Bill Clinton: U.S. Invaded Iraq Too Soon

[sabra]

Source: CBS News

Says "There Would Have Been No War" If Weapons Inspectors Had More Time

(CBS) Former President Clinton, seeking to clarify a recent assertion that he was against the Iraq war "from the beginning," said Monday he's maintained all along that United Nations weapons should have been given more time to complete their work in Iraq prior to the United States-led 2003 invasion.

...

While stumping for his wife, presidential contender and New York Sen. Hillary Clinton in Iowa late last month, Mr. Clinton said, "Even though I approved of Afghanistan, and I opposed Iraq from the beginning, I still regret that I was not asked or given the opportunity to support those soldiers." He was referring to a tax cut he, Hillary and other wealthy Americans got using money that could have gone to the military.

But a review of previous remarks by Mr. Clinton revealed that, among other things, he said in May 2003, "I supported the president (Bush) when he asked for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq."

...

But Mr. Clinton remarked to Smith Monday that he's said "a hundred times" that the weapons inspectors needed more time on the ground. "Nobody ever said it before because everybody who knows what was going on and knows me knows that I was trying to get even a new U.N. resolution passed," the former president said. "I was involved with an effort behind the scenes to talk to some people around the world to try to see if we could get another resolution passed to give (the inspectors) some more time.

"I supported threatening Saddam so we could do the inspections, but I believe -- I even believe the Senate resolution, if you read it, said that the force was authorized if the diplomatic efforts -- i.e. -- the inspections -- failed.

"The mistake we made was not letting the inspections finish. If they had, there would have been no war. And i was always against doing it without the inspections.

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/12/10/earlyshow/main3598046.shtml

[Captain Hilts]

1. The record backs him up as suggesting on Feb 11th 2003 that the brakes be put on . nt

[ixion]

2. there was never a reason to invade... inspections had already showed that

Bill is playing on the fence, as is his style.

[MGKrebs]

4. That is not true.

Statement from Hans Blix dated April 22, 2003:


"I have publicly said that I wished these units every success in finding the truth about the weapons, which, at UNMOVIC, we have concluded could exist and which several governments are convinced do exist. I have no doubt about the determination of these units to work objectively."

http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/recent%20items.html

[ixion]

14. Blix was playing diplomat... there were NO weapons found, and the only countries that were saying

otherwise were the US and GB, who were putting extreme pressure on Blix to skew the data. This was as close as he would come.

In that very same quote, he also says he has "no doubt about the determination of these units to work objectively", which was an enabling statement for the US to illegally invade. There was no objectivity. There was only corruption and deceit.

[MGKrebs]

20. Inspectors had only been back in-country for about 5 months before

Bush had them yanked out again. They should have been left there to pursue all the leads. They should have been able to work there for years if that's what it would have taken to prove the point.

Bill Clinton is pretty good at straddling fences, but this is not an example of it.

[ixion]

22. well, we agree on the fence straddling, but disagree here... that's okay...

:hi:

[MGKrebs]

38. And I want to be clear- I agree there was no reason to invade.

My point is that the absence of evidence up to that point was still not conclusive. There was more work to be done to satisfy most parties, including Hans Blix and Bill C.

[defendandprotect]

30. There are at least two dozen statements by Blix to the contrary --- and much clearer ---

[MGKrebs]

31. Bring 'em on.

[defendandprotect]

42. This one will do . . . "virtually every claim about Iraq's WMD has proved false" Blix

The New York Times
Blix is unsparing of the United States in his concluding sections. He points out that virtually every claim made by American policy makers about Iraq's weapons programs -- aluminum tubes, yellowcake, mobile labs -- has proved to be false. The entire assessment of Iraq's weapons program, he argues, lacked any kind of ''critical thinking.'' In addition ''the contempt which both Vice President Cheney and the leadership in the U.S. Department of Defense appear to have held for international inspections deprived them, in effect, of a valuable source of information.'' Everyone recognizes the need for human intelligence in societies like Saddam Hussein's. Well, the inspectors, who met with Iraqi officials, traveled around the country and inspected sites, were human intelligence. — Fareed Zakaria

[MGKrebs]

39. Let me help.

1. (3/3/2003) "But after an hour-long interview with Blix late last week, a group of TIME editors came away with the impression that he was a lot more skeptical of Iraqi behavior than has been assumed and that he could imagine Saddam Hussein exhausting the patience even of those countries that presently want to give the inspectors more time. The Iraqis, Blix said, "have no credibility."
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,100432...

