Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

DEM's Better Be Spitting Fire, to Repudiate "It's Clinton's Fault" Mantra

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
maxrandb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-05 09:04 AM
Original message
DEM's Better Be Spitting Fire, to Repudiate "It's Clinton's Fault" Mantra
If we have learned anything from the 2004 campaign and, most especially, the Paul Hackett campaign, it should be this:

First: Waiting too long to respond to scurrilous attacks is NEVER a good idea.
Second: Fighting back and hitting these "bastards" HARD! does not hurt our electoral chances. On the contrary, we are rewarded at the ballot box when we fight back. And I mean fight back as nasty as the repukes do. Our slogan should be the Sean Connery line from "The Untouchables". "If he sends one of your's to the hospital, you send one of his to the morgue".

In other words. "Coming out swinging with a 2x4 to the forehead to these "effers" IS A GOOD THING.

I caught Rush's little 2 minute update on the radio today. Stand by for 3 hours today of blaming Clinton for 9/11. It's all they have left. By the time Rush and Fox are done, they'll be saying it was Clinton himself putting "yellow stickies" on Atta's face.

Dems better get out in force to knock some sense into these people. As near as I can tell, President Clinton was not the President on 9/11/2001. As near as I can tell, President Clinton was not still on the "distribution list" for Presidential Daily Briefings on 6 August 2001. As near as I can tell, it was VP Cheney who dis-banded Clinton's task force on terrorism because the Bush admin wanted to go in a "new direction".

Here are some facts that we can, and should use(bolding is mine):
------------------------------------------------------------------

According to the public record, the Administration made counter-terrorism such a "top priority" that it never once convened its task force on counter terrorism before 9/11, attempted to downgrade counter terrorism at the Justice Department, and held only two out of more than one hundred national security meetings on the issue of terrorism. Meanwhile, the White House was cutting key counter terrorism programs -- Bush himself admitted that he "didn't feel the sense of urgency" about terrorism before 9/11. According to the Washington Post, President Bush and Vice President Cheney never once convened the counter terrorism task force that was established in May 2000(Clinton was still president in May 2000) -- despite repeated warnings that Al Qaida could be planning to hijack airplanes and use them as missiles. This negligence came at roughly the same time that the Vice President held at least 10 meetings of his Energy Task Force and attended at least six meetings with Enron executives.
Similarly, Newsweek reported that internal government documents show that, before 9/11, the Bush Administration moved to "de-emphasize" counter terrorism. When the "FBI officials sought to add hundreds more counterintelligence agents" to deal with the problem, "they got shot down" by the White House.
Additionally, the Associated Press reported in 2002 that "President Bush's national security leadership met formally nearly 100 times in the months prior to the Sept 11 attacks yet terrorism was the topic during only two of those sessions." This is consistent with evidence Clarke has presented showing that his January 2001 "urgent" memo asking for a meeting of top officials on the imminent Al Qaida threat was rejected for almost eight months. At the time, the White House said that they simply "did not need to have a formal meeting to discuss the threat". Finally, the White House threatened to veto efforts putting more money into counter terrorism, tried to cut funding for counter terrorism grants, delayed arming the unmanned airplanes that had spotted bin Laden in Afghanistan, and terminated "a highly classified program to monitor Al Qaida suspects in the United States.

Here are the sources for the above:

1. Process Used to Develop the National Energy Policy, US General Accounting Office.
2. "Cheney: We Met With Enron Execs", ABC News, 01/09/2002.
3. Freedom of Information Center, 05/27/2002.
4. "Clarke's Take On Terror", CBS News, 03/21/2004.
5. "White House Rebuttal to Clarke Interview", Washington Post, 03/22/2004.
6. Freedom of Information Center, 05/27/2002.
7. "FBI Budget Squeezed After 9/11", Washington Post, 03/22/2004.
8. "Officials: U.S. missed chance to kill bin Laden", Helena Independent Record, 06/25/2003.
9. "In the Months Before 9/11, Justice Department Curtailed Highly Classified Program to Monitor Al Qaeda Suspects in the U.S.", PR Newswire, 03/21/2004.

Additionally, here is the redacted August 6 PDB. Again (bold is mine)

The following is a redacted text of the presidential daily briefing from August 6, 2001: Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.
Clandestine, foreign government, and media reports indicate Bin Laden since 1997 has wanted to conduct terrorist attacks in the U.S. Bin Laden implied in U.S. television interviews in 1997 and 1998 that his followers would follow the example of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef and "bring the fighting to America."

