Chris Matthews Rewrites History about the Clintons and the Origins of the Iraq War

Huffington Post: Chris Matthews Rewrites History about the Clintons and the Origins of the Iraq War
David Fiderer
Posted December 3, 2007

On last Wednesday's MSNBC "Hardball," Chris Matthews asked a rhetorical question that no one answered. So I will.

"I'm amazed now that Bill Clinton has come out and said he's Jerry Rubin. I mean, he's now become -- announced the fact that he's been against the war -- I love the phrase, 'from the beginning.' Within a few hours, by the way, the verb -- the verb tense changed from the past to the present. This is like the old 'is' is question. He's now against the war, having promised the voters a few minutes before that that he was against it. Now he's just saying he is against it, a lesser claim. I don't remember him speaking out against the war back in 2001, 2002 and 2003, do you?"

I sure do. A few minutes on a fee-based search engine jogged my memory. Here are few clippings:

"Clinton Splits With Bush on Iraq," The Washington Post March 13, 2003: "Former president Bill Clinton, who has generally supported the Bush administration's Iraq policy in recent remarks, called on his successor yesterday to accept a more relaxed timeline in exchange for support from a majority of the United Nations Security Council members. ..(T)he former president has publicly espoused an approach substantially different from the administration's public stance."

"Deadline for war - Give the inspectors more time, urges Clinton" The Daily Telegraph March 13, 2003: "Bill Clinton yesterday urged the Bush administration to give Hans Blix as much time as he wants to complete weapons inspections in Iraq. The former president broke ranks with his successor...Mr Clinton said war might yet be avoided if Saddam Hussein were given more time to disarm."

"Clinton recommends U.S. patience on Iraq," Reuters, February 11, 2003: "Former U.S. President Bill Clinton said in an interview broadcast on Tuesday the United States should exercise patience in its standoff with Iraq to help build allied support for a potential strike."

"Hardball," February 12, 2003, when Chris Matthews asks Christopher Hitchens, "are you upset that President Clinton has emerged as a critic and perhaps a mild-mannered critic of the policy of this administration on the eve of war?"

Let me spell it out for anyone who doesn't get it. If you say the country should not go to war until certain conditions are met, or if you say there is insufficient basis for going to war, then you are against going to war. (Nobody is ever indifferent). This concept holds true if you're referring to war with Iraq, Iran or Mexico. Bill Clinton's position, which was identical to that of Hans Blix, was that we should exhaust all opportunities for inspections prior to any military action. And if, five days before the invasion, Clinton said that we should proceed with inspections and diplomacy instead of artillery fire, then he was against the war from "the beginning." It's the simplest type of syllogism....

***

...methinks Frank Rich doest protest too much. In Sunday's column, he writes that Clinton "revived unhappy memories of the truth-dodging nadirs of the Clinton White House," and that "history cannot be rewritten in any case, by Bill Clinton or anyone else." Rich revived my unhappy memories of pundits who relied on the flimsiest pretext to impugn the Clintons....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-fiderer/chris-matthews-rewrites-h_b_75089.html

Recomended

This needed sayin'. K&R

rove with Matthews help will have Bill and Hillary Clinton as the culprits who started the Iraq War, who are funding the Iraq War, and who want to bomb Iran...any takers.

Bill Clinton is a brilliant man; George W is not. Enough said.

Iraq policy - urged more time and patience - why? Oh yeah to "build allied support for a potential strike".

I'M BURNING!1!!1