On Fox News Sunday, former President William Jefferson Clinton lit off on Chris Wallace after he said:

WALLACE: When we announced that you were going to be on Fox News Sunday, I got a lot of e-mail from viewers. And I’ve got to say, I was surprised. Most of them wanted me to ask you this question: Why didn’t you do more to put bin Laden and Al Qaida out of business when you were president?

Clinton thought he was blindsided by this but, likely, he was tired of having to address the issue as terrorism has become such an incredibly serious topic. Clinton said:

CLINTON: OK, let’s talk about it. Now, I will answer all those things on the merits, but first I want to talk about the context in which this arises.

I’m being asked this on the Fox network. ABC just had a right-wing conservative run in their little Pathway to 9/11, falsely claiming it was based on the 9/11 Commission report, with three things asserted against me directly contradicted by the 9/11 Commission report.

How odd. I’ve not yet met anyone or read anything that would indicate Clinton was even remotely “obsessed” with OBL. Anyone else know something about this or, as I wonder, is Clinton pulling a defense out of the proverbial thin air?

It is interesting to note that during the interview Clinton referred constantly to Richard Clarke’s book Against All Enemies. But as Byron York of National Review writes:

But Clarke’s book does not, in fact, support Clinton’s claim. Judging by Clarke’s sympathetic account — as well as by the sympathetic accounts of other former Clinton aides like Daniel Benjamin and Steven Simon — it’s not quite accurate to say that Clinton tried to kill bin Laden. Rather, he tried to convince — as opposed to, say, order — U.S. military and intelligence agencies to kill bin Laden. And when, on a number of occasions, those agencies refused to act, Clinton, the commander-in-chief, gave up.

That is not to say there is not blame to throw around. Clarke’s book documents the sorry state of the CIA, and their laissez-faire attitude to terrorism of the time.

This frightening paragraph from York regarding Clarke’s book:

But neither the FBI nor the CIA would say that al Qaeda was behind the bombing, and there was little support for a retaliatory strike. Clarke quotes Mike Sheehan, a State Department official, saying in frustration, “What’s it going to take, Dick? Who the shit do they think attacked the Cole, fuckin’ Martians? The Pentagon brass won’t let Delta go get bin Laden. Hell they won’t even let the Air Force carpet bomb the place. Does al Qaeda have to attack the Pentagon to get their attention?”

The sad answer: well, yes, they would have to.

The World Trade Center 1993; the US embassies; Khobar Towers; the USS Cole. The writing was on the wall and we all put our heads in the sand — Clinton, as the Commander In Chief, could have done more and clearly needed to.

Clarke, however, strays from the reservation when he ascribes Clinton’s refusal to deal with the problem to the Republicans who were “going after the President” following the Lewinsky affair.

That’s like my prior “cat in the glass post.” No one put ol’ Bill there but Bill.

Byron York hits to the core, however, when he summarizes:

But the bottom line is that Bill Clinton, the commander-in-chief, could not find the will to order the military into action against al Qaeda, and Bill Clinton, the head of the executive branch, could not find the will to order the CIA and FBI to act. No matter what the former president says on Fox, or anywhere else, that is his legacy in the war on terror.

Not only sad, but costly to our nation.

This is one more example of it being All About Bill Time. Wallace asks a reasonable question, one asked by many persons and, as a journalist, he decides it’s time to pose it to the former president. Instead of taking the high road and using what he said as “yes, I failed” and then turning it around by indicating there is always more one can do — Bill makes it all about that Evil Fox Network, the “making his bones“ Chris Wallace, the nasty Republican Empire, and then lies once again by saying he’s never criticized the President and then, in the very next sentence, criticizes the President. What manner and make of man is this who turns petulant, bratty and, in truth, into a bully with one question — and who demanded that a full 50% of the questions be about his new “program?”

Bill: your legacy will never change. I didn’t hate you, I felt sad for you; you even did one very important thing that I will always welcome, and that is put limitations on federal welfare. Score. But your legacy will always be a soiled dress, “that all depends on what the definition of is, is,” a cigar, a fat book on cutout racks and “I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.”

I’m sure Bill tried to pin the ears of Fox Network back and score points with his moveon.org buddies. But he came off as a petulant, stamping little kid.

BZ

Sometimes I wonder if I’m insane.

I’m, shall we say, “over 50.”

I don’t much recognize my country or my newspaper or my local channels or my job.

I wonder if my benefit package will be there when I retire.

