Thursday, September 28, 2006

I knew the five year anniversary of 9/11 would have the GOP and wingnuts in fine form, looking to co-op the sad occasion as a time for photo ops and criticizing political opponents. However, what I didn't foresee is what's turned out to be their main focus: blame it all on Bill Clinton.

Starting with the ABC's attempt at fictionalized incrimination and continuing on the heels of Clinton's FOX News appearance, the right is blaring to anyone who will listen that Clinton had eight years to kill Osama, spoken now with perfect 20/20 hindsight about past events, and as if he didn't make attempts at all to hunt him down. Does anyone recall the missile attack in August 1998, where Osama made the luckiest decision of his life to skip a dinner date in Khost, Afghanistan? Compare this to the zero attacks against Osama in five years since 9/11. Recall how he was cornered in Tora Bora and yet shockingly Bin Laden escaped, without as much as a single bullet being fired.

But beyond that, the wingnuts line of reasoning would have one believe that Bush I should've killed Saddam when he had the chance in the first Gulf War, as opposed to what they did which was to abruptly retreat. If Bush's father had killed Saddam at that time, then we would've exterminated the guy who, according to the rightwing, harbored terrorists, had WMD, and was associated with 9/11.

What say you now? (Gads)

No comments: