Tuesday, October 03, 2006

Bill Clinton and E.J.Dionne

Personally, I haven’t been spending too much time on Bill’s tantrum, and there’s a lot of water under the bridge now. We’d all be better off focusing on how to prevent future attacks, and how to develop an intelligence service that actually has a clue about gathering useful and accurate intelligence that spending time on pre-9/11 finger pointing. Until 9/11, America simply wasn’t focused on taking terrorism seriously. That lack of concern prevailed throughout the Reagan, Bush, Clinton, and Bush administrations, and to some extent, goes back to Carter’s humiliation in the Iran hostage crisis.

That said, Mr. Clinton, and by extension, Mr. Dionne are unwise to refocus attention on Mr. Clinton’s record on terrorism. In Bill’s case, it’s largely because his major claims in the interview are not supported by the record (more here). As others have demonstrated, there was support from most of the major Republican leaders for stronger strikes on terrorist camps.

Some wag the dogitis? Sure, but most of the leadership was after him to do more against terrorism. For more examples, see Jonah Goldberg’s linkfest on The Corner. Amusing LAT op ed here.