2. (3/7/03) "Blix, chairman of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission, told the council, “After a period of somewhat reluctant cooperation there has been an acceleration of initiatives on the Iraqi side since the end of January” on revealing its programs of weapons of mass destruction, thus giving ammunition both to countries wanting to continue inspections as well as those who want to abandon inspections in favor of the use of force against Iraq.

This new cooperation on Iraq’s part “is welcomed, but the value of these measures must be soberly judged by how many question marks they actually succeed in straightening out. This is not yet clear,” said Blix. Iraqi initiatives “cannot be said to constitute immediate cooperation, nor do they necessarily cover all areas of relevance,” but, he added, “they are nevertheless welcomed.”
http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/newswires/2003_3_7...

3. 2/24/07 "Hans Blix, head of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification, and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC), plans to submit a list of 30 ''unresolved questions'' surrounding Iraq's weapons of mass destruction to the UNMOVIC College of Commissioners on Monday, an UNMOVIC spokesman said Friday."
http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-2491900/Blix-to...

4. (3/2/2004) ..."It also goes further than prewar U.N. reports, which said no weapons had been found but noted that Iraq had not fully accounted for weapons it was known to have had at the end of the Gulf War in 1991."
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-03-02-un-w...

[robbedvoter]

3. Hillary used that language when answering (better) Kerry's question "If you knew

then what you know now". I remember her saying "there wouldn't have been a vote if we knew" - and I thought - why couldn't Kerry have said that?

[maddiejoan]

6. I love John Kerry

But Hillary is a lot smarter.

[politicasista]

26. Hillary is a smarter politician. Kerry is a smarter and better statesman n/t

[maddiejoan]

27. no argument there

spot on in fact.

[robbedvoter]

46. He wasn't too smart on the war. he voted against the first Gulf war, then went dim

[karynnj]

34. Not if you compare what they have actually done

or watched them in various Senate committees. Kerry is a standout in the SFRC and the Finance committee, two of the most prestigious committees. He is always well prepared and the best questioner of the experts. The subject matter in both these committees is detailed and difficult. He is as comfortable speaking of pensions, AMT and other tax code issues as he is speaking of each near and middle eastern country, its leaders, culture and history. If you have listened to the hearings on global warming - people from Cardin to Boxer to Biden have all praised Kerry effusively for having spoken knowledgeably for decades on the issue.

On other environmental issues, it was Kerry who persuaded the NE governors to implement a cap and trade system for sulphur that was highly effective and became the model for the Clean Air act's program. This was a solution that he had read of and went to France and Germany to speak to people pushing it there. The French Environment minister was Kerry's cousin, which made those contacts easier, but it was Kerry who learned the concept well enough to see why it would work and convinced the NE governors to adopt it. Part of the difference on the environment between them is that Kerry is an environmentalist and HRC really isn't. The Kerrys spoke of the damage done by animal pens' runoff, the Clintons in Arkansas ignored the proplem caused by Tyson - instead setting up a task force - a device that the corporate world seems to have created to waste time.

Having read the excerpt John Kerry's 1966 speech at Yale on foreign policy - it is clear that he is a genius on foreign policy. His speech before the Senate in 1971 is absolutely amazing. I remember being stunned that he was only about 6 years older than me when I sat watching it in a college lounge - and I was not alone in thinking that. More impressive is the Q & A that followed that covered a wide array of issues. Read his speech on Afghanistan last week ( http://www.sais-jhu.edu/ )or several on Iraq. I have heard NOTHING as insightful from HRC. In fact in 2006, it was telling that it was BC who gave a foreign policy speech - not HRC. Consider that HRC's health care proposal in 1993 was a failure. It was a Kerry and Kennedy written bill (Kerry/Kennedy introduced in 1996, that became Kennedy/Hatch (S-CHIP) that HRC is using as how she succeeded after failing on healthcare.

On a level playing field, Kerry vs HRC would not even be a contest: Look at the major issues.