Perhaps it’s time to take a stand for me and my others.

I can’t be the only one retiring or thinking about retiring at this moment.

______________________________

Do I hate certain persons?

You bet I do. I’ll also wager you and I share some persons we hate in common.

My most recent experience that got me to thinking:

So there I was. At the Monterey Fisherman’s Wharf with a rather urgent need requiring fulfillment. I had already tried two restrooms clogged with waiting persons or a flock of children and their fathers. That did nothing for my requisite demands.

I left the muni wharf for western reaches beyond. I tried another restroom. Locked. By this time I was bordering on psychotic. Nature wasn’t going away, that much was abundantly clear. I had already wasted ten precious minutes.

I finally found a bathroom in a State of Fornicalia complex and waited patiently for another few minutes whilst a man urinated in a closed stall. Now, let me make this straight: he could have used the Mark I, Model I urinal a few centimeters to his left; but no. He had to have an enclosed stall. And, as we all know, these enclosed stalls contain basic toilets replete with seats and everything.

Did he know I was there and waiting? Yes, because the larger handicapped toilet was otherwise occupied by someone clearly with pants around ankles, and the urinal then became occupied by the man ahead of me. So I already knew: this guy is peeing, he isn’t doing other things. He could hear myself and other persons clearing our throats, talking, letting those involved know that they were not the only ones on the planet. Common etiquette.

He finished and snatched the latch open, sliding out. Another guy hit the urinal. My only option was the smaller toilet stall. I walked inside and found the toilet seat down and completely covered in piss. This guy had pissed all over the toilet seat. Folks, I had to do something more serious than that and required said seat. All he’d had to do was lift the toilet seat itself, requiring something like 12 pounds of pressure on the lid. And then do what needed to be done. Knowing that other persons were behind him. I lit off like a Roman Candle.

The guy was probably a good ten years younger than me and taller and heavier. He was carrying a backpack, a large gut, and another bag over his shoulder. Short dark hair, glasses, shorts, sneakers. Tourist. My scope of vision narrowed and turned dark red.

“Hey asshole,” I purred warmly, “you just pissed all over the fucking toilet seat.” In the minute or so that followed I found my right hand around his throat squeezing with some decent pressure, pinning him up against the tile. Suffice to say I was rather irate. We exchanged a few further pleasantries and he wisely didn’t swing at me but scurried away when I came to my senses. I have never, ever, I swear to you, done anything remotely like this before.

But the exquisite rudeness and assumption of this portly fuckhead defintely pulled my chain.

I smartly concluded that it was time to leave the Monterey Fisherman’s Wharf.

What sets you off?

A few of my additional peeves:

• Driving 60 MPH in the far left lane when the freeway is clogged with traffic and the limit is 65, and there’s a good mile or more in front of you;
• Pacing the Kenworth tractor/trailer rig through the curves when you possess twice the engine he does and traffic behind you is backed up a good quarter mile;
• Being in a construction zone and talking on the phone, unmoving, whilst others behind you wait for you to move — and the light turns red — and you only wake up on the yellow and move ahead a few feet;
• Being in a movie theatre and deciding the deux ex machina is the perfect time to take that cell phone call — loudly;
• Dragging your two or three brats to the market or Costco or Sam’s Club and deciding to block an entire aisle while me and four others are stacked up, attempting to continue further up the aisle past you;
• Being in a restaurant and having to watch and listen whilst your kid(s) throw food about, scream at the top of their lungs, shriek at ear-piercing decibels, and you respond with complete indifference or eminently ignorable comments like “he does that all the time.” Folks, I came to the restaurant for a relaxing dinner, not to hear or watch or listen to your spawn break windows with their tight little vocal cords or shitty attitudes;

What pisses me off: people who think that they are apparently the only ones in the Universe and no one else exists.

What pisses YOU off?

BZ

I recently traveled to the Monterey Bay with my fiance, stayed in a Santa Cruz motel, then a Monterey motel and shot over 150 photos during this trip. I’ve grown tired of politics for now; I would rather post some of my photos of critters and the sea.

At one point I lived in Santa Cruz in 1979; I had forgotten how the dark evening fog obscures one’s car windows requiring wipers — in the midst of summer.

The crashing waves of the California coast — even the most jaded of persons can become humble here.

How can one not be struck by the innocent eyes of a harbor seal?

The playfulness of pinnipeds, the ingenuity of the average otter?

