I think it was due to the recent fictional ABC movie as well as the fact that he thought the interview would be mostly concentrated on his recent humanitarian work. The question suprised him and he was sincerely put off that everyone has been trying to put 911 on his sholders. Has anyone that you know of ever ask W why he didn't do more to prevent 911, especially when he knew bin Lauden was a serious enough threat to fire rockets at him.

 

 

Do gas prices coming down and Bin Laden possibly dying are political yet Clinton doing an interview isn't?

Both are the job of the leader of this country. To say Bush "only" had 8 months is weak at best...

 

Not weak in the least. 8 months is a blink of an eye in regards to implementing a comprehensive policy shift. No president just sits down at his desk and says "Today I think i'll start a new anti-terror strategy by golly". First, wouldn't he need to assess the current policies that were in effect (from the Clinton Admin)? He would need to evaluate data from the CIA, FBI, NSA etc. He would probably then meet with all involved parties (Sec Def/Sec State/etc) and so on and so on.

 

What if Bush DID review the Clinton Administration's policies and strategies, and concluded they were adequate and therefore did not call for any substantive changes. Whom do we blame now? Clinton for having inadequate policies? Bush for adopting those policies? Both?

Not weak in the least. 8 months is a blink of an eye in regards to implementing a comprehensive policy shift. No president just sits down at his desk and says "Today I think i'll start a new anti-terror strategy by golly". First, wouldn't he need to assess the current policies that were in effect (from the Clinton Admin)? He would need to evaluate data from the CIA, FBI, NSA etc. He would probably then meet with all involved parties (Sec Def/Sec State/etc) and so on and so on.

 

What if Bush DID review the Clinton Administration's policies and strategies, and concluded they were adequate and therefore did not call for any substantive changes. Whom do we blame now? Clinton for having inadequate policies? Bush for adopting those policies? Both?

8 months is about 20% of a 4 year term, right? There is not a one day pass for the person elected to lead this country. An 8 month pass is only a small part of the real problem....

8 months is about 20% of a 4 year term, right?

Uh....no.

It's actually one-sixth of a four-year term ... close to 20 percent.

It appears that only a portion of the NIE was leaked to the NY Times. Curious that that would happen so close to the election.

Yeah, kinda like President Bush manufacturing gay marriage as an issue in the 2004 State of the Union address, in the midst of his re-election campaign.

Not weak in the least. 8 months is a blink of an eye in regards to implementing a comprehensive policy shift. No president just sits down at his desk and says "Today I think i'll start a new anti-terror strategy by golly". First, wouldn't he need to assess the current policies that were in effect (from the Clinton Admin)? He would need to evaluate data from the CIA, FBI, NSA etc. He would probably then meet with all involved parties (Sec Def/Sec State/etc) and so on and so on.

 

What if Bush DID review the Clinton Administration's policies and strategies, and concluded they were adequate and therefore did not call for any substantive changes. Whom do we blame now? Clinton for having inadequate policies? Bush for adopting those policies? Both?

If it is true, as Bill Clinton claims, that Osama bin Laden was a regular subject of his meetings during his term in office and that the Bush administration scarcely paid attention to bin Laden before 9/11 ... I would say that warrants harsh criticism.

 

If true, I don't blame Clinton for defending his position.

8 months is about 20% of a 4 year term, right?

 

 

In my math class it comes out to 16.66666.....% But I don't know where you attended school, thus, I can's speak for you.

 

Seriously..........

 

If Bush should have completely overhauled the nation's anti-terror initiatives in 8 months (16.666......% of a 4 year term) but failed to do so, aren't you in effect blaming the Clinton administration for the deficient policies in effect at the time of 9/11?

In my math class it comes out to 16.66666.....% But I don't know where you attended school, thus, I can's speak for you.

 

Seriously..........

 

If Bush should have completely overhauled the nation's anti-terror initiatives in 8 months (16.666......% of a 4 year term) but failed to do so, aren't you in effect blaming the Clinton administration for the deficient policies in effect at the time of 9/11?

Like Clinton said, at least he tried...

 

In all honesty, I don't think either Clinton or Bush is at fault for 9/11. Islamic Jihad is at fault for 9/11. But the way the right wingers have tried to pin it on Bill, he deserves the right to point that out.

Like Clinton said, at least he tried...

 

In all honesty, I don't think either Clinton or Bush is at fault for 9/11. Islamic Jihad is at fault for 9/11. But the way the right wingers have tried to pin it on Bill, he deserves the right to point that out.

 

Actually I completely agree with you. If (and only if) failed policies are to blame, those policies were in effect during multiple administrations.

W had been in office less than 8 months at the time 9/11 occurred. Hardly, ample time to devise an anti-terrorism strategy.

 

 

Yet Republcians blame the first WTC attack on Clinton who was less then 6 weeks into his first term. USS Cole also was in the last month of his term. Could you image the feedback by Republicans in 2000, if Clinton would have acted with the Cole, while all that election mess in Florida was going on. 8 months is not a long time, but they like the adminstration before them had their faults with this, no doubt about it.

Yet Republcians blame the first WTC attack on Clinton who was less then 6 weeks into his first term. USS Cole also was in the last month of his term. Could you image the feedback by Republicans in 2000, if Clinton would have acted with the Cole, while all that election mess in Florida was going on. 8 months is not a long time, but they like the adminstration before them had their faults with this, no doubt about it.

:thumb: :thumb: :thumb:

Bush will be declassifying the entire NIE. I hope this isn't another embarrassment for the NY Times.

Bush will be declassifying the entire NIE. I hope this isn't another embarrassment for the NY Times.

I am sure some on the right will attempt to portray it that way.

 

The reports I'm seeing are that "portions" of the report will be declassified, most likely the "executive summary."

Bush will be declassifying the entire NIE. I hope this isn't another embarrassment for the NY Times.

No he won't.

 

Bush announced that he was ordering parts of the report declassified during a White House news conference with Afghan President Hamid Karzai.