A tribute to Condoleeza Rice and George W. Bush who, despite voluminious evidence to the contrary, said, "I don't think anybody could have predicted that these people would take an airplane and slam it into the World Trade Center, take another one and slam it into the Pentagon, that they would try to use an airplane as a missile," adding that "even in retrospect" there was "nothing" to suggest that" and "I don't think anyone anticipated the breach of the levees," respectively.

Friday, September 29, 2006

Due to Monetary Constraints, Postings Will Discontinue on 09/30 

In defense of the Bush administration's anti-terrorism efforts before 9/11, Condescenderella Rice said,

"What we did in the eight months [between Bush's inauguration and 9/11] was at least as aggressive as what the Clinton administration did in the preceding years," Rice told the New York Post in comments published Tuesday.

Now, I have a pretty good memory when it comes to the right-wing attacks on Clinton from the time of his becoming the democratic candidate in 1992 till today. He was endlessly derided. Accused of murdering Vince Foster. Basically, the GOP was saying his policies were failures and the draft-dodging commander-in-chief deserved no respect from the American people. They even went so far as to set a 'perjury trap' as a pretext for an impeachment. When he went after Al Queda, it was "wag the dog." When Iraq was bombed, they accused him of bombing an "aspirin factory" not a legitimate target. To the GOP and their media chorus, Clinton could do nothing right.

So, here's the question, "If Clinton did such a poor job on fighting terrorism, why didn't the incoming Bush adminstration take it upon themselves to have a better, more aggressive effort, as their priority, than that of their predecessor?"

It hardly makes sense to say we did as much as they did when you've been denigrating them for over a decade.

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?