I said earlier must have been misquoted. I think, damm I miss Monica.

Is that finger he is waving in the face of the crowd the same finger he waved in the face of America when he lied about Monica? I wonder if we can tell when Bill Clinton is lying by the use of that finger?

It’s even more here, ABC (and will you put this story on the nightly news, or just on the blog?) then whether or not he supported the actually war.
Once it had started, former Pres. Clinton came out (July 22, 2003 on Larry King) and defended president Bush on the infamous “16 words” in the STOTU address, He stated for the record again that the WMD’s were there, in his view (sic. why the ongoing national fixation on the lie that Bush lied), and he challenged us all to stand behind the President and to support the effort to bring democracy to the people of Iraq.
The story here is that the media, censored his view then (and many other times) as well as the view of numerous other leaders who attempted in the public eye to bring us together as a country on many of these issues facing us all, and to set aside the silly partisan bickering over truly insignificant and often non-worthy issues.
Our media has chosen to play the partisan game this way, because with Republican in the White House, they cannot allow any color of success to enter the picture. Oh, they will always quote Bill Clinton (or Carter, or anyone) when they attack Bush, but when they speak out and say, “And what I think — again, I would say the most important thing is we should focus on what’s the best way to build Iraq as a democracy?” or “We should be pulling for America on this. We should be pulling for the people of Iraq,” well, our national media does not want that out in the public discussion.
It is my view that this censorship by the media, via its extreme bias and its personal agenda, greatly assisted in the collapse of the situation in Iraq from the summer of 2003 forward. Had the disenchanted, scared, and hopeful in Iraq witnessed the renewed spirit of want to help here at home, and had the terrorists and the wavering dissenting groups within Iraq witnessed something other than an American media firmly set against the effort, perhaps they would have melted into the night, and waited for another day. Perhaps tens of thousands of lives might have been saved. Perhaps –

Scotti you need to sit back for a moment, think, then e-mail or call your Dem congress person and asked one real question!!
Why do you not have the courage to over ride any of President Bush’s VETO’s? stop the war? stop the funding? Oh, sorry thats three.
The Clintons totaly embarrased the presidents office with THEIR scandals.
A Bush is not running for office here. A Clinton is. That makes her fair game and her husband and his record of affairs fair game for all of us.
Do not forget!! The power thats held by the DEM congress. Tell them to work and stop passing non-binding items that waste all of our tax dollars.

Paul. There’s some truth in your pitch, but it’s way too self serving. The media (the journalists, the editors, the reporters, the anchors, the hosts, the staff writers) wants a Democrat to win. Period. They would prefer Obama or Edwards, from a purely ideological standpoint – one who whould carry their agenda (pro-choice, anti-gun, higher taxes, open borders, socialized medicine, carbon tax, etc), but they understand that Edwards can’t win squat (he’ll become a spanking boy – he’s expendable). They are keeping all hope alive that Obama might be able to win — but in the end once it is clear to this media which candidate has the best chance againt the R’s, then that is thier choice – and they will support her, and will censor all of the negative coverage, all of the corruption stories, her war issues will become one of strength.
You’re view of Hillary, corporate, corrupt, etc. is the story, of course, but she is not a Republican on any of the social issues, of which the media cares most about. Just the same – they will, in mass, never support a Republican presidnet.
The corporate structure of the media, which you hang your hat on, is deeply flawed. Corporate media works in the background – lobbying, funding, etc. however, almost all (what 90%+) of the people who bring you the news are Democrats, or more to the left. Try to find a truly tough interview of a leading Democrat candidate. Try to find a truly nice interview of a Repbulican candidate.

