Just curious - Bill Clinton vs Bin Laden vs George Bush vs Bin Laden
EEE
location: Landscape Challenged Illinois
listening to: 16 Horsepower, black music from the 70's & and still going broke from Paste Magazine
registered: 2002.08.26
posts: 3227
[view all posts]
[view all posts]
After the interview on FoxNews, many on the right state Bill Clinton had 8 yrs to deal with bin Laden while Bush only had 8 months. Okay, my question is, since using this argument means the right is conceding that bin Laden was a big deal prior to GWB taking office, then why the hell did it ignore bin Laden AND Richard Clarke's warnings about Bin Laden? Why did it ignore all Clinton Whitehouse warnings about bin Laden? Why did it ignore Sandy Berger's (who is no favorite of mine) claim that Bin Laden would demand more time of the Bush Whitehouse than any other issue? Why did it ignore the briefing about bin Laden wanting to fly planes into buildings?It seems they want it both ways.
E
EEE
(view)
After the interview on FoxNews, many on the right state Bill Clinton had 8 yrs to deal with bin Laden while Bush only had 8 months. Okay, my question is, since using this argument means the right is conceding that bin Laden was a big deal prior to GWB taking office, then why the hell did it ignore bin Laden AND Richard Clarke's warnings about Bin Laden? Why did it ignore all Clinton Whitehouse warnings about bin Laden? Why did it ignore Sandy Berger's (who is no favorite of mine) claim that Bin Laden would demand more time of the Bush Whitehouse than any other issue? Why did it ignore the briefing about bin Laden wanting to fly planes into buildings?It seems they want it both ways.
