We Don't Need Another Clinton

Bill Clinton played the gallant hero and stepped up to defend his wife form the brutal attacks launched at her by primary opponent Barack Obama. More likely, someone in the Hillary campaign decided it would look better for her if Bill fought the "Are You Experienced" battle with Obama.

Personally I don't think either one of them would be qualified to be president of the local chapter of the Che Guevara fan club.

But what struck me was Bill Clinton's answer to a question comparing his experience to that of Obama

Asked about his own experience when he became President aged 46 - the same age as Mr Obama is now - Mr Clinton said that in contrast to 1992, “we didn’t have the terror threat. We didn’t have the troops in Iraq.(emphasis added)

It's a shame the journalist involved in the interview lacked any curiosity whatsoever. If the reporter's role had been anything other than helping Bill help Hillary, he might have followed up with a question like "In your estimation, Mr. President, when exactly did the terror threat begin?"

I think it might be fairly safe to assume that there was a terror threat some time before the February 1993 World Trade Center Bombing. Maybe Bill Clinton doesn't think the terror threat really began until the Khobar Towers bombing in June of 1996. Certainly Clinton would agree that there was a terror threat when two U.S. Embassies in Africa were bombed in August of 1998.

Could it be that Clinton believed the terror threat began with the Attack on the USS Cole in October of 2000?

Maybe Clinton is right. Maybe when he won election in November of 1992 there was no terror threat that we were aware of. But three months later the threat was there and it grew, virtually unchecked and unchallenged, for the eight years of his presidency.

There are a lot of reasons to not want Hillary Clinton to be president. Her husband's legacy of feckless defense of the nation is another.

Posted by: Stephen Macklin at 02:23 PM | No Comments | Add Comment