I am convinced by these posts that the true goal here is displacement. Displacement by repeating a message that slowly removes the blame for this ill-begotten war from Bush’s desk and put it on Democrats instead. This displacement of responsibility, DESPITE that the buck stops with Bush as Commander in Chief and he and his republican controlled congress were ultimately resposible? Or does he and his party need to displace blame because they are too big of cowards to accept full responsibility for initiating, pushing, cajoling, intimidating, and continuing this war in Iraq? They do all that and it’s our fault that they did all that? I don’t think so. It doesn’t matter what Hillary said while trying to support our president who was calling for war and patriotism and scaring us all to death. What matters is will Hillary be a good president. Well I’ll tell you right now, no way on earth am I voting for Bush or anyone who thinks like he does. He was a fool who tripped America into a trap. Our reputation will never fully heal from Bush’s mistakes.

Dems are so stupid. Venture on Hilary and Republicans will eat her raw with the Bill affair resurfacing. Obama will win big with Edwards as VP.
Clinton is big time losing candidate

During the years of the Clinton administration, Clinton himself, his wife, and politicians including John Kerry and Nancy Pelosi all said publicly that intelligence showed Saddam Hussein was making/gathering WMDs. Clinton signed off on a U.S. policy of regime change in Iraq. After Bush was elected, Democrats suddenly suffer memory loss and charge Bush with “lying” about Saddam’s WMD capability. If they had any hard evidence that Bush actually “lied” to bring a country to war, you can bet your next paycheck they would have found a way to punish him by now. The system of checks and balances in our government provides plenty of legal avenues to pursue if Congress truly believes a president “lied.” Were mistakes made after the invasion of Iraq? Of course. But was it a bad thing to remove Saddam Hussein and his two monstrous sons from power? Not at all. If you believe that somehow the Iraqi people were better off with Saddam at the helm, tell them so. And see what reaction you get.

Conservative Republicans have the darndest time pinning the WMD debacle on George W. Bush. “It’s everybody else’s fault,” they howl. (Limbaughtimized minds at work) Hmm, Bush was Commander in Chief. He was in charge. He pushed the button. He signed on the dotted line. Conservatives are intent on changing history…while it happened right before their eyes.

Posted by: Kelly | Nov 28, 2007 8:39:54 AM
Clinton was the worst president this country has ever seen. Here are a few things that happened during his presidency:
* 250,000 Rwandans hacked to death with machetes
* Reintroduction of concentration camps in Europe
* Pakistan and India became nuclear capable
* China given most favored nation trading status
* Egypt, Brazil, Iran, and N Korea are now alomost nuclear capable
* dot.com crash
Kelly, India and Pakistan developed nuclear weapons during NIXON’s watch. We all know his place in history. bUsH will be right along side him, even worse. Do you know any history. The dot com crash occured in the first two years of our commander in thief’s term. March 2000–Oct 2002. As for Egypt, Brazil, Iran, and N Korea are now alomost nuclear capable, THAT’S HAPPENING NOW!! The concentration camps are now.
Rwanda was a horrible discrace.
I don’t see how this is Clintons fault anymore than what’s happening now in Africa is bUsH’s fault. All the “Western” nations failed Rwanda except France. They all reneged. If you would recall the entire time Clinton was in office the Republicans and the lap dog press hounded Clinton over and over and
over. Every decision he made was overly chastised. There was also genoside going on in Bosnia. This was a hotbed that thrust the world into the first world war. Priorities and foresight. Kelly you are so mixed up. How can people just listen to Faux or Rush and think it is the truth. It should be criminal what the media is crapping out these days. I
can’t write anymore this comment box is all out of wack.

DMZ and my taxes were sky high paying for this crap. Bill is not running for office thank god. His corrupt wife is who may have helped keep the low paying jobs in check at walmart when she was there. Bet she knows what a gallon of milk costs these days.

Hey Jim,
In case you haven’t been reading the news lately, The Bush administration has spent the country into a 9 Trillion Dollar deficit. That’s a 13 digit number! Who do you think is going to pay for that?!!! The Republicans constantly say that Democrats are “tax and spend” people. Your president and his adminstration has cut taxes and increased spending dramaticaly– You do the math!!!!

