It’s amazing that Bill Clinton can lie through his teeth and nearly all Democrats don’t seem to care. We’ll see if this is yet another case of wrangling over what the definition of “is” is:
During a campaign swing for his wife, former President Bill Clinton said flatly yesterday that he opposed the war in Iraq “from the beginning” — a statement that is more absolute than his comments before the invasion in March 2003.
[. . .]
Advisers to Mr. Clinton said yesterday that he did oppose the war, but that it would have been inappropriate at the time for him, a former president, to oppose — in a direct, full-throated manner — the sitting president’s military decision.
“I have repeatedly defended President Bush against the left on Iraq, even though I think he should have waited until the U.N. inspections were over,” Clinton said in a Time magazine interview that will hit newsstands Monday, a day before the publication of his book “My Life.”
[. . .]
Noting that . . . Bush’s first priority was to keep al Qaeda and other terrorist networks from obtaining “chemical and biological weapons or small amounts of fissile material.”
“That’s why I supported the Iraq thing. There was a lot of stuff unaccounted for,” Clinton said in reference to Iraq and the fact that U.N. weapons inspectors left the country in 1998.
“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,” Clinton said.
Bill Clinton has been a confirmed liar for years; this attempt at revisionism is merely the latest public example, in support of his wife’s campaign.
It’s worth noting Hillary voted in favor of the Senate resolution authorizing military action against Iraq in 2002, and now claims she was misled by President Bush, which is another lie; the Congress had access to the same intelligence reporting the White House did, and made their decisions accordingly.
Revisionism is the worst sort of dishonesty and cowardice, and both Clintons are tainted.
i agree with your statement….however your error in logic is to say that democrats don’t seem to care…would you say the same about the republicans in reference to the bold faced lies that have been passed as self evident truths by the current acting president? I’m neither republican nor democrat so it doesn’t mater to me which “side” your on but at the end of the day, both sides lie…to call one party a liar is the proverbial “black kettle to the pot”…….
You’re comparing concrete apples to abstract oranges. First, above I demonstrate the Bill Clinton is a liar with specific quotes, while you are referring to unnamed “bold faced lies,” which may or may not be lies (i.e., is this the same tired bit of misdirection concerning mistakes vs. lies?). Second, many Republicans are unhappy with Bush, seems fairly obvious with approval ratings in the 30s. On the other hand, who among Democrats have called out Bill Clinton for the specific lie I detailed? Your “error[s] in logic” are obvious.
Interesting find. Bill Clinton certainly has his way of using the English language… although, I like the term “revisionism”… puts it quite nicely, doesn’t it?
So much of this mess going i just found http://www.clintonlies.info
Jav