Comments on: Clawing For A Second Chance

By: Scott Wiggins

Scott Wiggins — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 18:01:08 +0000

No legacy…Are you kidding? His legacy is bimbo-gate, FBI file-gate, State Trooper-gate, Pardon-gate, Impeachment, Disbarment, and a supporting cast of thousands including Charlie Trie, Monica Lewinsky, Kathleen Willey, Jaunita Broadrick, Marc Rich, Sandy Berger, Vince Foster…I could go on but what’s the point. He has a legacy…It’s just not one he chooses to remember.

By: Blue Crab Boulevard » It’s All About Bill

Blue Crab Boulevard » It’s All About Bill — Sun, 03 Feb 2008 15:22:26 +0000

[...] quite a lot more, including some rather revisionist claims of what Clinton accomplished in office. (Charles Krauthammer pointed out on Friday that Bill Clinton essentially left no legacy behind.) If Hillary gets the [...]

By: NortonPete

NortonPete — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 19:36:35 +0000

I agree CG, had the 1993 bombing been successful; one of the towers would have come down fast with 25,000 people working in it.
I was there that day working at 7 WTC. I will never forget it.
NY Waterways did a heroic job of getting 100000+ people off of Manhattan; the subways were all knocked out.
Initially we were told that there was not any chance of a bomb bringing the down the tower, but a closer examination of the damage sent a chill through many engineers’ spine. There was a tremendous amount of damage and now we know that the entire WTC complex, built by the Port Authority, was a collection of less than adequate designs.

Sheik Rahman’s gang of misfits tried again in 1997, they were caught but only after having made a bigger bomb in a Queen’s warehouse.

Many of my fellow workers would comment during the 1990s, “They will be back; it is only a matter of time.”

All this while the Clinton administration was ignoring attack after attack.

By: CG

CG — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 18:18:15 +0000

Remember too that history very nearly “returned” in February 1993, when the partially-successful bombing of the World Trade Center occurred. Had the bomb been placed in a slightly different position at least one of the towers would have collapsed on that day, resulting in what would probably have been a far higher number of casualties (the bombing occurred around noon on a Friday). It is an interesting counter-factual scenario to imagine how the Clinton of 1993 would have responded to this catastrophe.

By: Geoffb

Geoffb — Sat, 02 Feb 2008 17:16:48 +0000

If Clinton had actually wanted to be a wartime leader he with his rhetorical gifts could have started the showdown with Islamic terrorism, he had plenty of opportunities.

Instead he decided to downgrade the power of the US because of his whole administration’s view that is was not right for there to be only one superpower in the world. China was supposed to be the balance to US power. His “the era of big government is over” in reality meant the downsizing of the US military but increasing the size of the other parts of the Federal Government.

He only avoided Jimmy Carter status because we faced no threat as organized as the USSR during his Presidency. His failure was to allow the terrorist threat to metastasize and allow nations such as Pakistan and North Korea to develop into nuclear threats.