- Kerry had the plan (Kerry/Feingold) that led the way on Iraq - which HRC called cut and run, saying you couldn't set a deadline - though now she says that only a deadline will motivate Iraq politicians to make the changes needed.(Now where did we hear that?)

- On the Environment, Kerry has 4 decades of accomplishments that make him one of the best Senators on this. HRC has voted the right way - the Clinton years were aptly called the "years the locusts ate" in terms of acting on global warming. It was during that administration that the real mpg declined as SUVs were classified as "trucks" and not included under CAFE. In Arkansas, they were worse.

- Healthcare - With Kerry there, could she claim S-CHIP?

- Corruption - Who busted BCCI and investigated the Contras? Who fought other banking problems when on the banking committee - often allied with Senator Heinz? Who is considered an unusually clean politician? Not Hillary.

- Veterans' issues - Even in 1971, Kerry fought as hard to get the veterans the care they needed from the VA and was involved in setting up the first informal groups to deal with PTSD. In 2006 and 2007, he got the funding needed for centers modelled after these to deal with returning troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. He was a co-founder of Vietnam Veterans of America. He pushed to get them status as a recognized veterans' group. He, in the Senate and they as advocates fought to get Agent Orange recognized as harmful. Kerry agreed to be sworn in to testify when Admiral Zumwold's son, also a swiftboat commander, was too ill with agent orange caused cancer.

What HRC had was the total support of the Clinton wing of the party and all their media allies. Kerry is the only politician who has NEVER been allowed to correct anything he said - even if the correct text was available.

[LiberalFighter]

9. Kerry couldn't help himself. He's a Senator.

Those in Congress do too much debating on the floor. They say too much without saying anything.

Which is probably one reason Senators and Representatives are not likely to be elected President.

But if both parties nominate a Senator then a Senator will get elected.

[karynnj]

32. Kerry did not hear the question as you state it

and answered the same question he always did. He unlike HRC and BC spoke out before the war saying that the inspectors needed more time, they had not exhausted the diplomacy and that it was not a war of last resort.

There is a lot of confusion on how the question Kerry was asked was worded. What is clear is that Kerry's answer still says he would not have used it as Bush did to invade and that it was not known that there were no WMD.

[progressivebydesign]

54. That makes perfect sense... the Dems in Congress were the least informed.

People who attack those that voted for the Resolution forget that the Bush admin has been systematically keeping almost every Democrat out of security briefings, and other meetings that republicans were allowed to attend. Does anyone else remember that? The Demorcrats have been complaining since day 1 of his term that they have been frozen out. After the truth came out about Iraq, most realized they'd not only been frozen out of the info loop, but had been deliberately deceived. The resolution did not authorize Bush to go to war... I still can't figure out how he was able to start this war without an official WAR DECLARATION.

[terisan]

5. Even Clinton got caught up in wiley GW Bush's push to war. Kerry did also, asl elder Bush

I believe that neither of them trusted GW but did not comprehend the exent of the evil that Bush and his backers were up to.

Bush Sr's former advisors went public wrote op eds re need to go to UN. GW Bush indulged them but never intended to stop race to war.

Colin Powell insisted in public statements that the wmd were there and that the US knew where they were. The inspectors begged him to tell them where they were so that they could be found and destroyed. Powell refused.

GW, gleefully, cut short the inspections which consistently had found no wmd, but said Saddam had enough time and the war was commencing. They had to hurriedly get out of Iraq because the bombing was starting.

We are in the middle of a perfect storm brought about by the coalescing of power-hungry evil forces---1. corrupt religious maniacs who desire to initiate their evil armageddon and are eager to see rivers running with blood. 2. corrupt and greedy war suppliers and energy monopolists and media giants 3. Powerful lobbyists who have had dual national loyalties. 4 . A guy whose childhood love of torturing small animals was known but who managed to steal his way into the presidency because too many Americans forgot about the price of freedom being eternal vigilance.

I would add a corrupted American Psychological Society who refused to to raise the red flag on Bush's blowing up frogs in his childhood and has gone on to encourage its members to participate in the foulest torture of prisoners.

2008 is a critical year.

