http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2002/10/03/clintonspeech/index.html The intro: Former President Bill Clinton delivered the following remarks before the Labor Party Conference in Blackpool, England, on Wednesday. The speech, which ranged from Africa to Iraq to his differences with Bush conservatism, was hailed in the Guardian as the work "of a true political master ... At times, it was as if Mr. Clinton was calling on Mr. Blair to rescue America from Bushism ... What a speech. What a pro. And what a loss to the leadership of America and the world." The Mirror was even more exuberant: "It was a magnificent speech from a man who is rapidly becoming the greatest figure in world politics, second only, perhaps, to Nelson Mandela." Without being facetious, the speech reads wonderfully. He connects, he's erudite, he's coherent philosophically.
Boo hiss! Too predictable. The least you could do is put SOME effort into it. You can do better than that.
He probably would have been better off without mentioning Rwanda, considering we did nothing to stop the slaughter: This implied that the United States had done a good deal but not quite enough. In reality the United States did much more than fail to send troops. It led a successful effort to remove most of the UN peacekeepers who were already in Rwanda. It aggressively worked to block the subsequent authorization of UN reinforcements. It refused to use its technology to jam radio broadcasts that were a crucial instrument in the coordination and perpetuation of the genocide. And even as, on average, 8,000 Rwandans were being butchered each day, U.S. officials shunned the term "genocide," for fear of being obliged to act. The United States in fact did virtually nothing "to try to limit what occurred." Indeed, staying out of Rwanda was an explicit U.S. policy objective. Interestingly, he also makes the point that is conveniently forgotten from time to time -- that the US acted without a UN resolution in Kosovo. On Iraq: while I certainly don't agree with everything he says, Clinton manages to sound much more reasoned and eloquent on Iraq than almost any other Democrat currently making the rounds.
Hitchens, predictably, is hammering Clinton... http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12250021&method=full&siteid=50143
This is weak. Imagine me doing a "coke" joke on Shrub in about 3 years. Man, I hope I won't be that lame.
Clinton and Gore give speeches, and the world pays attention. Bush gives a major speech threatening a war, and is getting outmaneuvered by the French. It's such a small difference, really. Like adding the word "Special" to "Olympics."
Yeah, that's exactly the difference. The world is unaccustomed to an American President who means what he says and says what he means, instead of two empty suits who gave us 8 years of empty rhetoric.
Those "evildoers" in the "Axis of Evil" sure appreciate a president who avoids rhetoric. Especially one who means what he says and says what he means. Except when he said: "I've been to war. I've raised twins. If I had a choice, I'd rather go to war." --CNN, 01.27.02 (Strike one: Bush has never been to war) or when he said that Enron CEO Ken Lay "was a supporter of Ann Richards in my [gubernatorial] run in 1994." (Actually Mr. Lay gave almost $50,000 of his own money to Bush's campaign and raised $100,000 from other sources for Bush. Richards received $12,500) or this one (re: 9/11) Bush "said yesterday: "I saw an airplane hit the tower - the TV was obviously on - and I used to fly myself, and I said, 'There's one terrible pilot.' And I said, 'It must have been a horrible accident.'" Of the second strike, Mr Bush told the youngster [,third grader, Jordan,]: "I wasn't sure what to think at first."...The story that he was watching TV contradicts reports from correspondents at the time that he got the news in a phone call from his national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice. It also adds further puzzles: why he was being made to wait; why he did not at least delay his entry into the classroom; and why is it obvious that an elementary school would have a TV set in the corridor?" --Guardian, 12.5.01
[Daily Show Moment of Zen] "There's a saying in Tennessee...and in Texas, I think they have it in Tennessee as well...fool me once...." [/Daily Show Moment of Zen]
http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc/war11.html I find myself drawn to Matters of Why. Like, WHY DID BUSH KEEP GROOVING ON THAT GODDAMNED CHILDREN’S BOOK AFTER HE HEARD ABOUT A FUCKING PLANE HITTING THE WORLD TRADE CENTER?
[MEANS WHAT HE SAYS, SAYS WHAT HE MEANS] "I did not have sexual relations with that woman..." [/NOT!]
I believe that a Colossus should have a sexual appetite to match his ambition for power. I believe the President of the United States should have the abiltiy to dictate a simple cliche correctly without having to read it.
I am surprised that when he was going on about the AIDS thing he didn't mention that he should of had a helmet on the solider in order to prevent any STDs. He's a wanker. Amazing how he can speak about all the starving people in the world, even though every damn Sunday morning one can listen and watch the ads from ADM about how we could feed the world and yet for the eight years he was in office the people kept going to bed hungry. Not thinking we need to send military types in to distribute the food, just supply it. Good job Clinton, hope that speech made some big bucks for you. Betcha gotta like hobnobbing with the big entertainers. You know they get all the good drugs too, just don't inhale.
> I am surprised that when he was going on about > the AIDS thing he didn't mention that he should > of had a helmet on the solider in order to prevent > any STDs. He didn't need one. I thought the nature of his sexual activity was known to everyone. > every damn Sunday morning one can listen and > watch the ads from ADM about how we could > feed the world It's just a marketing slogan. > and yet for the eight years he was in office the > people kept going to bed hungry. You want him to cure world poverty? Even a Colossus could not do this. Even Jesus could not do this. It is the nature of bioligical entities to expand to the limit of available resources' ability to sustain them. > Not thinking we need to send military types in to > distribute the food, just supply it. We tried this. It does not work. The ruling powers take the food and give it to the groups that support them, leaving others hungry. The food may even be sold back to the west for money. Just this week it was discovered that cheap AIDS medicine sent to Africa by Europe was resold back to the European black market. A couple of Africans made a mint, I bet. > Good job Clinton, hope that speech made some > big bucks for you. He is a Colossus. He needs money to support his lifestyle. I hope you don't think Reagan and Bush are evil for doing the exact same thing.