Clinton Didn't Do Enough????????????????

[ellacott]

Why aren't the Democrats doing more to expose the hypocrisy of the Republicans?

This needs to be publicized and used in campaigns.

********************
President wants Senate to hurry with new anti-terrorism laws
July 30, 1996
Web posted at: 8:40 p.m. EDT
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Clinton urged Congress Tuesday to act swiftly in developing anti-terrorism legislation before its August recess. (1.6 MB AIFF or WAV sound)

"We need to keep this country together right now. We need to focus on this terrorism issue," Clinton said during a White House news conference.

But while the president pushed for quick legislation, Republican lawmakers hardened their stance against some of the proposed anti-terrorism measures.


http://www.cnn.com/US/9607/30/clinton.terrorism/

[deminks]

1. The headlines should be "The Republicans did nothing"

or "the republicans helped OBL" and we should be screaming this from sea to shining sea.

[razors edge]

2. We can all blame Clinton for something

if he had continued the investigation into Iran-Contra or BCCI, there would never be a bush in the WH now. etc. etc.

[ellacott]

5. The point is not to blame Clinton

That's what everyone is trying to do. In this alternate universe they have managed to convince a lot segment of the population that the left is weak on terror.

They did nothing on terror until 9/12/01 but we are the ones considered weak. Why did we roll over and let them label us like that?

[razors edge]

6. I read the full transcript with FUX news

and I think bill does fine in defending his actions and laying blame where it should lay, but we don't own the media, they do.

[ellacott]

8. They own the Media

But we can still get our message out there if we are smart. We can use our campaign ads. There are stil some Dems that appear on these talk shows. They squander a lot of opportunities and somecome off looking weak.

I'm not ready to surrender yet.

[razors edge]

10. The american public has tuned out

this board and all like it, probably have more NSA man hours spent reading and logging posts, that newly interested Americans trying to parse info and find the truth. If a regain of control of both houses fails to bring about charges against the republican's I for one wouldn't be surprised.

The Dem's will claim they are keeping their petrified powder dry, and many here will support that. The MSM has become a dying entity with less and viewers every week, and after the last election I will be surprised if 70% of those who voted in 04 show up, make that 60%.

I'll be at an Ohio diebold again for all its worth, but the change people want doesn't seem to be available to them from a ballot, since they don't bother going there. They must be waiting for something else.

[The Backlash Cometh]

3. Here is what you ask a Republican:

"Since everything is either good or evil; or, "with us or against us," I'd like to know, when Clinton went after bin Laden in the 90s, whose side were you on? Clinton's or bin Ladens?

[BlueEyedSon]

4. I'm confused, our leader says OBL is irrelevent and he doesn't spend any

time on him. So why should Clinton have?

[acmejack]

7. The anti terrorism legislation at this point is to be used against us!

We are the ones these laws will be used against. These laws are to be used against public demonstrations, planning a large demonstration that will snarl traffic-aha! Better be careful what you say here it could easily be construed as a "terroristic threat" or "planning a terroristic act". "Use of the internet to conspire to commit a terroristic act" or if you happen to be using encryption on your computer it elevates the crime to an even higher degree of felonious act.

So all these terror bills have a target & it is dissent within this Country more than it is any foreign enemy, despite what they may say. A careful reading of the text of these Bills will show one that they have broad applicability to the general American public and you can bet your bottom dollar they will be enthusiastically employed against us.

[ellacott]

9. That is a good point but

The point I was trying to make is that those who were against ANY anti-terror legislation are now the that are calling us weak on terror.

[Old and In the Way]

11. In the 90's, Congress had a bad case of the Willies.

They were terrorfied of the Weapon of Mass Distraction - the Clenis. They were so busy (over 1000 subpeona's issued to the WH) with the Weapon of Mass Distraction, they had no time or interest in persuing international terror.

The Republican corporate media has actively supported their Congressional counterparts since the 90s. No wonder they have a vested interest in trying to revise recent history to cover their complicity in the letting 9/11 occur. Had they done their job, supporting the administration in addressing the real problems that faced this country, instead of running with every lie and smear that the original swiftboater, Ken Starr, fed them, we'd be a different and better country for it today.

Mike Wallace keeps legitimizing the debunked lies of Path to 9/11. Big surprise. The truth is of no interest to the corporate media. Lies that cover for the criminals in our national government is what their objective is.

[Uncle Joe]

12. I wonder what Hatch says now?

"Hatch called Clinton's proposed study of taggants -- chemical markers in explosives that could help track terrorists -- "a phony issue."

"If they want to, they can study the thing" already, Hatch asserted. He also said he had some problems with the president's proposals to expand wiretapping."