[Kolesar]

23. ^-that is how I remember it

Except I don't remember the American Psychological Society's endorsement process. :thumbsup:

[terisan]

28. One link regarding Pyschology Association allowing participation in torture.

I have been told that American Medical Association has warned its members against participating in torture. I hope it is true

However the leadership of the American Psychological Associations has apparently delayed making a statement, and then, under pressure, has made a weak statement with loopholes.

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/26/3414/

[defendandprotect]

43. I think they are too late for this round . . . and, even more alarmingly and sadly,

I have read that some of the doctors in the 1950's were TORTURED to force them to participate in CIA programs and experiments on citizens --- !!!

And, then, in this go-round, I've read comments that suggest that the doctors were at the least
harassed, threatened ---

This is medical and psychological ---

[Finite]

7. BUT

It has to be said that the inspectors wouldn't have been in there in the first place without the military buildup on Iraq's borders.

On the other hand, Saddam wouldn't have chucked out the inspectors if they hadn't been feeding intelligence directly to the Pentagon, and so on and so on..

[alllyingwhores]

12. Saddam didn't "chuck out" the inspectors--that's another Neocon lie.

Bush pulled them out before they had a chance to complete their inspection.

[defendandprotect]

44. Of course! And, Bush continues to tell this lie every chance he gets!!!

[ixion]

15. nope, the opposite happened.. he gave 'unprecedented' cooperation to the UN

and let them go anywhere they wanted, unfettered, in an effort to avert a hostile invasion by the US.

[karynnj]

36. Saddam didn't kick them out

Bush demanded that they leave declaring that he had waited long enough. Kerry spoke of speaking to Koffi Annon, who had been told by Bush that the time for diplomacy was over. I don't know if we yet know the entire story of what everybody knew or was for at that point in time.

I give more credence to things said closer to March 2003 than now. I personally find it hard to believe that BC was working quietly behind the scenes to stall Bush - but as millions of people took to the streets around the world - did NOT very clearly say that the inspections were working and there was more that diplomacy could do. He had a FAR bigger voice than Kerry, who did say this in January 2003. (Kerry in fact was dealing with cancer treatments in January and February 2003 - yet he was able to speak out more than Bill Clinton, who could have commanded far more attention.)

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

8. Bill, please don't take this the wrong way.

I like you. I really do. You were a good President.

Now please sit down and shut the hell up.

[clarence swinney]

17. OK Here is the Shut Up

PRAISE CLINTON AND GORE WITH PLEASURE
GDP--rose from 6300 to11,600
NATIONAL INCOME-5,000 to 8,000 Billion--
JOBS CREATED—237,00 per month to replace Jimmy Carter record of 218,000.
AVERAGE WEEKLY EARNINGS--$360 to $478
AVERAGE WEEKLY HOURS WORKED--never hit 35.0--hit that mark 4 times in 80's
UNEMPLOYMENT--from 7.2% down down down to as low as 3.9%
MINIMUM WAGE--$4.25 to $5.15
MINORITIES--did exceedingly well
HOME OWNERSHIP--hit all time high (no big deal most can say this-except Reagan)
DEFICIT--290 Billion to whoopee a SURPLUS
DEBT----+28%---300% increase over prior 12 years by Conservatives.
FEDERAL SPENDING--+28%---+80% under Reagan- who is da true conservative?
DOW JONES AVERAGE—3,500 to 11,720 top in 2000. All it's history to get to 3500 and Clinton zooms it
NASDAQ--700 to 5,000 top in 2000.---All of it's history to get to 700 and Clinton zooms it
VALUES INDEXES-- almost all bad went down--good went up in zoom zoom zoom
FOREIGN AFFAIRS--Peace on Earth good will toward each other---Mark of a true Christian--what has Bush done to Peace on Earth?
POPULARITY---highest poll ratings in history during peacetime in AFRICA, ASIA AND EUROPE . Even 98.5% in Moscow--left office with Highest Gallup rating since it was started in 1920's.
STAND UP FOR JUSTICE--evil conservatives spent $110,000,000 on hearings and investigations and caught one very evil man who took a few plane rides to events.
BOW YOUR HEADS—“Thank you God for sending us a man of Bill Clinton's character, intelligence, knowledge of governance, ability to face up to crises without whimpering and a great leader of the world. Amen”.
THANK YOU GOD FOR THE GOOD TIMES THE CLINTON YEARS.
clarence swinney-political historian-Lifeaholics of America- burlington nc
[e-mail]
6-28-03