Wow, pretty amazing how the corporate press and GOPs are howling with fury over something an ex-president says today that might be different from what he said a few years back – when he was an ex-president. Yet I don’t hear too many grumblings about CURRENT veep Cheney’s recent denial that he ever said there was a connection between Saddam and 9/11…when there’s PLENTY of video and audio evidence to the contrary. And didn’t Rove originally say he “doubted” the war in Iraq would last as long as six months…and backtracked big city time on that? We’d be greeted as liberators with candy and flowers!
Huh. And no explanation for why ABC – or indeed any “media outlet” failed to take Shrub to task for saying he didn’t know where Osama was – he didn’t spend much time thinking about it. Unbelievable.
How anyone can support Bush is beyond me. He has completely destroyed this country.

We’ve had 20 years of the Bushes and Clintons, do we want even more of this nonsense, on the grounds that Clintons aren’t as bad as Bush? Hillary voted for this war. Her Democrat colleague, Bob Graham, was warning anyone who would listen that the NIE had information that contradicted Bush’s claims. Somehow, Hillary, who knows everything and is smarter than everyone, was unaware of this. As always, whenever something go wrong, she never knows what’s going on. Never has someone who is so smart been so repeatedly clueless. Hillary may not really be smarter than everyone, but she certainly is a lot smarter than her supporters, many of whom seem to be in need of some serious de-programming.

To whoever said that the dot.com crash was during Bush term. Note: Bush’s term began on Jan. 21, 2001. The broad market top was in late 1997, by the way. The historic bubble economy (based on greed, corruption, fraud) came to an end in March 2000. Bush was not nominated. Within a couple of months we experienced the CA energy crisis. Gasolilne prices would soar 56%, heating oil prices were hurting the the economy. The gap between the rich and the worker, was historic (did we just get back there? it’s close) Almost all economic stats were in deep decline. True, both would carry over till they were resolved.
By the end of 2000, the Nasdaq crash was of historic note – down 51%. Hundres of companies were folding – this trickles down through the economy. Millions of workers would loose there jobs, their health insurance, their life savings and their children’s college education funds (those were the facts).
9/11 (long in planning)in the fall of 2001 would add to the downturn, but most feel that it only sped up the process of “returning from greed and excess to normal – in the markets.”
The economic revenue loss by 2003 (projected surplus minus actual deficit), year end, (not including the Bush tax cuts and war costs (just reving up then) would be approximately 1 and 1/2 Trillion dollars. 80% of the much ballyhooed “bush blew the surplus” had next to nothing to do with Bush policies.
For the record, the combined tax cuts and war costs for 2003, were approx. #135 billion. The 2000 projected budget surplus for 2003 was $225 billion. The actual deficit was about $450 billion. Of that $675 billion shift, for that one year, Bush’s (most of those tax cuts were strongly supported by the D’s, by the way)$135 billion, is 20% of that shift. Who knows what Al Gore would have done after 9/11? After the Crash?
Since 2004 – have at it.
Dean Baker, a much loved by the media, liberal economist

For everyone who thinks Clinton is such an honest guy when he now claims to have “opposed Iraq from the beginning” and that Bush “lied,” here’s a quote that Bubba gave to Time Magazine during a June 28, 2004 interview:
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.

It depends on what the definition of “is” is so that one can accurately triangulate the definition of “support”.

Bill Clinton is certainly flip-flopping of whether he supported beginning the Iraq war. On March 18, 2003, two days before the start of the war, Clinton wrote an article in the Guardian asking the British public to support, or rather trust, Tony Blair on the Iraq war.
Clinton wrote in the column that although he preferred a second UN resolution, the veto of it left no option but the forthcoming attack.
Towards the end of the column Clinton wrote the following:
“Now, it appears that force will be used to disarm and depose him.
A s Blair has said, in war there will be civilian was well as military casualties. There is, too, as both Britain and America agree, some risk of Saddam using or transferring his weapons to terrorists. There is as well the possibility that more angry young Muslims can be recruited to terrorism. But if we leave Iraq with chemical and biological weapons, after 12 years of defiance, there is a considerable risk that one day these weapons will fall into the wrong hands and put many more lives at risk than will be lost in overthrowing Saddam.
I wish that Russia and France had supported Blair’s resolution. Then, Hans Blix and his inspectors would have been given more time and supprt for their work. But that’s not where we are. Blair is in a position not of his own making, because Iraq and other nations were unwilling to follow the logic of 1441.
In the post-cold war world, America and Britain have been in tough positions before: in 1998, when others wanted to lift sanctions on Iraq and we said no; in 1999 when we went into Kosovo to stop ethnic cleansing. In each case, there were voices of dissent. But the British-American partnership and the progress of the world were preserved. Now in another difficult spot, Prime Minister Blair will have to do what he believes to be right. I trust him to do that and hope that Labor MPs and the British people will too.”
I think that the above comments show conclusively that not only did Bill Clinton support the commencement of the Iraq war but that he actually lobbied the British public to support Tony Blair on behalf of going to war.

