Sept. 30: Bill Clinton endorses wife's torture position
Former president Bill Clinton today continued to back away from his position that the president should have the authority to authorize the torture of a terrorist in a "ticking time bomb" scenario.
The issue arose during the Democratic debate last week when moderator Tim Russert asked candidates if they supported such an exemption to a ban on torture. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) said she opposed an exemption. Russert then pointed out her husband had supported one. "I'll talk to him later," she said.
Today on NBC's "Meet the Press," Bill Clinton said "it's better now to have one. ... The more I think about it, and the more I have seen that if you have any kind of a formal exception, people just drive a truck through it and they'll say, 'Well, I thought it was covered by the exception.'"
He said he thought his wife's response during the debate was "terrific" and laughed heartily at the video of her response. He said he had heard that line before - "Several times over the last 35 years."
He said, "She's perfectly comfortable making these national security calls and others even if she has to disagree with me."
Clinton said that no "ticking time bomb" scenarios had occurred during his tenure or President Bush's to his knowledge.
But he also revealed his fascination with such a scenario as presented in the television show "24", the Fox network drama that stars Kiefer Sutherland as counterterrorism agent Jack Bauer: "There's a one in a million chance that you might be alone somewhere and you're Jack Bauer on "24" -- that's the Jack Bauer example, right? It happens every season with Jack Bauer, but in the real world, it doesn't happen very much."
Clinton also said he would reveal the names of donors to his foundation and library if his wife is elected president. "I just don't want there to ever be a question in anybody's mind ... that somebody helped me to do my public work in the hopes of currying favor with her."
As a presidential spouse, Clinton said he would not want a specific policymaking job, but instead would hope to help his wife with foreign policy problems and go around the country promoting her domestic agenda.
Clinton said he sometimes thinks about the historic nature of what would be a second Clinton presidency. But he rejects the idea that it is the formation of a dynasty or the notion she shouldn't be elected because he was president.
"I don't want to see her eliminated because we've been together so long," he said. "I literally told her she shouldn't marry me because she was more gifted than me at politics. ... She laughed and said I'd never run for office. ... That's how our life began. ... I knew in 1971 ... and she didn't decide until New Year's Day this year."
On ABC's "This Week," Clinton defended his view and his wife's view of NAFTA, the North America Free Trade Agreement that has been the subject of heated opposition from many in the labor community. Clinton signed NAFTA early in his administration, but he said the Republican takeover of Congress prevented many of the environmental and labor protections he had included in the accord to go unfunded.
"Knowing what I know, would I still try to pass it today? Absolutely. Because if I had not passed it, it would have been devastating to our relations with Mexico and Latin America."
Newt Gingrich
Former House speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) appeared on ABC to explain his last-minute decision not to run for president. He said everything was in position - his lawyer had taken a leave from his firm, he had taken leave from his analyst position at Fox, he had a web site ready to go - when he learned that it was a "criminal offense" for him to continue to work with his political organization while he ran for office.
"American Solutions is technically a 527, which is a form of fund-raising, which allows us to develop ideas. ... It's an effort to reach out on a bipartisan basis," Gingrich said. "And I thought there was a way that you could continue the momentum of those ideas while I began to prepare a presidential campaign. What we learned yesterday morning was, I mean, it's a literally a go to jail, criminal activity."
That said, Gingrich put on his usual hat as political pundit. He predicted that Clinton would be the Democratic nominee and would come out of the Democratic convention ahead - but that the Republican would close the gap by Election Day.
He also said former New York mayor Rudolph Giuliani and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney "are beginning to articulate really dramatic change." He said former Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee is an effective candidate, but doesn't have enough money to make an impact yet. And he said he hasn't heard much from former Tennessee senator Fred D. Thompson.
He said despite the inhospitable political climate, a Republican could defeat Clinton next year. But attacking her "personally is just insane." Rather, he said, Republicans should try to chip away at her, with positions most Americans endorse, such as cutting the capital gains tax or establishing English as the official language of the United States.
Children's health insurance
On "Fox News Sunday," two high ranking senators, Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Trent Lott (R-Miss.) went head to head over an expansion of a children's health insurance program that Bush has vowed to veto.
Lott, who supports the veto, said the expansion is "is a classic example of how in Washington no good deed goes unpunished." While the program was originally a good idea, he said, the expansion would cover children in families that make up to $83,000 per year.
Schumer, who hopes Congress overrides the veto, said it only goes that high when the administration grants a waiver. "There are people way above the poverty level who have a rough time affording $20,000 a year, and lots of kids go uncovered. And we're all hurt as a country when a child is not covered by health care and goes to school sick," he said.
Schumer said if Bush vetoes it, and Congress fails to override, it will come up again and again.
"That shows it's just totally politics. Now, the president's going to veto it. It's going to be sustained. We need to sit down and make some changes so that we can actually get broader support and the president can sign it," Lott said.
By Zachary Goldfarb |
September 30, 2007; 1:41 PM ET
Previous: Clinton Sticks to Her Script in Whirlwind Tour of Shows |
Next: Pelosi Says House Close to Overriding Bush on SCHIP
Posted by: ceflynline@msn.com | September 30, 2007 4:49 PM
Is there anything worse than having the public forced to watch Sunday morning reruns of a third rate melodrama (Arkansas Hillbillies) starring two compulsive and self-possessed egotists? I suspect that there is, namely the insidious culpability of irresponsible TV media executives, who incidentally brought you the unending "Paris Hilton Saga," and their "celebrity" Beltway presenters (Russert & Stephanopoulos)!