[defendandprotect]

45. And even thru impeaching his penis, his popularity held ---

Americans were against the GOP "impeachment" ---
And, I understand that his popularity still rivals Reagan's ---
Clinton's supposedly higher ---

And, if anyone understands Reagan --- he should be low tide ---

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

49. I rank Clinton as one of the best Presidents of the 20th century.

I just don't think he needs to be doing what he's doing right now. I can thoroughly understand why Hillary's campaign is pissed at him.

[progressivebydesign]

58. Thank you for posting the truth. people are blinded by their Clinton hatred here..

I have no idea why.. but I suspect it's a combo of fierce support for candidates running against Hillary Clinton, paid campaign workers for candidates running against Hillary Clinton, and republican infiltrators making sure that they divide the Democratic Party even further to ensure that someone suitable to them.. like Saint Rudy, will win.

I've been here on DU since the beginning.. and honestly, there has NEVER NEVER NEVER been this type of attack against not only Hillary but against Bill Clinton. You can be assured that it's coming from the groups I named above. DU is just not the same, sadly.

[Captain Hilts]

25. Check the WP Feb. 11th 2003 and you'll see what Bubba said. nt

[sjdnb]

33. I wouldn't put it quite that way ... but,

I think it has been noticeably awkward and uncomfortable for him to play this type of supporting role - and, quite honestly, I believe it is a waste of his experience, knowledge, and abilities.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

48. The problem is...

...that he's behaving in exactly the way that allows the media to charicature him as "Slick Willie" the serial fabricator, and it's the last goddamn thing any of us need right now. God help us if Hillary gets the nomination and he continues to pull this stuff.

[saracat]

10. Clinton triangulation.I can't believe I used to really love this guy! I was blinded by charm.

Why doesn't he donate that tax cut he is always talking about? I notice he keeps the money! Sheesh. I don't really care what he does with the tax cut but I wish he would stop talking about it and he really needs to shut up about Iraq. He is parsing .he did and does support the Iraq war.

[Lilith Velkor]

52. I never liked him, but the right used to have such tantrums about him

...that I wished he could have a third term just so they would all have strokes and die. Seriously.

[progressivebydesign]

57. No he really didn't support the war.

He said publicly many times in the early stages that he did not disgree that Saddam was a "bad dude" and needed to be taken out. BUT.. he felt like the inspectors should have been given time to do their job, and that the whole "shock and awe" thing was over the top. Are people becoming revisionists because of their supporting candidates other than Hillary Clinton? Because I've noticed a lot of Clinton bashing here... I keep having to check my address bar on my screen to remember exactly where I am.

[bpeale]

11. gawd! i can't believe i ever held any respect for Clinton.

what a tool for Bush!

[Proud Liberal Dem]

13. I agree with him

We should've waited to launch an invasion/occupation of Iraq until we had some REAL genuine evidence from the UN Weapons Inspectors that Iraq actually had an active WMD program and even then, there is the possibility that we could've probably peaceably disarmed them WITHOUT completely trashing the country (and our military) in the process. After all, the Iraqis DID destroy those prohibited long-range (but non-WMD related) missles when the UN inspectors uncovered them during their renewed inspections. Additionally, any information that the Bush (mis-)administration had regarding WMD sites should have been shared with the UN Inspection Team. However, there is no doubt in my mind that Bush/Cheney et. al WANTED to invade/occupy Iraq and nothing, not even the clear lack of evidence of WMD (which they relentlessly spun as evidence of Iraq's deviousness and the UN's incompetence),changed the outcome. Their dogged intransigence regarding the recent Iran NIE should be a clear warning signal that it's about to happen again or at least that it would've happened already if Bush/Cheney hadn't gotten our military hopelessly bogged down in a quagmire in Iraq. It is quite unfortunate that we live in a country where a President gets impeached for perjury about his private sex life but impeachment is put "off the table" by our party leaders without any kind of input or feedback from the rest of us when it comes to a President clearly manipulating us into a "war of choice" and proudly admitting that his (mis-)administration in concert with big business illegally spied on Americans (among other more serious offenses).

