Folks, there’s nothing in this paragraph that is true! Bush didn’t go to the right! If he had, he would be leading in these polls and he would be up 55-42. But he expanded spending. It went out of control on the domestic side. Ted Kennedy wrote the education bill. We’ve got this drug entitlement now, this prescription drug entitlement. First entitlement in, what is it? How many years, 40? We’ve got farm subsidies. We’ve got steel tariffs. We’ve got campaign finance reform. Can you believe this? In 1994, the Republicans win the Congress for the first time in 40 years, and ten years later, they create the first entitlement in 40 years, and this is called “moving to the right”? But that’s not even what I want to focus on. Let’s take…
Assertion #1: Clinton claims the Bush administration “walked away from our allies in attacking Iraq,” but the Bush administration did not do that. President Bush won overwhelming approval in both houses of Congress before going to the United Nations, which unanimously passed Resolution 1441. Resolution 1441 promised “serious consequences” which everybody knew meant war if Iraq failed to comply with Resolution 1441. There is no doubt that Iraq did fail to comply with Resolution 1441. Even Mr. Blix said so — and so the United States and a coalition of more than 30 allies liberated Iraq.
Now, but let me go back to this whole notion that the Bush administration “walked away from our allies” in attacking Iraq. Not only did we not do that and not only did the president go to the United Nations, the Democrats demanded a brand-new debate on this, in the summer of 2002. Remember this? He already had a resolution post-9/11 to go wherever he thought he had to to wipe out terrorists. He didn’t need a new resolution. But the Democrats wanted to get in on it, because they wanted to pick up some of the favor and some of the gain if Iraq was successful.
This was typical of these people. They wanted a new debate so that they could get on record as either opposing it or supporting it, but those who wanted to support it also wanted to bask in the glory of victory — and, remember, it was a great rope-a-dope because it was in the middle of the 2002 election cycle, and the Democrats willingly took their big “kitchen table issues” and the economy off the table and put on the table Iraq, Bush’s issue, and they went on to a stinging
Didn’t abandon allies, didn’t abandon the Democrats, didn’t unilaterally do anything. This one assertion that Clinton made last night is just factually inaccurate — and
Fact of the matter is the press is bored with Kerry. He’s a dryball. He’s a dead weight. He’s a charismatic dud. They don’t think Bush is very smart and gives good speeches so they’re excited to have Clinton up there. You should have heard the love fest. “Oh, man was this great!” When I saw these TV ratings today, you know what I thought? Not only are the anchors of the big three networks going to be disappointed nobody watched them — because they are
They think Bill Clinton is the greatest thing since sliced bread and the country
They see he’s never going to be able to
I want to go back just to assertion #1. There are in fact four of these, actually five of these. In this one paragraph there are five assertions made that are totally inaccurate. They’re totally wrong — and I just need to close the loop on the first one. This is where Clinton claims the Bush administration walked away from our allies in attacking Iraq. We did not walk away from allies! We begged; we went to the UN. We spent
Assertion #2: “The president walked away from our allies in withdrawing from the climate change treaty.” This whole theme of this one little paragraph is that we (just sit tight on this) the whole theory is that we are going it alone, that we have destroyed these wonderful alliances that keep us safe, and so he’s listing all — and it was the Jimmy Carter theme. This is a big theme for these people, that Bush has destroyed our alliances, and up next, the climate change treaty.
Well, let me tell you why he didn’t use the real word. It’s
In fact, the Russians didn’t sign this.
And in July of 1997, during the Clinton administration, the U.S. Senate voted 95-zip against accepting a treaty if it exempted developing countries from emission controls and would cause economic harm to America. Bush had nothing to do with killing Kyoto. Bush’s fault was not killing Kyoto. It was announcing its already determined demise. It had been determined by the Clinton administration at the Hague before Bush even took office that the thing was unworkable and undoable. Since that time, there have been
Assertion #3: President Bush walked away from our allies in withdrawing from the international court for war criminals. Now, this one, folks, this is a beat. Why? Because on the last possible day for signatories — now, get this. This is psychopathic, sociopathic for Clinton to say this. On the last possible day for countries to sign the international court for war criminals, December 31st, 2000, Bill Clinton signed the treaty establishing the International Criminal Court, despite what he called “concerns about significant flaws.” Clinton said he would not submit the treaty for Senate ratification or even recommend ratification until these concerns were addressed, which they never were.
Bush made the proper judgment that the ICC was beyond repair because it would subject U.S. soldiers to criminal charges in the International Criminal Court and were not going to let the world determine whether or not our soldiers defending the freedom of the United States are acting in a criminal manner. We’ll do it ourselves. We’re not going to subordinate our defense. The fact is Clinton simply signed it along with all those pardons on December 31st, 2000 just to say he did, but he
Assertion #4: These get even weirder. Clinton claimed the Bush administration walked away from its allies in withdrawing American support for the ABM treaty. Do you want the facts? In December of 2001, Bush gave formal notice to Russia that in accordance with the treaty the U.S. was withdrawing from it. Now, do you people remember this? There was no Soviet Union anymore! The ABM treaty was with the Soviet Union. There was no Soviet Union. There was a new Russia, Vladimir Putin. The whole structure of the Russian nuclear arsenal — it was irrelevant.
This was as irrelevant, you know, as an agreement between the horse-and-buggy industry and the whip industry to make sure that they always made sure there was — it’s irrelevant! And the Dems harped on this, and the reason they harped on this back when it happened is because their playbook is 30 years old, and to them, arms control is
One more thing here about assertion #4 that Clinton made, this one paragraph. This is where he claims that the Bush administration walked away from our allies and withdrawing American support for the ABM treaty. The facts are the ABM treaty was with the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union didn’t exist, no reason to have the same treaty. Here’s what you don’t know, and this is what Clinton also didn’t say. On May 24th, 2002, President Bush and Vladimir Putin signed one of the most sweeping nuclear arms reduction agreements in history. (story) It’s an agreement that calls for a two-thirds reduction of the strategic nuclear warheads of both nations. Critics of the president said that withdrawing from the ABM treaty would spark an arms race, and they were all panicked about this.
Instead, the president helped engineer a huge reduction in nuclear arms, while at the same time allowing the U.S. to move ahead on deploying a missile defense. Sounds like a win-win to me, and here is Clinton
<*ICON*>Your Resource for Combating the Partisan Media, Liberals and Bush-Haters…
<a target=new href=”/home/menu/fstack.guest.html”>(…Rush’s John F. Kerry Stack of Stuff packed with quotes, flips & audio!)</a></span>