Talking Points Propaganda: The Liberal’s Fallible Defense of President Clinton
by
Joshua Frank
by Joshua Frank
It seems that
liberals will go to any lengths in order to protect the sanctity
of President Clinton’s legacy, and it is getting downright aggravating.
Take Joshua Micah Marshall, the Ivy-league liberal who publishes
Talking Points Memo, an enormously popular online political blog
with a pwog-centrist tilt, ala Eric Alterman. As Marshall recently
wrote:
"[T]he
president's defenders have fallen back on what has always been
their argument of last resort – cherry-picked quotes from Clinton
administration officials arranged to give the misleading impression
that the Clintonites said and thought the same thing about Iraqi
weapons of mass destruction as the Bushies did."
Yeah, you’re
not the only one, it makes my head spin too. I’m not exactly sure
how one can cherry-pick President Clinton’s 1998 Iraq Liberation
Act, which gave the US government the green light to whack Saddam
for the slightest annoyance, whether fabricated or not. In fact,
it was the former Iraq dictator’s alleged Weapons of Mass Destruction
that were part of the Act’s foundation.
As the Act
provided:
"Since
March 1996, Iraq has systematically sought to deny weapons inspectors
from the United Nations Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM) access
to key facilities and documents, has on several occasions endangered
the safe operation of UNSCOM helicopters transporting UNSCOM personnel
in Iraq, and has persisted in a pattern of deception and concealment
regarding the history of its weapons of mass destruction programs."
President Clinton
was attempting to justify an attack on Iraq on the grounds that
Saddam had a lethal arsenal of WMD. I am not sure how that is all
that different from Bush’s rhetoric. But logic is meaningless when
party loyalty is involved. Just ask Josh Marshall, who continues:
"But
even arguing on this ground understates the full measure of administration
mendacity in the lead up to the war since it ignores half the
story. WMD was only half the administration equation for war.
The other half was a Iraq’s alleged tie to Islamist terrorist
groups like al Qaida and including al Qaida. On top of that, of
course, was the big enchilada, the Cheney favorite, those frequent
and intentionally ambiguous suggestions that Saddam Hussein played
a role in the 9/11 attacks."
On my, what
a stretch. I’d put WMD at about 75% of Bush’s justification for
invading. And remind me again how the Democrats opposed Cheney’s
favorite Iraq lie? Oh yeah, they didn’t. That aside, Marshall doesn’t
acknowledge the bigger picture, as I describe in Left
Out!;
"In
1993, Clinton himself bombed Iraqi intelligence centers for what
he said was retaliation for the attempted assassination of George
Bush Sr. "He said publicly that the U.S. strike on Iraqi intelligence
headquarters was retaliation for Saddam's attempt to kill [ex-president]
George Bush," Laurie Mylroie, who worked as Clinton's Iraq specialist
during his 1992 campaign, told WABC Radio's Steve Malzberg. "[But]
he also meant it for the Trade Center bombing ... Clinton believed
that the attack on Iraqi intelligence headquarters would deter
Saddam from all future strikes against the United States," she
claimed. "It was hopelessly naïve."
Clinton didn’t
try to tie Saddam Hussein to the crime, he just went ahead and bombed
on his own accord. No matter that the CIA was pointing to bin Laden
and not Saddam. So much for Dick Cheney being the only one pointing
fingers in Saddam’s direction when it was undeserving.
How soon Marshall
forgets that in 1996 the Clintonites bombed several civilian targets
and military facilities – without the approval of the UN or any
international alliance, for that matter. The Iraqi government and
even the Pentagon reported dozens of deaths and millions of dollars
worth of damages. The war on Iraq, despite popular belief, didn’t
start with Bush Jr.
How can we
forget President Clinton’s callousness toward Iraqi civilians? The
United Nations estimated in 1995 that as many as 576,000 Iraqi youth
died as a result of the sanctions that the US had imposed and supported
since 1991. But we’re talking bombs here, not sanctions.
Soon after
the Iraq Liberation Act was signed into law, Clinton, in what many
criticized as an effort to deflect attention from his impeachment
trial, tried his luck with Saddam one more time on December 16,
1998. Unlike previous attacks on Iraq, which paled in comparison,
this attack was waged with primitive anger. As President Clinton
asserted in a national televised address on the day of the first
U.S. offensive.
"Earlier today,
I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security
targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission
is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons programs
and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors ... Their purpose
is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed
the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the
world."
"Six weeks
ago," he continued, "Saddam Hussein announced that he would no longer
cooperate with the United Nations weapons inspectors called UNSCOM.
They are highly professional experts from dozens of countries. Their
job is to oversee the elimination of Iraq's capability to retain,
create, and use weapons of mass destruction, and to verify that
Iraq does not attempt to rebuild that capability … The international
community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that
left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again."
I’m not mincing
words and I’m not sure how in the heck President Clinton’s word-for-word
rationale for bombing Saddam could be considered "cherry-picked"
as Josh Marshall puts it.
I
just don’t think there is any question that Joshua Micah Marshall’s
beloved Bill Clinton laid the groundwork for George W. Bush's Iraq
invasion. He most certainly did. As my granddad used to tell me,
"the proof of the pudding is in the eating."
Chew
on that for a while, Mr. Marshall.
November
9, 2005
Joshua
Frank [send him mail]
is the author of Left
Out!: How Liberals Helped Reelect George W. Bush, just published
by Common Courage Press. To learn more visit www.BrickBurner.org.
Copyright
© 2005 LewRockwell.com
Joshua
Frank Archives
|