[boricua79]

16. I'm still of the position

that there was no legitimate reason (save self-defense or defending another invaded nation) for us to get involved in Iraq War 2. I never fell for the "they have weapons of mass destruction" rationale. Plenty of other nations have them, and that has never been the law or custom of international relations to invade on those grounds. I didn't like Saddam Hussein's regime, but I felt about it as I feel about China, Burma, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and other places were I feel the regime is dastardly: it's an internal affair. The people of those nations have to overturn their leaders. Only then, can there be a homegrown movement of revolutionary change that can improve conditions. Imposing it from the outside leads to resentment and leads to abuse.

I disagree with president clinton, and I heavily disagree with the opportunistic "if I knew then" position of Mrs. Clinton. I distinctly remember the collective opinion of political scientists and weapon specialists being heavily against the war even before it started. How come Mrs. Clinton didn't consult them before taking her position of helping the administration.

And in case it slipped people's mind...the Congress was also derelict in its duty to declare war, and George W. Bush waged an illegal, undeclared war. That little parlor trick of giving an "authorization" is not Constitutional legitiamate or an effective substitute. Declaring war has particular legislative requisites, and those processes were not followed. It's not the first time that we've waged undeclared war and frankly, we've been pissing on the Constitution for quite a while now. I don't want to hear another complaint about someone burning a flag or not saying the Pledge of Allegiance and that being "unpatriotic" or "offensive" when NO ONE seems to mind the continual PISSING on the Constitution and Constitutional obligations that has been our Congresses' actions for the past decades.

There's SO much to continue to rant on, but I sometimes feel it's necessary to repeat these facts.

The Iraq War was TOTALLY illegitimate on a lot of grounds. It should have NEVER been fought.
:rant:

[clarence swinney]

18. CLINTON GREAT THE PROOF

PRAISE CLINTON AND GORE WITH PLEASURE
GDP--rose from 6300 to11,600
NATIONAL INCOME-5,000 to 8,000 Billion--
JOBS CREATED—237,00 per month to replace Jimmy Carter record of 218,000.
AVERAGE WEEKLY EARNINGS--$360 to $478
AVERAGE WEEKLY HOURS WORKED--never hit 35.0--hit that mark 4 times in 80's
UNEMPLOYMENT--from 7.2% down down down to as low as 3.9%
MINIMUM WAGE--$4.25 to $5.15
MINORITIES--did exceedingly well
HOME OWNERSHIP--hit all time high (no big deal most can say this-except Reagan)
DEFICIT--290 Billion to whoopee a SURPLUS
DEBT----+28%---300% increase over prior 12 years by Conservatives.
FEDERAL SPENDING--+28%---+80% under Reagan- who is da true conservative?
DOW JONES AVERAGE—3,500 to 11,720 top in 2000. All it's history to get to 3500 and Clinton zooms it
NASDAQ--700 to 5,000 top in 2000.---All of it's history to get to 700 and Clinton zooms it
VALUES INDEXES-- almost all bad went down--good went up in zoom zoom zoom
FOREIGN AFFAIRS--Peace on Earth good will toward each other---Mark of a true Christian--what has Bush done to Peace on Earth?
POPULARITY---highest poll ratings in history during peacetime in AFRICA, ASIA AND EUROPE . Even 98.5% in Moscow--left office with Highest Gallup rating since it was started in 1920's.
STAND UP FOR JUSTICE--evil conservatives spent $110,000,000 on hearings and investigations and caught one very evil man who took a few plane rides to events.
BOW YOUR HEADS—“Thank you God for sending us a man of Bill Clinton's character, intelligence, knowledge of governance, ability to face up to crises without whimpering and a great leader of the world. Amen”.
THANK YOU GOD FOR THE GOOD TIMES THE CLINTON YEARS.
clarence swinney-political historian-Lifeaholics of America- burlington nc
[e-mail]
6-28-03

[clarence swinney]

