Last night, Jeanette mentioned that Chris Matthews rounded out his GOP debate questions with, “Would it be good for America to have Bill Clinton back living in the White House?”
I’ve already written how I would have liked to have seen the “what do you dislike about America” question answered here. I don’t know how the candidates answered the Clinton question, but I know what answer I’d have liked to hear:
“This is the question you ask? Okay, well, perhaps…considering President Clinton took very little aggressive action throughout the 1990’s - say, from the first WTC bombing in 1993, to the attack on the USS COLE in 2000 - to curtail the growth and activities of OBL and Al Qaeda, and since President Clinton was the man who, in 1998, told us - along with his entire administration - that Saddam Hussein had WMD and would certainly someday use them…perhaps it’s finally time for you to let go of Bill Clinton, and look ahead instead of back?
To be fair, I am not one of those folks who would blame Bill Clinton for 9/11, and as I once wrote, here:
Bottom line: no administration ever did enough, and nobody COULD have done enough, prior to 9/11, partly because the country wasn’t paying attention and there was no mindset to “get” bin Laden…the country and the congress would never have gotten behind the effort. Good heavens, even AFTER 9/11 look at what the Bush administration had to go through (and what it still goes through) to try to find terrorists and interrogate them. Beancounters and objectors every step of the way.
But frankly, if I were a presidential candidate and presented with such a ridiculous question, I’d make sure no one ever dared to ask it of me again.
Related:
GOP Debate: Here’s an answer I’d like
May 4th, 2007 at 2:51 am
THE FIX: Frying Fish, Pressing Flesh…
Leading Democratic presidential candidates get another chance to stump in South Carolina during Rep…
May 4th, 2007 at 6:07 am
The Left seems so fond of Mr. Clinton and having him in the White House again that if I were inputting into the messages for ’08, I would compare Mrs. Clinton running for President with that of the running of Mrs. Wallace in Alabama for governor when Mr. Wallace could not run because of Alabama’s constitutional prohibition. I’m sure what worked for Alabama in Mr. Wallace’s heyday, would work for the Clintons today.
May 4th, 2007 at 7:38 am
I heard the initial response, which was general laughter from the candidates, then someone said, “You’ve got to be kidding.” Mattews, I think, said, “No, I’m not.”
Someone should have said, “God Forbid!”
Reminds me of the Bentsen/Quayle debate. There was Dan Quayle, comparing his legislative record with that of Democrat God JFK - Quayle was a very good, active legislator compared to JFK. Bentsen, knowing this would come up, had his rehearsed reply, which I think went something like, “I knew John Kennedy; John Kennedy was a friend of mine. Senator, you are no John Kennedy.”
That garnered all sorts of plaudits from the assembled Libs and MSM. But I replied, at that moment, “Well, thank GOD! Who wants another Kennedy?” Always wish Quayle had had the guts to give that back to Bentsen.
May 4th, 2007 at 10:24 am
He…said…what??…
Chrissy Matthews has to be one of the dimmest bulbs on TV, only slightly brighter than Keith “But mom, you’ve got to watch my show!!” Olbermann. And he proved this, on a national stage, last night at the GOP debate. via The Anchoress:
Last night…
May 4th, 2007 at 12:12 pm
[...] ridiculous query about Bill Clinton leaves me glad I didn’t have time to watch Matthews and [...]
May 4th, 2007 at 9:34 pm
I would have answered it a bit differently, with a bit of humor; I would have said, “back in the WH, what do you mean? Senator Clinton said she would make him Ambassador of the World if she wins; sounds like to me she trying to keep him out of the WH.”
May 4th, 2007 at 10:20 pm
I would have answered it like this. “What do you mean back in the WH. Sen. Clinton said she would make him World Ambassador if she won. It sounds like to me, she’s trying to keep him out of the WH.”