English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

GOP talked constantly about Clinton and rarely mentioned OBL. Why? Even Limbaugh was focused like a laser on Clinton. Why not OBL as he claims to be such a genius?
Were they fearful of a terrorist attack by the president?

2007-09-02 11:08:58 · 6 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5 in Politics & Government Politics

Jon M (below) Ever heard of the Congressional Commitees who's jobs it is to focus on national defense and foreign policy?

2007-09-02 11:26:05 · update #1

ohbrother (below) Oh. So the GOP had absolutely NO RESPONSIBILTY over national defense. Thanks for the memo.

2007-09-02 11:27:48 · update #2

6 answers

Bush manages to secure our nation, despite the petty attacks of dems over wiretaps, Iraq and fired prosecutors. National Security is the President's job. Clinton failed.

2007-09-02 11:16:55 · answer #1 · answered by A Plague on your houses 5 · 1 4

Let's get back to reality.
1. To quote Gore Vidal: "The United States has only one party - the property party. It's the party of big corporations, the party of money. It has two right wings; one is Democrat and the other is Republican."
2. OBL is a CIA creation and a US strategic asset.


"The enormous gap between what US leaders do in the world and what Americans think their leaders are doing is one of the great propaganda accomplishments of the dominant political mythology."
Michael Parenti

"Every government is run by liars, and nothing they say should be believed."
I.F. Stone

"Throughout the twentieth century and into the beginning of the twenty-first, the United States repeatedly used its military power, and that of its clandestine services, to overthrow governments that refused to protect American interests. Each time, it cloaked its intervention in the rhetoric of national security and liberation. In most cases, however, it acted mainly for economic reasons-specifically to establish, promote and defend the right of Americans to do business around the world without interference."
Stephen Kinzer

2007-09-06 11:06:47 · answer #2 · answered by Fraser T 3 · 0 0

He did not ignore Bin Laden. The GOP thwarted his efforts to get support behind fighting terrorism by accusing Clinton of using Bin Laden to distract people away from the Lewinsky Scandal. They like to claim that Clinton was handed Bin Laden on a silver platter when it is far more complicated than that. Their focus on Clintons sex life at the time put this entire country is danger.

2007-09-02 18:56:27 · answer #3 · answered by Stephanie is awesome!! 7 · 1 0

In Congress, Clinton was thwarted by the reactionary conservative majority in virtually every attempt he made to pass legislation that would attack al Qaeda and terrorism. His 1996 omnibus terror bill, which included many of the anti-terror measures we now take for granted after September 11, was withered almost to the point of uselessness by attacks from the right; Jesse Helms and Trent Lott were openly dismissive of the threats Clinton spoke of.

2007-09-02 18:17:57 · answer #4 · answered by justgoodfolk 7 · 2 1

Again, read, "Dereliction Of Duty" by Lt. Col. Robert Patterson. In his book he explains when Clinton was watching a golf game in Fla. and would not come to the phone for Sandy Berger. The pilots were in their cockpits and had a window of opportunity to get Osama and Clinton would not take the call because he was watching a golf game. He also was concerned he did not want to alienate the Muslim vote. Just like he pardoned the Puerto Rician terrorist for Hillery.

Additional: When it came to the Chain of Command for the O.K. for the air strike they go to the Commander in Chief, not the Speaker of the House. I'm just trying to get you to read the eye witness accounts. Berger has also confirmed it. The Congress controlled the purse strings and like now, as it was then, the Presidents responsibility for National Defense not Congress. They try to inject themselves into that roll as you remember Pellosi taking trips that were out of her pay range.

2007-09-02 18:25:36 · answer #5 · answered by ohbrother 7 · 0 2

It's not Congress's job to Conduct War; or even police action. Whichever you consider the situation to be.
Moot Question.

2007-09-02 18:15:23 · answer #6 · answered by Jon M 4 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers