Originally posted on Sept. 26, 2006.

^.^

On this last Sunday's FOX News show, FOX newsman Chris Wallace interviewed former President Bill Clinton in the aftermath of Clinton's global initiative conference. Mr. Wallace explained that there were ground rules set up for this interview, that half of the fifteen minutes would be given over to discussing the global initiative, and the other half could be about anything else.

The part of the interview that was not about the global initiative was a whole lot more entertaining than the part that was. For those of you who missed the interview, or in case you want to make some popcorn and watch the fun again, you can find the video at the FOX News website. ( http://www.foxnews.com )

Chris Wallace asked Mr. Clinton why he didn't do more to get Osama bin Laden, this in light of the fact thatUS interests had been hit in 1993, 1997, and 2000, and given the fact that Osama bin Laden celebrated the withdrawal of US forces from Somalia.

Mr. Clinton had a right to be angry, although I can not believe that he was blind-sided, as he seemed to suggest. He's a public figure, a Liberalista who was coming onto FOX News, he should have known that he was not getting soft questions.

Clinton however went overboard, accusing Chris Wallace of playing a hatchet job for the right-wingers. He accused Wallace and FOX News of double standards, not asking these sorts of questions of the Bush administration. If anyone watched FOX interviews with Donald Rumsfeld for example, they would see that Clinton didn't know what he was talking about.

Clinton also held up Richard Clark's book as though he were Hugo Chavez at the UN General Assembly. Mr. Clark worked in every administration since 1980 and has become an expert on terrorism issues. Clinton said that Clark's book supported the assertion that the Clinton administration was more aggressive in "getting" Osama bin Laden than the Bush administration. Clinton said that a strategy plan was handed to the Bush administration, and Bush apparently sat on it for eight months.

The problem is that Richard Clark says no such thing...and this is backed up by people like Condi Rice and Mary Matalin, who were there in the first eight months of the Bush administration, and they report that the Clinton's handed off no such anti-terror strategy. The intel report saying the bin Laden was planning attacks in the US was a general report with nothing specific to act upon.

Clinton was angry in the wake of the ABC film that said that he was too distracted by Monicagate to take out Osama bin Laden. The idea that a president could not do more than two things at once is ludicrous. It would take less than ten seconds to order the military or intel boys to waste the terrorist raghead and then the President could go back to dinner.

Dick Morris further indicted Clinton for his failure to get Osama bin Laden. In 1999, the CIA got information that Osama bin Laden would be in one place for a week, and he in fact, *was* there for that week. The CIA agents who had Osama bin Laden in their sights asked for authorization to take him out, and there was almost crying in the room when that authorization was NOT given...this according to Dick Morris, who worked with the Clinton administration on a wide number of issues.

In the FOX interview, Chris Wallace spoke truth to power, and the Liberalistas are reacting as though the biggest crime in humanity has been comitted...unfortunately for them, they are acting out on the biggest stage in the world.

Conservatives simply need to sit back, munch on the popcorn, and watch Clinton and the Liberalistas implode.

---
John B.
Blog Guy

BACK