After U.S. missile strikes on his base in Afghanistan in 1998(I interrupt this post to point our that in 1998 THE PRESIDENT WAS BILL CLINTON), Bin Laden told followers he wanted to retaliate in Washington, according to a service.
An Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ) operative told service at the same time that Bin Laden was planning to exploit the operative's access to the U.S. to mount a terrorist strike.
The millennium plotting in Canada in 1999 may have been part of Bin Laden's first serious attempt to implement a terrorist strike in the U.S. Convicted plotter Ahmed Ressam has told the FBI that he conceived the idea to attack Los Angeles International Airport himself, but that Bin Laden lieutenant Abu Zubaydah encouraged him and helped facilitate the operation. Ressam also said that in 1998 Abu Zubaydah was planning his own U.S. attack.

Ressam says Bin Laden was aware of the Los Angeles operation.
Although Bin Laden has not succeeded, his attacks against the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 demonstrate that he prepares operations years in advance and is not deterred by setbacks. Bin Laden associates surveilled our Embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam as early as 1993, and some members of the Nairobi cell planning the bombings were arrested and deported in 1997.
AI Qaeda members -- including same who are U.S. citizens -- have resided in and traveled to the U.S. for years, and the group apparently maintains a support structure that could aid attacks.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hit these people hard and often that blaming the guy who had been out of office for 9 months WILL NOT FOOL THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-05 09:15 AM
Response to Original message
1. Just try to get anyone in DC to pick up a phone in DC in August.
Good luck! Everyone who is anyone is out at the OBX radiating their skin cells on the beach.

I've tried. Even gave them a hook to hang the story on:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/8/10/145513/501



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-05 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. True-Still the Dem Party attitude towards GOP Clinton bashs needs a change
I reposted the op post in the Democratic Party forum. I hope someone notices it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxrandb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-05 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #1
6. I'm So Tired of Watching the Republican Noise Machine Frame the Debate
Edited on Thu Aug-11-05 10:49 AM by maxrandb
This is how they work.

1. Some congressman, or "staffer", goes on news programs and "breathlessly" tells how he has "new" evidence that proves Clinton is to blame for 9/11. He doesn't even have to say it, he can just imply it. (already happened in this case)
2. Drudge puts up the flashing light. (already happened in this case)
3. Internet sites pick it up and spin it as fact. (already happened in this case)
4. Talk radio hosts pick it up and spend their entire air time "pumping" the story. (beginning to happen in this case)
5. Neo-con media complains ad nauseum that the bullshit story they've created is not getting enough coverage in the MSM.
6. MSM, fearful of being labled as "liberally biased", runs with the bullshit story, giving said bullshit story credibility.
7. Cable news shows have "expert panels", with a 5-1 ratio neo-con Republican to moderate Republican (for ballance of course) discuss it breathlessly

and Voila!!

A Bullshit Story has infected the news cycle like a festering peri-anal abcess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iconoclastic cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-05 09:15 AM
Response to Original message
2. How about: : "Don't make excuses for bad behavior! Personal responsibility
!!!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gold Metal Flake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-05 09:29 AM
Response to Original message
4. Thank you.
Excellent post. Don't forget to say that *co thought so much about anti-terror prior to 9/11 that they reduced it's head to sub-cabinet level (Clarke). Well, I mean find a way to say it better, but it's a glaring example of how they ignored terror, and effective to throw in a rightoid's face.

Hard to belive that chosing to be agressive on the methods and messages offends some on DU and elsewhere. Even a clenched fist is sometimes frowned upon. I suggest thinking about the clenched fist being held over our heads by *co, their corrupt political/military/intelligence structure, the corporatocracy, the zombie public/freeptards and the whore mediocracy.

We are way past Ghandi methods, unless someone is hoping for global sympathy from mass casualties.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woo me with science Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-05 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
5. excellent post. and necessary. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-05 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
7. Clinton is too wellknown w/ the best communication skills - the GOP and
Edited on Thu Aug-11-05 12:17 PM by blm
their whores in the media can't possibly influence how the public sees such a wellknown politician like Clinton.

Clinton also was able to set the record straight about his work when he did his two promotional tours for his book and when the 9/11 commission report came out.

Why would he need defending by any Dem who could never command the media as easily as Clinton? The GOP can't win this battle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FUGWB88 Donating Member (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-11-05 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
8. When have the dems ever spit fire?
They are going to let the mantra live and allow themselves to be pushed aside....like always
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Oct 21st 2014, 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC