How will this play out with the grassroots Republican voters?
Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani defended Bill Clinton on Wednesday over the former president’s counterterrorism efforts, saying recent criticism on preventing the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks is wrong.Political bickering over which president _ Clinton or George W. Bush _ missed more opportunities to prevent the attacks has been escalating since Clinton gave a combative interview on “Fox News Sunday” in which he defended his efforts to kill Osama bin Laden.???“The idea of trying to cast blame on President Clinton is just wrong for many, many reasons, not the least of which is I don’t think he deserves it,” Giuliani said in response to a question after an appearance with fellow Republican Charlie Crist, who is running for governor. “I don’t think President Bush deserves it. The people who deserve blame for Sept. 11, I think we should remind ourselves, are the terrorists _ the Islamic fanatics _ who came here and killed us and want to come here again and do it.”
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice challenged Clinton’s claim that he did more than many of his conservative critics to pursue bin Laden, and she accused the Democrat of leaving no comprehensive plan to fight al-Qaida.
Giuliani said he believed Clinton, like his successor, did everything he could with the information he was provided.
“Every American president I’ve known would have given his life to prevent an attack like that. That includes President Clinton, President Bush,” the former mayor said. “They did the best they could with the information they had at the time.”
Giuliani also said a recently declassified report that said the Iraq war had become a “cause celebre” for Islamic extremists demonstrated the need to continue the fight there.
“The jihadists very much want a victory in Iraq. They feel that if they could defeat us in Iraq they will have a great victory for terrorism,” Giuliani said. “What that should do is organize us to say if they want a big victory in Iraq then we have to deprive them of that victory.”
Giuliani said he was “very interested in considering” a run for president but would not make a decision until after the November election.
I don’t doubt Clinton is a patriotic guy and would have done everything he could to prevent 9/11, including giving his own life, if he knew it was going to happen.? But defending what Sec. Rice described as Clinton’s “flatly false” claims that the Bush administration didn’t lift a finger to stop 9/11, that his administration tried harder to fight terrorism than that of the Bush administration, and that his administration left the Bush administration a “comprehensive” plan to take down al Qaeda?
I like Giuliani, but I have to seriously disagree with his statement that Clinton “did everything he could with the information he was provided.”? The 9/11 Commission Report specifically notes many failures of the Clinton administration pre-9/11 and chances to kill bin Laden that were not taken advantage of because of political reasons.
I don’t see how Giuliani’s move on this issue can possibly be a plus for him in a Republican primary.? If it has any effect at all, it will most likely be a net negative.
September 27th, 2006 at 9:00 pm
Giuliani’s trying to transcend the 50/50 environment of the past 10 or 12 (or more) years. That’s my reading of this. There was another instance a month back or so where Rudy was invited to trash the Democrats but refused to. Contrast that with plenty of occasions where Rudy has made clear that Americans have a choice between the two parties, and that one is just head-and-shoulders above the other when it comes to policies. I think Rudy’s strategy is to attack the Democrats’ policies, not as people. And I know that technically, Clinton’s terrorism failures in the ’90s were due to his policies, but it’s also a reality of politics that those criticisms are taken personally by many
Clinton supporters, which includes 49% of the country from 1996.
It would be nice to have a 53% president again, that’s all I’m saying.
September 27th, 2006 at 9:36 pm
Giuliani’s key word here is that, “Clinton did everything
HE
could…”
Clinton simply did have the right stuff to do more. And Rudy does not contradict Rice. Rice was responding to Clinton’s attacks on Bush and correcting Clinton lies.
September 27th, 2006 at 10:00 pm
I think my Race42008 colleague DaveG has hit the nail on the proverbial head here. While Mayor Giuliani is certainly giving President Clinton a lot more slack and benefit of the doubt than I am personally comfortable with given the evidence of malfeasance and nonfeasance in this area, my guess is that there is a method to his madness. And that would be that he is positioning himself to run a campaign based on his own track record and on ideas and policies rather than the same old slash and sully campaigns we have witnessed recently.
With Senator McCain and Governor Romney recently getting into a spitting contest over the detainee issue, I think it is refreshing and wise for Mayor Giuliani to take the high road and abstain from going negative on his political opponents. Here I think he is simply respecting the office of president and making a practical argument that we cannot really know everything that goes on in National Security Council meetings.
I would expect that Mayor Giuliani and Speaker Gingrich are likely to run issues oriented campaigns and refrain from going negative. I think they are predisposed to lead that way and also realize that such a campaign provides the best defense for their own personal vulnerabilities. And in doing so that would also explain why they are getting into the race later than others and not worried about hiring the usual suspects for their campaigns who have given us the mud fight tactics seen over and over again.
At the risk of taking sides, I think it would be great if such clean tactics succeeded.
September 28th, 2006 at 6:08 am
Mes Confrères:
I think both DaveG and Republius have hit the proverbial nail on the head, with respect to Rudy’s recent comments on Bill Clinton. Thanks to Gamecock for providing us with the full quote and to Kavon for expanding thereupon. Shame on Woodrow for truncating same in the first place! I don’t believe that either Presidents Wilson or Eisenhower would consciously have done such a thing! The “real point” is that Rudy, and Rudy alone among potential Republican candidates, is showing “real leadership” here!
Like most of you, I believe, I too am lothe to give Bill Cilnton the benefit of the doubt about anything, or even to give him credit for anything positive. Then again, I am not running for anything, and I do — at the same time I feel free to “tell the truth” about Bil Clinton — appreciate Hizzoner’s leadership! If any of you have some time on your hands, and feel like expending some additional mental energy on this distasteful human being, I invite you to visit my own recently-created blog entitled “Run Rudy Run”:
(http://lutherhardy.blogspot.com/)
and read the posting entitled “Bill Clinton’s ‘credibility’!”.
At is obvious from the name, I started the bolg in July to support Rudy’s potential Presidential candidacy, but alas, I haven’t had the time to devote to it that I thought I would, and lately I become bogged down on such distasteful topics as Bill Clinton and Larry Sabotage.
Cheers!
September 28th, 2006 at 2:12 pm
Condi was defending our president, and we have only one
at a time in this country. She was correct to say Clinton
was “flatyly false” and he is. For her to sit like a silent
little doll only creates the image that Condi can’t fight in a
battle with the Big Boys. She is tough enough for her job now,
she is tough enough to handle the office of president is she
accepts the will of the people.
That is what this is all about. Yes, leadership is at issue NOW. and Condi has Leadership and strength. Rudy is just trying to be
the referee calling for “time out”. Hillary is standing by her man again, which makes her look like the dutiful housewife.
At least Condi does not have to worry abour her president trying
to overshadow her.