Where was Hillary when Bill was "repeatedly" defending "Bush against the left on Iraq"?

[ProSense]

"I have repeatedly defended President Bush against the left on Iraq, even though I think he should have waited until the U.N. inspections were over," Clinton said in a Time magazine interview that will hit newsstands Monday, a day before the publication of his book "My Life."

Clinton, who was interviewed Thursday, said he did not believe that Bush went to war in Iraq over oil or for imperialist reasons but out of a genuine belief that large quantities of weapons of mass destruction remained unaccounted for.

link

In the middle of the 2004 campaign to make Bush a one-term president (select) for his illegal invasion, Bill Clinton was defending him.

[MonkeyFunk]

1. Most people would have carpal tunnel by now...

you're a machine.

[Dogmudgeon]

4. Check out ErnestoG -- nine days, well over 1000 posts!

He da MAN!

--p!

[ProSense]

9. How much does it take to reverse denial? n/t

[girl gone mad]

10. Believe it or not,

this really happened.

Attacking the messenger is a favorite tactic of the right wing.

[MonkeyFunk]

13. I'm pointing out that she starts

dozens of threads attacking Clinton, day in and day out. Literally dozens every day.

She's a machine.

[ProSense]

14. And you respond to everyone of them with nonsense! n/t

[TwilightGardener]

2. Nice.

[blm]

3. Yep - for THREE WEEKS straight. And you don't see Clinton agreeing with Kerry's

strategy on terrorism or to stabilize Iraq so troops could be withdrawn sooner on ANY of those transcripts from his appearances.

Nope - just three weeks of good headlines for BUSH.

[fascisthunter]

5. A Man with Such a High IQ can Still Be Fooled by Bush?????

not good

[tularetom]

6. Just sittin there waiting for Kerry to lose

so that she could be the favorite for the 2008 nomination?

Shit either Bill Clinton is way stupider than I ever imagined to fall for that shit or he is the ultimate cynical sellout - trashing his party's nominee so that his wife (well really himself) would have the inside track for the next nomination.

Or he is simply a coward - knowing the bush war was based on bullshit but afraid to say so because he might be accused of being an unpatriotic pussy.

[DJ13]

7. Clinton was defending him because their plan for Hillary to run wasnt till after Bush was done

I sometimes wonder if not having Hillary run in 2004 was the result of a backroom deal between Bill and daddy Bush.

Even I (someone who doesnt like the politics of the Clintons) would have gladly voted for Hillary if she had ran in 2004 just to save our country from Bush's last four years.

[speedoo]

8. Thanks, Bill.

You neutralized the efforts of thousands of Democrats trying to defeat Bush with those statements. Just like Hillary's criticism of John Kerry during that campaign.

You and Hillary will never have my support, or vote, again.

[usregimechange]

11. No telling

[ProSense]

15. It's very telling! n/t

[pretzel4gore]

12. they all will do it...ie betray the people

all the Hillary versus Obama versus mccain versus huckleberry are premised on the idea that there's something at stake, but ...is there, really?:
-------------------
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/dec2002/gore-d21.shtml
snip>
The former vice president and nominal head of the Democrats, who captured the votes of 50 million Americans and won the popular vote in the 2000 presidential race, chose a December 15 interview on the CBS program “60 Minutes” as the venue for publicizing his decision. That Gore, by far the best known of all likely Democratic presidential aspirants, should remove himself from contention at this early stage shows the degree to which the political system is controlled by an elite of media and political decision-makers, who are themselves answerable to the American financial oligarchy.For several months Gore had been aggressively preparing the way for a rematch with George W. Bush, making speeches on foreign and domestic policy, appearing on television interview programs, and conducting a national book tour with his wife. According to opinion polls, he was, by a wide margin, the first choice of Democratic voters to challenge Bush in 2004.

But the critical constituency for a viable presidential run was to be found not in voting precincts, but rather in corporate boardrooms, network office suites and the top echelons of the Democratic Party apparatus. Among the few hundred individuals who really “count” in shaping American electoral politics, Gore was decidedly out of favor. Their verdict was reflected in sluggish fundraising and what Gore associates called the “skeptical media coverage” of his book tour. The blow to Gore’s presidential aspirations was softened, according to press reports, by the former vice president’s new-found wealth, gained in part from a vice chairmanship at a West Coast investment firm.

In explaining his decision, Gore has offered only one political motivation—but it is a highly significant one. Referring obliquely to the 36-day battle over the Florida vote and the Supreme Court ruling that ultimately handed the presidency to his Republican opponent, Gore told his “60 Minutes” interviewer, “I think a campaign that would be a rematch between myself and President Bush would inevitably involve a focus on the past that would, in some measure, distract from the focus on the future that I think all campaigns have to be about.” In other words, a second Gore-Bush contest would inevitably raise the overtly anti-democratic manner in which the 2000 election crisis was resolved, and bring into question the legitimacy of the Bush administration. In his desire to avoid such issues, Gore reflects a preoccupation of the entire ruling elite and both political parties.
<snip