CLINTON AND BUSH IN 2009?
by Dr. David Currie

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."  (Al Gore, Sept 23, 2002).  Most Americans are reeling from Gore's non-support of former running mate, Joe Lieberman, Gore's endorsement of emotionally charged Howard Dean, and Gore's emotional outbursts against everything Bush, including prosecution of the war against Saddam.

But Gore is not the only one running from his own pre-war anti-Saddam stance.  Roger Mansell has collected pre-war quotes confirming weapons of mass destruction from numerous liberals now forgetful of their own statements.  Along with similar quotes at jrwhipple dot com (liberals may find US flag and American eagle images offensive), Mansell has demonstrated a chasmic dichotomy of liberal pre- and post-war opinions.  Caught in the headlights by their own pre-war anti-Saddam barrages are capital "L" liberal luminaries John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, Madeline Albright, Sandra Berger, Tom Daschle, Carl Levin, Nancy Pelosi, Bob Graham, Robert Byrd, Jay Rockefeller, Henry Waxman and, of course, Al Gore.  President Bill Clinton and Senator Hillary Clinton are excluded from among liberal back-steppers, as they remain solidly behind their pre-war record against Saddam Hussein.

Before Republicans pat themselves on the back, recall that Congressional Republicans eclipsed President Clinton's ambition to clean up Afghanistan and Iraq as early as 1997.  In 1998, President Clinton conducted limited cruise-missile based counter-proliferation/counter-terrorist attacks against the Sudan and Afghanistan in Aug, and counter-proliferation air strikes against Iraq in Dec.  In a speech at Georgetown University in Feb 2004, George Tenet, director of U.S. Central Intelligence, reviewed investigation of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction during the 10 year period ending in Oct 2002.  Herein we learn why Clinton and Bush, Jr., were anxious to remove Saddam Hussein.  Tenet's speech should be required reading for those attacking the Bush administration; Hussein led an inhuman, murdering, raping, torturing, thieving, and cowardly regime.  There existed pressing concerns that Iraq could, "either have on hand -- or could quickly re-create the capability to produce -- vast amounts of anthrax, tons of material, compared with the several grams of material that literally shut down the U.S. postal system last year." (Jon Wolfsthal, deputy director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace Non-proliferation Project, quoted by CNN in Sept 2002).

When President Bush, Mar 1993, demanded that Saddam Hussein reveal and destroy his weapons of mass destruction, or leave Iraq, Hussein failed to comply.  Compliance would have eliminated Saddam's ability to terrorize surrounding nations and marred his record of actions that led to the death of as many as 1.25 million people.  Compliance by Saddam in Mar 1993 would also have left most of Saddam's criminal regime in power today, a frightening proposition for the 90% of the Iraqi population glad to see Saddam gone.  To post-war "hate Bush" fanatics anxious to return Saddam Hussein to power in Iraq, read the words of Alexander Downer, Australia's Minister for Foreign Affairs, in a speech in Parliament House in Sept 2002.  And just this once, try to read the whole speech.

Now, crystal ball time.  Bin Laden will be captured or killed within the next year; democracy will eventually prevail in places like Iraq, Haiti and Russia (where democracy hangs in the balance).  Kerry's running mate will not be Wesley Clark (which would scare liberals already regretting the adage, "anybody but Bush in 2004"); Kerry will run against Bush and lose; Nader will not steal many left wing votes from Kerry (Kerry is as strongly to the left as Nader) but Nader will also receive a few right wing votes from those who respect Nader's constitutional right to run, and those upset with Bush's attempts at altering the constitution (or its amendments) but who would be reluctant to vote for Kerry; Hillary Clinton will receive thousands of write-in votes in the 2004 election; Kerry will receive a pair of flip-flops and a reversible windbreaker from Bush.  Now hated by leaders of Hollywood's wealthy radical left for not selling her soul, Hillary Clinton will be a serious contender for the 2008 Democratic Presidential nomination.  Senator Clinton will continue to put her New York constituents ahead of Hollywood's major left-wing donors, continuing to enhance her popularity with most Americans.  Republican blogs will try to predict the potential 2008 Republican front-runners (Bill Frist?).

Bush, Jr., and Bill Clinton will become better acquainted and will become golf buddies in 2009.  Both love America, both will have served as two-term Presidents, both will have maintained the conviction of their agendas, despite intense political heat and distraction.  History will show that the natural succession of their actions worked to drive Al Qaeda from Afghanistan, Saddam Hussein from Iraq and to initiate new global anti-terrorist networks.  Bush is a liberal conservative, Clinton is a conservative liberal... all in all, the makings of an excellent golf game.

Dr. W. David Currie
NetNacs! Reporter

Other NetNewsArticle... Windows vs. Lindows