DMZMAN – such talent and skill you have. Next time, try reading what another has to say first. I was responding to another’s statement that the dot.com pop was Bush’s. Or the reference that it was – it’s a common mistake -even the LA Times did it last week. I admit I used a couple of numbers off the top of my head- but they are very close – close enough for the exercise.
I did not blame squat on Clinton. I could. I simply noted what occurred. I’m sure that had Bush been president then, he’d liked it as well. But it was an irrational period of greed – and it severely damaged the country. And it’s going to get worse.
Also – of note. I offered no political agenda here. I opposed the top end of the tax cuts. I opposed the War (well, at least more than Bill Clinton did.) I did not offer an opinion where you could surmise that I support the massive deficits, nor the interest on them. My view is well supported by the facts, by simple logic, and by many like say, Dean Baker — a well known progressive economist — who by the way also warned of the error in Clinton’s foolish effort in propping up the dollar – and who said that the political leadership during that period of time was the worst since Herbert Hoover. That millions of American workers would loose thier jobs – their savings, etc.
Why did Baker go back and write this in 2003? (it’s people like you who keep the public from understanding how it works, always wanting to blame it on somebody else):
“In 2000, President Clinton could legitimately boast of the “best economy in 30 years.” Unemployment was low, wages were rising at all income levels, and the poverty rate was headed downward at a rapid pace. But after President Bush took office in 2001, the economy fell into recession, shedding jobs and causing real wage growth to slow and eventually stop altogether.
A convenient story explains this sharp economic reversal. According to the script, Clinton eliminated the deficit through progressive tax increases and spending restraint. This deficit reduction lowered interest rates and spurred an investment boom, which was the basis for the extraordinary growth of the late ’90s. Then Bush came into office and quickly squandered the surplus with his tax cuts to the rich and military build-up. As a result, the deficit skyrocketed and the economy tanked.
It’s a good story, but the reality is quite different. The Clinton boom was built on three unsustainable bubbles. One of them, the stock bubble, has already burst. The other two bubbles—the dollar bubble and the housing bubble—are still with us. The dollar bubble is starting to deflate, and the housing bubble is perhaps just now reaching its peak. These bubbles created the basis for the 2001 recession and the economy’s continuing period of stagnation.”
Instead of smearing people –tell me here I am wrong?
Why did the leftist columist, Robert Scheer write this on June 6, 2000 in the Los Angeles Times:
“What great news last week–116,000 people, mostly black, Latino and poor, lost their jobs..”
Wow! in one week. Multiply that by 4.
DMZMAN – When some $8-10 trillion of overvalued and fraudulent equity(remember the Enrons, the WCOM’s, the GX’s,) goes pop – it trickles down in the economy. People loose their jobs. Tax revenues plunge. You studied economics? oh help us all. Try studying reading and thinking and encourage information and dialog.

Parity,
“Of the top of your head”?
As I said, Your numbers are total fiction. Anyone who knows any better would look at your verbiage and come to the conclusion that Mr. Bush’s tax cuts were of benefit to the country (at the very least you seem to feel that there is some question).
The truth has been quite the opposite– The Bush administration has essentially given people $2,000 today and will end up taking $12,000 in a few short years when the credit card statement comes due! I say again: You’re ecomonic math is pure fiction and your attempt at appearing “apolitical” is transparent!

No one is blurring the distinction between giving a president authority to go to war, and a president making the decision to put boots on the ground. Yes, two separate actions. The problem is the blatantly dishonest arguments of politicians who now claim they were “lied to” by the president before they cast their authorization vote. I spent a large part of my career working as an intel analyst for the federal government and rest assured that the politicians who are charging that Bush “lied” had access to the VERY SAME intelligence reports that the president did.
What has happened is this: the war has not gone well and to save their political careers, the cowards in Congress are hiding behind ridiculous accusations that they were misled, thus leading to their “yes” authorization vote.
On a final note: you don’t vote to give war authorization to a president without a clear realization that there is a very distinct chance it will be used.

To all the posters that keep saying congress had the same info bUsH did.You are just avoiding the facts. It has been well documented now that bUsH and Vader cHeNeY lied about the intelligence they fed to Congress and the rest of us. “Downing Street Memo”. PBS has also done several programs on it also. To Darrel.
YOU GOT IT RIGHT. tO PARITY, thank you for responding to my post. The news is supposed to report facts. The facts are supposed to be truth. I don’t think the news does either of these things anymore
because of the corporate ownership. As far as them not supporting a Repub candidate, how do you explain how bUsH
got into office. The MSM is a joke. Right now I couldn’t comment on how they are handling the Presidential candidates
for either side because I haven’t watched TV news in over two years. I have gone to all of the candidates web sights and I can’t find anything good to say about any of the Repub’s except Ron Paul’s stand on the costitution and the
unprovoked invasion and occupation of Iraq. But he wants to get rid of every Government agency except the war department. He scares me. He believes that corporations will restrict themselves. He says if they have a faulty or dangerous product the consumer
will not purchase said product. But that would be after several thousand have been killed, maimed, or poisoned. I would prefer the consumer affairs test or the FDA. Look at all the food poisonings and lead in the toys the deaths in the mines. This is because the
bUsH administration has appointed people
in these dept that don’t believe in regulations. I am an independent. I have never voted for a straight party in my life and I have voted for Dem’s, Repub’s
and an independent for president. I did not vote for bUsH. I used the internet and checked his history and said “they’ve got to be kidding”. Then I watched as the MSM buried his past. I have been disgusted and then horrified
ever sense. I just hope the people here that are just barking Clinton lied, Clinton lied, would do some research and
check out the candidates that are running for office in “08″ instead of “96″ and 2000. The candidate who I think
is best for this country right now is a
guy who the MSM is deathly afraid of. That’s why when he is mentioned, it’s he’s too short or he has funny ears. Never his policies or his past voting
record. If this continues we are so screwed.

It’s funny you can tell the political orientation of the writer or commenters when they reference clinton as “President Clinton” and Bush as Mr. Bush or just Bush. Out of respect for both holding the office they should be referred to as President or former President. It always seems to be liberals and dems that act this way too.

THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS AGAINST BILL. HE OPPOSED THAT WAR IN THE BEGINNING;YOU ALL SUPPORTED IT AND WENT AFTER THE DIXIE CHICKS AND EVERYONE WHO OPPOSED IT. REMEMBER? READ AGAIN WHAT BILL SAID BACK THEN:
Clinton’s March 14, 2003, comments were posted on The Fact Hub — a fact-check website produced by Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign — on November 27. From Clinton’s March 14, 2003, remarks:
Do you believe this matters? If you believe it matters — as I do — then you have to decide if it matters whether we bend over backwards to try to disarm him in a way that strengthens rather than divides the world community. If you don’t think it matters, then you’re with a lot of the people in the current administration who think that we’ll just go over there and this will take a few days, after we win — victors always get to write history — everybody will get over this and we’ll get everybody back together and they’ll be glad he’s gone because he’s a thug and a murderer. That’s what they think. If you believe it matters to keep them together, then you’ve got to support some version of what Prime Minister Blair’s doing now, which is to say, okay, he’s finally destroying his missiles. And the administration, to be fair, is nominally in favor of what Blair’s trying to do.
He’s finally destroying his missiles, so let’s give him a certain date in which, in this time, he has to destroy the missiles, reconcile the discrepancies in what we believe is the truth on chemical weapons, reconcile the discrepancies on biological weapons, reconcile the issue of the Drones, and offer up 150 scientists who can travel outside of Iraq with their families for interviews. If you do that, then we’ll say this is really good-faith disarmament, and we’ll go on without a conflict. Now if that passes, however, then you have to be willing to take yes for an answer. You see what I mean? I’m for regime change too, but there’s more than one way to do it. We don’t invade everybody whose regime we want to change. There’s more than one way to do this, but if that passes and he actually disarms, then we have to be willing to take it, and then work for regime change by supporting the opposition to Saddam Hussein within and outside Iraq, and doing other things.

Jeez, why is this even news? Bill, Hillary, Obama, Democrats, Republicans, ALL politicians will say whatever they have to in order to get elected.
My question is, while Hillary and Obama and other senators and such are on the campaign trail, who is doing their job back at the house or senate?
We need a new system to get regular people into office who have real opinions and real life experiences and are not spouting off whatever their handlers tell them. We need to vote out all these shifty lying bribe taking no good career politicians and vote in some people who can do the job that needs to be done without having to spend 1/2 their time getting re-elected and the other 1/2 of their time doing favors (passing laws, adding pork, whatever) to replay those who donated to their campaign.

Well, I may as well get my two cents in, since everyone else has an opinion. The fact of the matter is that both Clintons are pathological liars and anyone who votes to make Hillary POTUS should have their head examined. How many examples of “spin,” parsing and outright lies does it take for it to sink in that we don’t need people like Bill/Hill to run our government? This is just the latest example of the Clinton machine and their “how do we fool them today” act. When are Democrats goint to shun these dishonest and sleazy people? Huh?

i dont care much for obama’s policies, but hillary makes me sick. i could accept an obama presidency.but if hillary is the nominee, it will be handing the election to the republicans who dont have an attractive candidate among them. there is too much trash hanging from the clinton’s necks, and too much ammunition for a presidential win. her lies are all on video, i can imagine the tv ads now, they will anhilate her.

Anybody hear Zogby on Hannity this afternoon. He sees Iowa as very competitive with Obama on the rise. Also he thinks if Hillary loses Iowa she may be trouble.

ditto susan :)

billy boy is a spoiled baby boomer brat. That alone says a lot. If anyone personifies that generation it is he. I had my fill of him in Arkansas. He roamed around Little Rock with reckless abandon because he knew that the local press would leave him alone. His arogance was unequaled. This is just another example of his gaul. However, at least now there is some scrutiny of his absurdities.

DMZMAN – whew – the problem you’re having – now remember you jumped on my comment first — is that you continued to suggest that I was off my rocker, touted your education, yet instead of discussing any of the specific details I laid out, you, in each case, changed the subject to another matter. So, to all of your remarks – none of which related to mine – I have something of equal value to offer. Oranges.

Recall that needing a shower feeling during the ’90s. It’s baaack. When you recall the finger wagging “I want you do listen to me. I’m gonna say this again, I did not have sexual relations…” then add the flagrant flip-flop on Iraq, it’s like deja vu; like he never left.

For all of you folks who are questioning the honesty of the Clinton’s – yes, you are on the right track. But, perhaps none said it better than former Clinton devotee and financial supporter, Hollywood mogul David Geffen, who said earlier this year, “Everybody in politics lies, but they [the Clinton's] do it with such ease, it’s troubling.”
For anyone wanting a good left wing piece on a single issue (Clinton as President, Africa and HIV/Aids) plug this into Google and read. Many on the left side of the isle understood how many millions of lives were lost because Clinton was an inept president, and here David Corn, Washington editor of The Nation Mag. lays out one bit of history on one issue. The point to consider here, is why our larger media never sought to challenge Bill Clinton on much of anything.
I can’t do a link here so:
“Clinton Pardon Me, Africa” or/ “How many times is Bill Clinton going to apologize to Africa?”
By David Corn, AlterNet. Posted July 19, 2002
Highlights:
“Back to Clinton. When he had the chance — and the power — to address the devastation in Africa, he took a pass. Why didn’t he figure out the US share for an anti-AIDS crusade and add it to his budget? It would surely be illuminating and instructive if he explained this. Might he claim that, as with the Rwanda genocide, he was not fully informed of the horror? A cynical guess might be this: AIDS in Africa, it doesn’t poll well.”
[..]
“When Clinton arrived at 1600 Pennsylvania, the US government knew that an AIDS pandemic was coming in Africa. A 1991 classified study produced by the CIA predicted that by 2000 there would be 45 million people infected with AIDS virus, most in Africa. The following year, an unclassified version of the report, which was released by the State Department, foresaw infection rates of up to 30 percent for the sub-Saharan African population. For the next seven years — while Clinton was in office — the budget for combating AIDS overseas remained flat. (It was $124.5 million in 1992.)”
But the media just keeps on blaming it on Ronald Reagan. Heard it again last night on Larry King Live.
Under Bush’s leadership we’re now up to approx $6 billion annually – and guess what? And Unicef is giving credit to the effort in finanally turning the tide. Bill Clinton started doing something as well.

Parity,
The nature of this comments thread began with an accusation of Bill C’s flip-flopping on Iraq which inevitably lead to a discussion about the direction of the country– both current and past. My response was a response to a person named Jim regarding The Clinton administration and (Democrats in general) as having a reputation for taxing and spending (i.e. essentially that the Democrats had been reckless with taxes and the budget). I responded in terms that real-people understand– namely that the current administration had cut taxes while at the same time increasing spending without fundind it. All you’ve done is to take an abstract intellectual stance and say that I have not responded point-by-point to your arguments. I have no intention of dignifying your data. In my opinion it’s based on any number of incorrect or debatable assumptions at best (Do you really deny that?).
This is a political thread– the tone of which has to do with the direction of the country. Stop hiding behind abstractions and give us your opinion on the current state of the economy as regards the efficacy of economic strategy alternatives– both past and present. What is the impact of a 9 trillion Dollar debt–long-term and short? What is the impact of a multi-trillion Dollar shortfall in the credit markets? What is the impact of the foreclosure crisis in the housing markets? How will $100/barrel oil (or higher) impact US consumers and manufacturers? Describe the nature and impact of an ongoing trade-deficit that is in the hundreds of billions/year? In layman’s terms describe the nature of the ongoing devaluation of the Dollar relative to other currencies. Enlighten us please about the long-term impact of military spending that is in excess of 600 billion/year (you know Parity, the old “guns or butter” debate)? People want to know what all of this means to them in real terms. Give us your opinion please.
You’re absolutely correct Parity– you’ve been talking about “oranges” smack dab in the middle of a discussion that is all about the future direction of the country generally, and the impact of (failed) monetary policy on the economy specifically.

Only foolish people continue to be hostile to Bill Clinton for his past mistakes. And I am sure most who hold this hostility in their hearts are living in their own mistakes … like voting twice for Bush!
Posted by: Jackson | Nov 27, 2007 8:23:44 PM
Sorry dude but I see Hillary as the next Bush! Looks like you’re the one voting for him again. I hope this won’t be the third time, sad man, sad. They’re liars and hypocrites. Are they blind to the rest of the world because if they weren’t they won’t have made this mistake.

hillary is high in the polls for one reason and one reason only—name recognition. She has inherited the clinton name from her husband. She is where she is not for her abilities or experience, no matter how dubious that may be, but because of who she married. She got it the old fashioned way—she married it.

Ken , we are doing horrible things in Iraq to the dismay of Iraqians. Our soldiers are not fighting for Americas freedoms. They are fighting for big oil.
When I say this I am not trying to insult you or be unpatriotic. This is not a war in Iraq. It is an occupation. bUsH invaded Iraq on the lie of WMD’s. When that was found to be untrue, the lie was changed to we have to topple Hussien. Which our great armed forces did. If you just leave it at that: WHY ARE WE STILL THERE FOUR YEARS LATER?
If a country did to us what we did to them wouldn’t you be fighting to get them to leave. I’m telling you this occupation is extremely lucrative for bUsH, his family oil business, the Arab’s (who by the way were the ones who atacked us on 9/11) and bUsH’s friends
who are getting muti-billion dollar contracts to rebuild the infrastructure we keep bombing. This is your’s, your childrens, and their childrens money. But worst of all it is the countries children that are dying for profit for a small few.
Just follow the money and connect the dots. Open your mind.

All these comments are mostly about Clinton being labled as a “LIAR”, including this War, IF YOU DON’T LIKE LIARS, You MUST hate Bush MORE!If you can forgive an occasional “Lack of Weapons of Mass Destruction”, you really should sit down and shut up!

What have we done that is great in Iraq?? Are you bomb lovers so blind that you’re unable to see that our interest and everything we believe in has been compromised in order to decrease the violence back down to “acceptable” 2006 death tolls?
This is how we now define success?

America has tired of Bush and Clintonian style politics. Lets move on. No more Bushes or Clintons. Please!

stop complaining and quit voting for horrible candidates because yoiu think you have to, we are locked into bad choices by the media and polls direct us to “viable” candidates and we dont want to waste our votes so we settle for the worst of the worst. losers like clintons. no way hillary could survive a general election with all of the baggage she has and the flip flops and lies she has told, they are all on video.she cant escape detection. all this anti-hillary is ony the tip, its gonna get pretty rocky for her if she gets the dem nomination, they will anhilate her.

Bill also wished that he were asked to pay higher taxes to support the troops even though he was opposed to the war from the beginning. Of course that depends upon what the meaning of the word beginning is.

For the record, I backed up my comments above with links to stories from the ’90s on President Clinton’s WMD remarks and to Ramsey Clark’s report. This website removed those links. Draw your own conclusions.

The American people had better wake up and stop worrying about what Bill Clinton did or said years ago and had better concentrate on what the madman GWB is doing right now. His trigger finger is just itching to get us into another war with Iran before he leaves office. If he and Cheney have their way, the next president will inherit war on 3 fronts. LIVE IN THE PRESENT PEOPLE – STOP BUSH AND CHENEY. Leave the past to history where it belongs but learn from it.

DMZMan — a poster had stated:
Do you know any history. The dot com crash occured in the first two years of our commander in thief’s term. March 2000–Oct 2002.
I responded to that with:
To whoever said that the dot.com crash was during Bush term. Note: Bush’s term began on Jan. 21, 2001. The broad market top was in late 1997, by the way. The historic bubble economy (based on greed, corruption, fraud) came to an end in March 2000. Bush was not yet nominated. Within a couple of months we experienced the CA energy crisis. Gasolilne prices would soar 56%, heating oil prices were hurting the the economy. The gap between the rich and the worker, was historic (did we just get back there? it’s close) Almost all economic stats were in deep decline. True, both would carry over till they were resolved.
By the end of 2000, the Nasdaq crash was of historic note – down 51%. Hundres of companies were folding – this trickles down through the economy. Millions of workers would loose there jobs, their health insurance, their life savings and their children’s college education funds (those were the facts).

reaganfan…too bad Reagan was so brain-addled during the last six years of his presidency. Otherwise, he might have accomplished something besides the Savings and Loan meltdown and the ’86 amnesty for millions of illegal immigrants.

To Mr Vegan,
Clinton was impeached. Impeachment is the accusation. Removal is the result of the Senate finding the articles of impeachment accurate.
Theres no doubt Clinton was guilty of the specifications of the impeachment, but Senators have the ability to vote however they choose. They chose not to remove him. Democrats voted straight party line against conviction, with some GOPers crossing over.

Gee whiz guys..you’re right Bush Jr. is as honest as the day is long. Ha, that’s funny who’s writing these tibits Carl Rove?