Has the "blame Clinton" thing finally worn thin? - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 11 (permalink) Old 10-13-2006, 07:48 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Has the "blame Clinton" thing finally worn thin?


Bush's newest N. Korea policy: Blame Clinton
Responsibility pinned on the guy who left office six years ago
TOM TEEPEN
Cox News Service


Kim Jong Il had no sooner taken his nuclear test shot than the Bush administration's outriders were rushing to microphones and computer keyboards to blame Bill Clinton.

The president left the blaming to his surrogates and volunteer enablers, and conservative commentators duly closed ranks around George W. and the proposition that the nuclear test was all Clinton's fault. Clinton has been a negotiatin' wuss and should have ... what? Well, it is never very clear in the chorus of denunciation just what he should have done. Maybe nuke Pyongyang.

Here's Bush, almost six years into his presidency, nearly three-fourths through his two terms, and it's the guy who hasn't been president for six years who is supposedly responsible.

GOP never takes responsibility

Have you noticed how often these days ideological conservatives seem to get tangled in their own contradictions?The Republican Party bills itself as the party of personal accountability -- as opposed to a Democratic Party that by GOP accusation is the party of eternal rehab. But neither the White House nor Congress takes responsibility for anything -- not for the Iraq war or its blown execution, not for the record federal deficits and, now, not for a failed North Korean policy.

The 1994 agreement dickered by Clinton's people traded two light-water reactors, paid for by South Korea and Japan, for a halt in North Korean nuclear development that froze that program for eight years. But Bush and crew came to the presidency disparaging, when they didn't outright despise, all things Clinton.

Asked in the administration's early days whether the U.S. would continue the policy of engagement with North Korea, Colin Powell, still under the mis-impression that he was going to be a real secretary of state, said yes, only to have the White House cut him off at the knees within hours.

In early '02 the president declared Iran, Iraq and North Korea an "axis of evil" that must be crushed and at the first excuse invaded Iraq, providing North Korea and Iran, both already nuclear-keen, with an undeserved gloss for their projects. And even giving Pyongyang an alibi, however tendentious, when it was caught cheating on the '94 deal later that year.

No attempt at consensus

No one can know whether the Clinton track, if followed, would have yielded any better results than Bush's about-face. North Korea is a distinctly oddball nation, deeply self-isolated and unpredictable.

But refusing ever to deal directly with Pyongyang if it wouldn't accommodate preconditions that it plainly would never accept, Bush all but guaranteed his multilateral approach could never nail down a deal.

A nuclear North Korea is every bit as scary a prospect as Bush makes it out to be. Pyongyang is improving its medium-range missiles and stretching for still greater range. A beggar nation, it sold missile technology abroad and there is no reason to suppose it would never prop its failed economy by hustling even pricier nuclear technology.

But wouldn't a wise president in the circumstances, instead of letting his cadres alienate the other political party, work toward a sustainable consensus in the, you know, national interest? Remember the national interest?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Teepen is a columnist for Cox Newspapers.
FeelTheLove is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 11 (permalink) Old 10-13-2006, 08:02 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Check Codes's Avatar
 
Date registered: Mar 2005
Vehicle: '01-E320 & 02-ST2
Location: John 15:18-19
Posts: 31,634
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 35 Post(s)
I think the "blame Clinton" thing will last slightly less time than the "blame Bush" thing.

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy; its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery. (Winston Churchill)
Check Codes is offline  
post #3 of 11 (permalink) Old 10-13-2006, 08:32 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #4 of 11 (permalink) Old 10-13-2006, 08:39 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mzsmbs's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 1972 Mercedes 250 (/8) W114/M130
Location: on a high bank of a creek
Posts: 7,296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
where is BHD when you need him? LOL chickenhawk will do but not as well.



in political asylum
mzsmbs is offline  
post #5 of 11 (permalink) Old 10-13-2006, 08:41 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
mzsmbs's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 1972 Mercedes 250 (/8) W114/M130
Location: on a high bank of a creek
Posts: 7,296
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FeelTheLove
lol.. i am sure, somehow, this is also clinton's fault. not sure how but we shall find out shortly.



in political asylum
mzsmbs is offline  
post #6 of 11 (permalink) Old 10-14-2006, 08:40 AM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)

Wagging the "Big Dog"
In desperate straits, the GOP has reverted to blaming the Clinton administration for its failed policy toward North Korea.

By Joe Conason


Oct. 13, 2006 | North Korea's apparent nuclear blast exposed the incoherence not only of Bush administration foreign policy but of the Republican midterm political strategy as well. While White House underboss Karl Rove has long planned to win this November's elections on a "national security" platform questioning the strength and patriotism of the Democrats, the developments of the past several days have showed that the Republicans are in a reactive mode, unable to master the policy agenda, and reduced to flailing against their perennial target: They've reverted to blaming Bill Clinton.

