Bill Clinton Flatly Asserts He Opposed War at Start

[Pale Rider]

Bill Clinton Flatly Asserts He Opposed War at Start

By PATRICK HEALY
Published: November 28, 2007

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.

Before the invasion, Mr. Clinton did not precisely declare that he opposed the war. A week before military action began, however, he did say that he preferred to give weapons inspections more time and that an invasion was not necessary to topple Saddam Hussein.

At the same time, he also spoke supportively about the 2002 Senate resolution that authorized military action against Iraq.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/28/us...in&oref=slogin

[Pale Rider]

Could somebody please answer one question for me?

WHO THE FUCK IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT HERE... HILLARY OR BILL?!

Why is this impeached moron plastered all over every news paper and webpage?

[darin]

Clintons are blatant, unabashed political opportunists.

[hjmick]

Clintons are blatant, unabashed political opportunists.

You poor politcally correct soul, they are not "political opportunists," they are political whores.

[Hobbit]

You poor politcally correct soul, they are not "political opportunists," they are political whores.

They are Democrats in the classical, derogatory sense. That is, politicians who go whichever way the wind blows and always give in to the mob.

[typomaniac]

Could somebody please answer one question for me?

WHO THE FUCK IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT HERE... HILLARY OR BILL?!

Why is this impeached moron plastered all over every news paper and webpage?

Why do you need to ask? You're the one contributing to the posting.

[glockmail]

Clintons are blatant, unabashed political opportunists.

You poor politcally correct soul, they are not "political opportunists," they are political whores.

The NYT sanitized this as much as they could: "a statement that is more absolute than his comments before the invasion in March 2003". But Rush lead with this today, with Bill-Bob's actual quotes from today and 2003, proving that his latest comments are a complete bald-faced lie.

[hjmick]

The NYT sanitized this as much as they could: "a statement that is more absolute than his comments before the invasion in March 2003". But Rush lead with this today, with Bill-Bob's actual quotes from today and 2003, proving that his latest comments are a complete bald-faced lie.

It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

Maybe it depends on what your definition of "support" is...

[avatar4321]

Hill Billy is running.

The fact that he blatantly lies about it despite writing an op ed supporting the war is downright amazing.

[Pale Rider]

Hill Billy is running.

The fact that he blatantly lies about it despite writing an op ed supporting the war is downright amazing.

Exactly. "They," meaning bubba and hitlery have sat down and calculated that if hitlery isn't enough by herself, "they" will start throwing bubba out there to let the clinton lovers know that a vote for hitlery will be the same as a vote for bubba.

These two filthy, opportunist sons a bitches are the SEEDIEST THINGS I can think of that's EVER hit politics. They're just disgusting to point of making me ill.

[Pale Rider]

Why do you need to ask? You're the one contributing to the posting.

To point out their filthy lying, hypocritical ways. Why did you need to ask?

[typomaniac]

To point out their filthy lying, hypocritical ways. Why did you need to ask?

In 1992, Hillary made no bones about wanting to be as politically influential as she could. I don't suppose Bill would feel any differently now.

That's why I asked: because it hardly seems like such a huge surprise.

Not that it has anything to do with their lies or hyprocrisies......

[trobinett]

Acutally, everytime Bill opens his pie hole, he cost Hilary votes.

Keep talking Bill...........

[Kathianne]

Hey, even Oliver Willis can't take this shit and he is as liberal as they come. Lots of links:

http://www.oliverwillis.com/archives...-didnt-oppose/

President Clinton Didn't Oppose The Iraq War
By Oliver Willis on November 27, 2007 11:43 PM

UPDATE: Those of you visiting via Andrew Sullivan and other conservative blogs should know that I think Sullivan is full of crap and that President Clinton is one of the nation's greatest presidents, I just happen to disagree with him on this.

bill clinton in iowaAs one of President Clinton's strongest supporters and biggest fans, it pains me to point out that what he's saying here is a load of bull.

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.

That's just not true. I don't think its right to put President Clinton in the role of war supporter, but if he was against the war only he and Sen. Clinton know for sure because he didn't say a thing about it. Maybe, as the article goes on, he was silent due to presidential protocol or to not overshadow Sen. Clinton's vote and subsequent statements, but President Clinton was noticeably silent as the nation went to war in 2003.

You can easily compare his silence to that of his vice-president, Al Gore, who was vocally and clearly opposed to the war from day one. I wondered at the time - and I still do - why President Clinton sat on his hands when he easily would have had a national platform to nullify Bush's war policy.

There is no public record of any sort to support President Clinton's assertion that he "opposed Iraq from the beginning". That just didn't happen.

[glockmail]

Acutally, everytime Bill opens his pie hole, he cost Hilary votes.

Keep talking Bill...........

Same with Hill. Hillary for the Dem Nom!!!!