Article

2005-05-18 Iraq-Jordan

Bill Clinton: Iraq Changes Good for Region

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve 2005-05-18 12:23:45 PM|| || Front Page|| [11132 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Late... jump... bandwagon...

Posted by Raj 2005-05-18 13:42|| 2005-05-18 13:42|| Front Page Top

#2 Dead-Center, Raj! Not too late for the shark though, lol!

Posted by .com 2005-05-18 14:04|| 2005-05-18 14:04|| Front Page Top

#3 The real laugh will come years from now, when due to Paul Bremer's brilliant management, Iraq will transcend Japan's rise under the MacArthur constitution to become one of the most powerful and important economies in the world. It's mostly invisible right now, but their (boring) banking, financial services, insurance, brokerage, and other institutions have been set up to be idealized versions of the best operating systems in the world, with none of the learning curve baggage. Economics textbooks will use Iraq as the standard on which to evaluate other economic systems performance. When a permanent government is elected and foreign investment is allowed, that economy is going to explode.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-05-18 14:06|| 2005-05-18 14:06|| Front Page Top

#4 Hilary has been pro-Iraq invasion from the start, when she not only voted for it, but sat next to Lieberman at the state of the Union speech. The Clintons soft-peddaled their support in public in 2004 out of deference to Kerry, whom they had supported as an alternative to Dean. Now that Hilary will probably run on her own, they are simply reasserting the centrist views theyve always held. (and if you say shes a socialist cause of national health care, fine, that kind of socialism she has in common with Harry Truman, whom conservatives seem to admire these days)

Posted by Liberalhawk 2005-05-18 14:17|| 2005-05-18 14:17|| Front Page Top

#5 Hilary was "pro"-invasion because she knew that was what the voters of NYstate wanted.
She's no centrist and never will be.
She and her HINO (husband in name only) both loathe the military and have very little concept of its proper use.
Clintoon knows his legacy was 9/11 and part of that legacy was his failure to deal with Saddam's regime and his flagrant violation of 16 UN resolutions.
Slick Willy's idea of "military intervention" was a few cruise missiles, only fired after the military waited for hours to get the "Launch" command from Clintoon because he was on the golf course.
If you call Hitlery nationalizing 1/7th of the US economy for her womb-to-the-tomb health care "Truman-like," is it any wonder you Democrats are so lost???
Truman was the last good Democrat; please don't ruin it by lumping in Her Heinous with him!

Posted by Jennie Taliaferro">Jennie Taliaferro 2005-05-18 14:58|| http://www.greatestjeneration.com]">[http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2005-05-18 14:58|| Front Page Top

#6 What, was he trying to get into a Republican chick's pants or something?

Posted by BH 2005-05-18 15:36|| 2005-05-18 15:36|| Front Page Top

#7 Harry Truman also wanted national health insurance. While I dont know the details of his proposal, or even whether he got to the point of a detailed proposal, I doubt it was any less radical than Hilarycare.

Posted by Liberalhawk 2005-05-18 16:54|| 2005-05-18 16:54|| Front Page Top

#8 Yup, the Clintons didnt effectively attack Afghanistan or Iraq. Neither did Bush, pre 9/11. There simply wasnt political support for that, from either party.

Posted by Liberalhawk 2005-05-18 16:55|| 2005-05-18 16:55|| Front Page Top

#9 'A 1969 "Oral History Interview" with Oscar R. Ewing, formerly President Truman's administrator of the Federal Security Agency (predecessor of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare) reveals that, in Ewing's words, "national health insurance had been proposed by President Roosevelt in the very first social security bill introduced in Congress back in 1934." But, as Ewing explained, the American Medical Association "didn't want the Government to have a thing to do with medicine. They opposed every bill that was introduced in Congress that even remotely would involve Government in medicine." (Their opposition extended to government support of any medical research, and they proposed that doctors "raise ten million dollars a year for research" - a sum Ewing thought the AMA intended to solicit largely from the pharmaceutical industry. "the pharmaceutical manufacturers.") President Roosevelt, whose wife, Eleanor, had been persuaded by her own doctor of the rashness of pushing for national health insurance, decided to withdraw that provision from the social security bill. His strategy now, said Ewing, was to "get what he could" right away, and try later for national health insurance.

The Wagner-Murray-Dingell Bill, introduced in Congress in 1943, did include a national health insurance provision, but it was rebuffed even though a Gallup (American Institute of Public Opinion) poll had reported 59% of respondents favoring the inclusion in the Social Security program of payments for sickness, disability, doctor and hospital bills.[4]
Roosevelt's successor, Harry Truman, proposed in 1945 a national health insurance plan to a recalcitrant Congress; and Oscar Ewing, undeterred by defeat and with Truman's support, began to advocate such a plan publicly early in 1948. At this point, the tag "socialized medicine," earlier used effectively to defeat a proposed California health insurance program, was applied to the legislation urged by Ewing. He said in the 1969 interview that he thought the reason for the pharmaceutical industry's intense opposition to the administration's bill was a provision in the original draft that provided for price controls if drug prices became excessive. '

Posted by Liberalhawk 2005-05-18 16:59|| 2005-05-18 16:59|| Front Page Top

#10 Jennie, you do know that Truman threatened to nationalize the steel industry?

Posted by Liberalhawk 2005-05-18 17:00|| 2005-05-18 17:00|| Front Page Top

#11 Strawman LH.
1993 Somalia: Withdrawal and be shown to be a paper tiger, instead of attacking into the city as requested by the Rangers.
1993 World Trade center bombing: No response, even though at least one of the bombers escaped to Iraq.
1998 Khobar Towers bombing: No response.
1998 Kenyan and Tanzanian embassy bombings: Cruise missile strike at Afghan AQ camps and Sudanese pharmaceutical plant.
2000 Yemen Cole destroyer bombing: No response.

Not a stellar record. I'm sure other readers can find more examples.

Posted by ed 2005-05-18 17:13|| 2005-05-18 17:13|| Front Page Top

#12 Was he showing off for the chick in the picture at the link? She looks doable. But with this guy, what isn't?

Posted by tu3031 2005-05-18 17:25|| 2005-05-18 17:25|| Front Page Top

#13 Good point. Wonder what remarks accompanied that hand gesture of Bill's?

Posted by thibaud (aka lex) 2005-05-18 17:59|| 2005-05-18 17:59|| Front Page Top

#14 Clintoon appears to be, um, weighing things, heh, in that pic. I've done that, too. "Guess My ~~Tits~~ Weight. A fine tradition. Thanx, into the image collection it goes.

Posted by .com 2005-05-18 19:28|| 2005-05-18 19:28|| Front Page Top

20:37 trailling wife
20:16 Whomoting Omeaper1434
19:01 Whomoting Omeaper1433
17:58 Whomoting Omeaper1433
17:55 Whomoting Omeaper1433
07:44 Whomoting Omeaper1433
07:41 Whomoting Omeaper1433
07:29 Whomoting Omeaper1433
00:02 trailing wife
23:50 badanov
23:48 badanov
23:46 Halliburton Legal Department
23:41 Sobiesky
23:30 .com
23:11 Fred
22:59 49 pan
22:57 Pappy
22:55 Frank G
22:51 thibaud (aka lex)
22:51 Ebbavith Angang9747
22:36 Zpaz
22:23 Matt
22:21 Frank G
22:18 Jackal