19. Clinton and Reagan

Comparing Democrat’s hero-CLINTON—versus Republican’s hero--REAGAN
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.JOBS—grew by 43% more under Clinton.
2.GDP---grew by 57% more under Clinton.
3.DOW—grew by 700% more under Clinton..
4.NASDAQ-grew by 18 times as much under Clinton.
4.SPENDING--grew by 28% under Clinton---80% under Reagan.
5.DEBT—grew by 43% under Clinton—187% under Reagan.
6. DEFICITS—Clinton got a large surplus--grew by 112% under Reagan.
7.NATIONAL INCOME—grew by100% more under Clinton.
8.PERSONAL INCOME—Grew by 110% more under Clinton.
SOURCES—Bureau of Labor Statistics (www.BLS.Gov)--Economic Policy Institute (EPI.org)—Global & World Almanacs from 1980 to 2003 (annual issues)
www.the-hamster.com (chart taken from NY Times)
National Archives History on Presidents. www.nara.gov
LA Times 10-11-00 on Market--www.Find articles.com

A vote for a Republican is a vote for Less Success.
A vote to reduce the Standard of Living for all Americans.

Clarence Swinney-Political Research Historian-Lifeaholics of America-President
Please submit comments to [e-mail] or P.O. Box 3411-Burlington NC-27216

[Malva Zebrina]

21. Too bad he didn't give his wife the benefit of his great

foresight and knowledge.
She voted to allow pre-emptive invasion and war, and she voted to let Bush do it. She also voted Kyl Lieberman, calling Iran's military a terrorist organisation. What does he think of that, I wonder. That's twice she voted for virtual pre-emptive war.

He is miffed that he was not "consulted". Why on earth does he think a man with the personality of Bush, and those he surrounded himself with, is going to consult with him about going to war? I liked him once, but I don't like him now. People are seeing him as "already been" and they do not like what they see of him now. I agree, he should just shut up and sit down and spend the rest of his years doing something for others, with humbleness and without fanfare and publicity instead of trying to get back in the White House.

[Kolesar]

24. She apparently shredded all of her mail and email from her constituents urging caution

And ejected the antiwar activists from her office before the IWR vote.

[Laughing Mirror]

29. She did not want to hear from us

I did not know about the shredding of the mail, etc., but I always wondered why all of a sudden I could no longer get through to her office after I'd made a few calls. So thanks for the information. Now I think I might know why.

[Kolesar]

50. I was being "somewhat" facetious

I am given to overstatement, but then again, some politicians think they know better.

[BootinUp]

37. You must not understand Pres. Clinton

He is saying he thinks the IWR vote was correct, but the decision to invade was not.

[progressivebydesign]

55. If she voted to "go to war", then WHY does everyone say it's an "ILLEGAL WAR"???

God.. are some people incapable of reading? The resolution did not give authority to go to war. In fact the reason ALL DUers called it an "illegal" war was because NO WAR DECLARATION was ever given by Congress.

Let's put it in terms that people can understand. It's like getting a hall pass from your teacher on the premise of using the bathroom. Instead.. you head off campus, break into a few houses nearby. When you're caught by the truant officer, you AND the community blame the TEACHER for giving you a hall pass to take a piss.

[BootinUp]

35. Sometimes I think I'm the only one who can read.

I'll look at some of the responses, maybe I'm wrong. ;)

[ozone_man]

40. Only a naive fool would have thought that Bush would not invade early.

And that would be his wife, who voted for the IWR. ;)

[sandnsea]

41. And then said to ignore Bush's yellowcake lies

while Hillary was saying "stay the course".

No sale.

[David Zephyr]

47. Yeah, Bill Clinton was right there against the war just like Howard Dean & Dennis Kucinich.

Not.

[progressivebydesign]

56. No, actually he was against it. n/t

[killbotfactory]

51. Did 9/11 make our democratic Senators forget what an asshole Bush is?

Bush vowed to take out Saddam long before the vote on the IWR, what the fuck did they think was going to happen when they gave him the authority to invade?

[progressivebydesign]

53. I remember him saying this at the time....

I'd hope there aren't too many Clinton-haters on DU now (sorta feels like Fresno lately), who will claim that he pushed for the war. I have a memory like an elephant (no wait, bad comparison!), anyway.. I remember almost verbatim Clinton's words when the war was just starting. he said.. "hey, no one is debating that Saddam is a bad dude (he used those words), but I think the inspectors should be given more time, I'm not convinced that the way this went down is the right thing).