Posted by: David G. Ward | September 30, 2007 7:52 PM
The only position Bill Clinton whole heartedly endorses is the doggy position.
Posted by: Fred | September 30, 2007 8:58 PM
Abu Ghraib was the classic ticking time bomb -- they had to find the IED factory that was killing their fellow soldiers. No method was excluded. As a result of the Abu Ghraib scandal, hundreds of IED factories were created and thousands more have died.
Every conflict has its dire need to abandon all the rules.
Posted by: Kacoo | September 30, 2007 9:43 PM
would it be possible to obtain a diagram of this position along with a kama sutra manual for the purposes of further explanation in terms of exactly what constitutes torture? i am reasonably certain that i am no the only one confused by what her particular position might be on this topic.
Posted by: lonewolf | September 30, 2007 10:56 PM
Hey, Fred and all this time I thought it was Missionary!
Seriously, is anyone amazed that Bill would take his own position on something and now twist it to get HRC in the White House.
He stated he "did not have sex with that woman". Probably true as it should have read "had sex with women" (plural). The Clinton's start whining when their personal "faux pas" and "fibs" come up, but so long as Hillary uses the term "My Husband" his conduct and record are fair game.
Expect more "cackles" in the months ahead as when an answer to a question starts with one, you know a "whopper" is coming next.
We need answers from all the candidates and I hope the media will pin all of them down. Numberous sources jumped on her after last Thursday's performance at Dartmouth as they should.
American needs to go forward not spend the next four years of tabloid journalism running and ruining the country. HRC is a great Senator, no doubt about it, but as President she will tear this country in two. Just as bad, her nomination will, according to a lot of polls, give us another four years of the GOP. Wake up America!
Posted by: Joe in Vermont | October 1, 2007 7:38 AM
Electing Senator Clinton will give us four more years of the GOP??!!??
You mean four more years of Big Government, Big Debt, Unwinnable Wars, and Incompetent Decisions? {cackle, cackle, cackle}
You must be forgetting that, after taking over from Bush I, Clinton I brought Smaller Government, a Balanced Budget, a SURPLUS, a WINNABLE Iraq War, the SUCCESSFUL regime change of a rogue dictator...
I guess the GOP plan for 2008 is to try to get us all to simply ignore the FACT that 70% of the country thought we were going in the right direction when Clinton I left office!
Now, under Republican George W. Bush, 70% of the nation thinks we are going in the WRONG direction.
Yeah, electing another Clinton -- poor us.
Posted by: Jan | October 1, 2007 7:56 AM
When reading an interview with a Clinton, you certainly get to see all sides of an argument - and all sides are given by a Clinton. Other than building their own dynasty and filling their own bank accounts, what do these two people believe in?
Posted by: Theresa | October 1, 2007 11:54 AM
International Blogger Day for Free Bumra ( 4 October 2007)
We would like to inform, in fact request you to know about the brutality and information blackout in Crisis Burma recently.
( for further information : http://www.ko-htike.blogspot.com)
Junta is so cruel and wicked neglecting outside world. But international pressure have been getting higher through local bloggers and internet users. So now they are targeting all people including bloggers, internet cafe, journalists, even to those who carrying camera and handphones. ( what a worst in this 21st century)
The fact is that defenseless people are suffering and struggling apparently behind the international watching windows now. Junta cut down all blogspot service, even the whole internet system . In that sense , we would urge you to promote your freedom for those of unfortunate Burmese civilians by campaigning International Blogger Day ( 4 Oct 07) for Free Burma as follows.
http://www2.free-burma.org/index.php
We world request you to make know the rest of the world on behalf of those who have no more information freedom and severely suppressed not to talk and speak out the world.
We do hope a lot for your help on behalf of Burmese Google and Blogspot users.
Regards,
Burma changer ( on behalf of Free Burma campaign)
Posted by: freeBurma | October 3, 2007 3:49 AM
If Hillary expects to win, her husband needs to shut his mouth and stay out of it. if this is an example of the way the White House will be run if she becomes president the the question as to whether her presidency is going to be a two-for-one presidency is conclusive. From his statements about Hillary being swiftboated during and after the debate etc, this isn't good at all. If she loses the nomination or even the presendcy during the election, I wouldn't be surprsed if there was a divorce in the offering. She'd have no one to blame for her loss but Bill and a few of her handlers.
Posted by: Steamboater | November 12, 2007 10:30 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.
Politics: N, The art of maintaining and advancing the POLIS, that is, the City, by necessary compromise that permits the differences within the population to strengthen the body politic, as opposed to the village, where differences are seen to weaken the Village as a whole.
Yes, the expansion of SCHIP is politics, a necessary compromise, in a necessary progression to Socialized Medicine. It provides medical coverage that over time lessens the price we pay collectively and individually when treatable, controllable illness ravages the population unnecessarily. It requires compromise, in taxes paid, and freedoms lost (Quarantine is without question socialized medicine. Remember when Rush wanted everyone with AIDS quarantined?) It requires that we deal with differences in ability to afford Medical Care by billing someone not actually sick to care for someone who is sick to protect the rest of us who don't want to become sick.
It is basically Medicinal Realpolitik, hard-nosed and essential to securing the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity.