June 24, 2005

Clinton hits governor on White House aide's Sept. 11 comments

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton demanded Thursday that Gov. George Pataki object to a top White House advisor's comments about liberals' response to Sept. 11. In return, Pataki called Clinton a hypocrite.
[Yes, yes, yes, Pataki!
Notice Miz Hillary! didn't say one word in condemnation of Turban Durbin's outrageous remarks about Gitmo!--Jen]

Clinton, D-N.Y., joined Senate Democrats who called on Karl Rove to apologize or resign for his comments Wednesday night in Manhattan to the New York state Conservative Party.
[How convenient...they were all "united" and vocal in this outrage and not about Durtbin.
And Karl Rove serves at the pleasure of the President, not the Democrats--thank God!
Furthermore, the White House is standing behind Rove as is only right!]

The senator said Pataki was at the event and should speak out against Rove's characterization.

"I have absolutely no intention of asking him to apologize," Pataki said, adding that he didn't think Rove's remarks were divisive.

Rove, President Bush's chief political advisor, said Wednesday that liberals "saw the savagery of the 9/11 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers."
Conservatives, said Rove, "saw the savagery of 9/11 and the attacks and prepared for war."
[No truer thing has been said so clearly in a long time!
Bravo, Karl!--J.T.]

Pataki was seated at the dais while Rove spoke, and he spoke after Rove. The governor's speech focused on plans for rebuilding ground zero and did not refer to Rove's comments.

Clinton said Rove's remarks don't reflect the unity among New Yorkers and Americans of all political stripes after the terror attacks of 2001.
[Anyone besides me remember the way Hillary was booed by the FDNY and NYPD at that 9/11 benefit Concert for NYC at Madison Square Garden?
That was a beautiful moment, which Viacom edited out, BTW.]

"I would call on anyone who was at that dinner who is a New Yorker who cares about the unity of not only New York City but of our country to say we may have disagreements about what the best way is to win the war against terror, but we have no disagreements about our unity and our resolve and the goals we seek," Clinton said.

In response, Pataki said Clinton hadn't voiced similar outrage over recent controversial comments from Democrats, including national chairman Howard Dean's disparaging remarks about Republicans and Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin's invocation of Nazis and Soviet gulags in a speech about the U.S. military installation at Guantanamo Bay.
[Tell it like it is, George!]

"I think it's a little hypocritical of Senator Clinton to call on me to repudiate a political figure's comments when she never asked Senator Durbin to repudiate his comments," Pataki said.
"Senator Clinton might think about her propensity to allow outrageous statements from the other side that are far beyond political dialogue _ insulting every Republican, comparing our soldiers to Nazis or Soviet gulag guards _ and never protesting when she serves with them," Pataki said.

Michael Long, chairman of the state Conservative Party, called Rove's speech "excellent" and said the Democrats' criticism only proved Rove correct.

"I was sitting there and I watched nearly 700 people who couldn't agree more with his remarks," Long said.

If anyone should apologize to the people at that dinner last night, it should be Sen. Clinton for her failure to support a flag amendment when people died for our freedom protecting the flag," Long said.
[And yet they say this woman wants to be President...For shame, Hillary! (But then she has none.)]

The arguments over Rove's remarks quickly spread to the New York City mayor's race.
Mayor Michael Bloomberg urged both sides to cool their rhetoric, saying, "We owe it to those we lost to keep partisan politics out of the discussion and keep alive the united spirit that came out of 9/11."
[Bloomberg's such a tool.
He can't figure out which way to jump to advance his own career.]

New York state Democratic chairman Herman Farrell said the Republican mayor's "utter failure to repudiate Karl Rove's ugly and divisive comments demonstrates yet again that he is willing to put his loyalty to the White House ahead of his commitment to New York."
[How about his loyalty to truth, Mr. Farrell?--Jen]

By the end of the day, Rep Peter King, R-N.Y., made the unusual move of criticizing a fellow member of the state's congressional delegation.
"Karl Rove deserves a medal," King said. "Hillary Clinton, she's the one who went to the floor of the Senate and implied President Bush knew about Sept. 11 and let it happen."

And she's been trash-talking the President, his administration, the values of this country and our military ever since, too!
Peter King is right: Karl Rove does deserve a medal for saying what needed to be said at a crucial point in the war.
I'm also pleasantly surprised by Pataki's bold defense of Rove (he didn't strike me as being brave enough to publicly stand up to Hillary), but indeed he is and was.
All in all, a good day for America.
Even though this detracted some from our righteous anger about Durbin and the need for him to resign and/or be censured, it also highlighted the Dims' silence on the Durbin and Dean insults while putting the spotlight on their moves to obstruct the prosecution of the WOT almost from the beginning.

I keep thinking about President Bush's speech to the country on Sept. 22, 2001 when he told us that this war would be long, perhaps stretching over decades: the Dems (as well as the GOP) in both houses of Congress agreed that that was "OK" then, but only 3 and 1/2 years later, the Donkies are ready to give up, pull our troops out and let the POWs go.
The Dems like Clinton, Kerry, Biden and Kennedy have complained that the Iraq part of the war isn't "going well," or it's a "quagmire" or a "Vietnam."
Yet, in his first debate with Kerry, President Bush told the American people that winning the war in Iraq was hard work, and for this, they made fun of him.
SecDef Rumsfeld also informed us that the Iraq war would be a "long, hard slog" a long time ago--yet the Dims insist that we all "move on."
For what, to what?
To a game of "let's pretend 9/11 never happened?"
Battle has been joined by Al Queda against our Coalition in Iraq and we will must and will win.
In fact, the only way we can lose is if the Dims and their minions in the MSM win the propaganda war they are waging on CSPAN and in Old Media.
This refusal to apologize by Pataki and the White House on behalf of Rove's awesome speech which isolates the Dims as obstructions and appeasers is cause for hope that we may someday win the propaganda war, too.
(For the record, Dick Durbin didn't really give much of an apology.
This a far cry from taking back his awful lies about how our military treat POWs at Gitmo.)
But we must press onward to victory: there are still Islamist killers at large and soft-headed ill-liberal "liberals" at home who must be crushed!
Also notice how the Libs will call remarks like Durbin's and Dean's part of the "political discourse" but condemn Rove's speech and demand that it be retracted as "divisive."
Pataki nailed it--they are complete hypocrites.