BZ

Geoffrey Nunberg has written a book entitled (get ready) “Talking Right: How Conservatives Turned Liberalism Into a Tax-Raising, Latte-Drinking, Sushi-Eating, Volvo-Driving, New York Times-Reading, Body-Piercing, Hollywood-Loving, Left-Wing Freak Show.”

Whew. What a title.

The premise of the book is that the Democrats are victims of having themselves or allowing themselves to be defined by those hooligans on the Right. Nunberg bemoans that “liberal” is now associated with “malevolence, anarchy, elitism and irresponsibility.” Liberals, in turn, have seemingly disassociated themselves from the word and now tend to embrace “progressive.”

That part I know to be true; how many times has a conservative talk show host, most specifically Hugh Hewitt, Michael Medved and Dennis Prager, attempted to get a liberal guest to admit that they are the “L” Word and that guest has refused? Many times. They’ll now admit to “progressive” but not to “liberal.” I find that most odd. If you’re in fact a liberal then stand up and admit it. You’re not a “progressive” — “progressive” is for rock music like Magna Carta, King Crimson and Porcupine Tree.

Enough of the book review; I simply want to respond to the above paragraph. Nunberg writes the obvious.

To begin, Liberalism does consist of tax raisers, latte drinkers, sushi-eaters, Volvo drivers, NY Times readers, those with body piercings, lovers of Hollywood and yes, the Left is a Freak Show.

Like the cat with its head in a glass, no one put the Left there but themselves. And the Left’s reaction, poor poor poor people, is merely a response to the Right’s deciding that they were going to find their voice.

I’ve written this once but shall emphasize it again: the so-called culture and political “wars” in America only started when the Right decided to voice its stance. The Left had their voice carried for them in the Mainstream Media for years and, as the Left leaned farther left, the Right became increasingly frustrated. The true breakthrough did in fact come via AM radio when a little fuzzball was given a chair at KFBK in 1984 Sacramento. Oooh, 1984 — chilling!

Rush Limbaugh provided the voice and the venue for those of a conservative bent and a movement was started. There are those who would credit the political process itself for the Right finding its voice — and certainly the Ronald Reagan years should not be discounted as it was during the temper of these times that RL worked his way to syndication in 1988.

From there the wars began. After literally decades of ruling all forms of media and, moreover, its content, liberals were most chagrined to discover AM radio shortly became the bastion of conservatives. It took literally years for the Left to even attempt inroads to AM radio via Air America — and we all know how solvent and powerful AA is currently.

From there, the internet blossomed. Conservatives took to the net like fish to water. This in turn led to various conservative magazines with links to the internet, Fox News and, most recently, to my venue — the blog. Conservatives are big in the Blogosphere.

As grew the voice of Conservatives, so the Left and liberals felt (because, let’s face it, they were) more challenged. Not everything they said and espoused was accepted by rote. Persons actually had, egads, the temerity to speak up and attempt to refute what the MSM said and wrote. And, egads, it was proven time and again that the MSM occasionally seemed to omit some very salient things from their stories — some people call them facts.

Liberals then, during that transition and now (witness this book and others) feature themselves the victims in this heinous and oppressive power grab by the Right.

What happened is this: common people found a voice. They found an outlet for their frustrations. People from the heartland. People from the working class who wanted to get ahead and didn’t want the government to do it for them. People who wanted to be left alone to prosper. People who believe in Capitalism and believe that hard work should yield benefits. People who believe in a higher being as did our Founding Fathers, who believed in justice, in ethics and morals.

So in truth, Conservatives haven’t “fought back” — they just had the gall to voice their beliefs and concerns in a way they never had before.

And that’s what’s threatening to liberals.

Make no mistake: Leftist dogma is every bit a religion; Leftists believe the greatest enemy is the United States, the epitome of Capitalism. Capitalism by its nature must exploit people, so a major country like America, as a capitalistic leader, must be overthrown just as any capitalist oppressor must be overthrown. Anti-big, anti-corporate. Anti-capitalist. Anti-success.

And one step beyond equality of opportunity — the Left wants a guaranteed equality of outcome. And that’s just not feasible or realistic. Lazy and stupid people simply exist. Life itself tends to thin the herd and frequently that’s a good thing.

When there are bad days and blank days and times when I don’t feel like blogging — well, those are the days I have to continue making my little teeny mark on the Blogosphere and why I simply mustn’t quit. Conservatives must never quit.

“Poor kitty! Who put his head in the glass? — for surely he couldn’t be responsible!”

BZ