Debating the Korea policy of the Clinton administration could hardly be what Rove had in mind when he designed his party's midterm strategy. His original plan, a variation on the successful blueprints used in the 2002 and 2004 elections, was to label the opposition "Defeatocrats" who would "cut and run" from the "war on terror," leaving the nation defenseless against bloodthirsty enemies. What Rove's plan obviously didn't contemplate was continually worsening circumstances in Iraq -- and stark proof of the resulting American military and diplomatic paralysis in defiant moves by North Korea and Iran. In an unusual moment of lucidity and candor, National Review's Jonah Goldberg confessed last Monday that Pyongyang's test -- although possibly a distraction from the Mark Foley mess -- undeniably represents "a failure of U.S. policy ... President Bush denounced the Axis of Evil five years ago and promised that he would do everything to keep its members from getting nukes. Well, North Korea just detonated one. Iran is well on its way to getting one. And Iraq, well, that's not quite the bright spot we hoped it would be." Not quite indeed, particularly with former pal Bob Woodward now denouncing the president for concealing the truth about Iraq from the American people and himself.

Still, it was startling to watch the Republicans respond to a boilerplate critical statement from Sen. Hillary Clinton by mounting a full-bore, multilevel assault on her husband's policies. At first, the White House refrained from "playing the blame game," as the president likes to say, and instead allowed surrogates to do the attacking. The first to step forward, unsurprisingly, was Sen. John McCain (or "Rove's poodle," as he is known without affection on a listserv I read). Speaking as if there had actually been nobody in charge at the White House, the State Department, the CIA and the Pentagon for the past five or six years, McCain excoriated the 1994 agreement negotiated between the Clinton administration and the North Korean regime as "a failure" that had rewarded Pyongyang repeatedly without achieving anything.

Swiftly following McCain's attack, the Republican National Committee began raking former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright as a stooge of Kim Jong Il. According to RNC chairman Ken Mehlman, the former secretary is somehow responsible for North Korean nukes because she shared a toast with the dictator and gave him an autographed basketball. This tactic was reminiscent of those old pictures of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Hussein -- except that Albright had actually accomplished something when she talked with Kim.

Both McCain and Mehlman ignored the central achievement of the Clinton policy, which was to maintain monitoring of Pyongyang's plutonium supply for eight years -- and thus prevent the building of plutonium bombs or the transfer of those materials to other states or terrorist organizations. The North Koreans started a secret uranium enrichment program precisely because they could not use reprocessed plutonium to build weapons under the 1994 Agreed Framework. Since the Bush administration cast aside that process in 2002, Kim's scientists have been freed from the scrutiny of international inspection.

Whatever the merits or defects of Clinton's diplomacy in Asia, however, the political risks of focusing on that topic seem far greater than any potential rewards. Already once in this season the Republicans have learned (or should have learned) that angering the former president is unwise; he is far more popular than Bush is and considerably more skilled in argument than anyone on the other side, including McCain.

Even if Clinton's policy was completely misguided, why should any sane voter accept the notion that current policy problems are his fault? Didn't the mature statesmen and women of the Bush regime declare a clean break from the previous administration as soon as they assumed power? Where have they been since January 2001 and what have they been doing? What are they going to do now?

Coming from the Republicans as they face the increasing prospect of defeat in the midterm elections, the Clinton-bashing tactic stinks of political desperation and policy exhaustion. Flogging a "Big Dog" piñata may motivate the party's die-hard right-wing base -- but if that is Rove's objective four weeks before Election Day, he, his president and their party are in even greater trouble than the latest polls suggest.
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #7 of 11 (permalink) Old 10-14-2006, 09:15 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregs210
I think the "blame Clinton" thing will last slightly less time than the "blame Bush" thing.
Yep.

B
Botnst is offline  
post #8 of 11 (permalink) Old 10-14-2006, 10:29 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
yoseyman's Avatar
 
Date registered: Nov 2005
Vehicle: Baby
Location: 1313 Mockingbird lane
Posts: 9,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Clinton is still looking for this,

Last edited by yoseyman; 01-01-2008 at 06:14 PM.
yoseyman is offline  
post #9 of 11 (permalink) Old 10-14-2006, 10:35 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by yoseyman
Clinton is still looking for this,
What has he found in his search?
Botnst is offline  
post #10 of 11 (permalink) Old 10-14-2006, 10:39 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
yoseyman's Avatar
 
Date registered: Nov 2005
Vehicle: Baby
Location: 1313 Mockingbird lane
Posts: 9,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
^^^^^Poontang
yoseyman is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Similar Threads
    Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
    "Yakuza" Sato's AMG Mercedes from "Black Rain" (starring Michael Douglas&Andy Garcia) JJB236 W124 E,CE,D,TD Class 23 10-05-2009 01:19 PM
    Republican Blame Game begins: Matt Drudge blames kids for "enticing Foley" FeelTheLove Off-Topic 16 10-04-2006 06:19 PM
    Excusez moi but what is that "water" thing you guys use to clean your W163 with? Solvent? tcp_ML500 W163 M-Class 4 06-23-2003 07:37 PM
    I finally got some new pics of the new 2004 ML "GST" Man-Du-Ru-Gas W163 M-Class 11 11-30-2002 10:36 PM
    Anyone experience an occasional "headlights go dim" all of a sudden thing?... cgeorge430 W163 M-Class 11 10-18-2002 02:44 PM

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome