August 16, 2002

10:57 AM

Is this a legitmate criticism....or just complaining that the Administration has lost its aura of invincibility? From the Daily Standard, an opinion piece stating that former Clinton administration officials are unfairly criticizing the Bush administration. A short, interesting read. What's your opinion? Should former officials criticize their new leaders?
posted by pjgulliver (20 comments total)

But so far as I know, officials of the Clinton administration are the first to attack the policies of the next administration in a systematic way that includes public criticism, leaks, and dubious statements.

And officials of the Bush administration are the first to blame terrorism, recession, corporate fraud, moral decline and bad weather on the officials of the last administration in exactly the same way. Extra! Extra! Pot Calls Kettle Black!

If there were a permanent civil service in the USA, you'd expect a professional silence from former officials. (Or the restrictions of the Official Secrets Act to kick in, as in Britain.) There isn't, and you shouldn't. Look at it this way: if you spent four or eight years at your job, and felt that the person who took over, not necessarily through any fault of your own, was fucking it up badly, wouldn't you want to defend the hard work you'd done?
posted by riviera at 11:05 AM on August 16, 2002

a basic fundamental of this nation is the ability to criticize leaders. former officials or no, if they AREN't criticizing, THAT'S when it's time to be concerned. take your typical rah-rah-dubya-why-do-you-hate-america-do-you-want-the-terrorists-to-win-my-country-right-or-wrong-my-god-don't-you-realize-we-are-at-war schmuck. HIM i'm concerned about.
posted by quonsar at 11:06 AM on August 16, 2002

Now there's nothing illegal or even unethical about this. But it does abet the partisan and bitter tone that has seized Washington in recent years.

By recent years he means those ending in A.D.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 11:10 AM on August 16, 2002

Or C.E. if you like.
posted by PinkStainlessTail at 11:11 AM on August 16, 2002

He'd better start worring more about the criticism coming from their own side.
posted by Dirjy at 11:16 AM on August 16, 2002

sort of OT but this cracked me up :) Bush: Thinking About New Economic Measures "I am going to analyze and think about some suggestions, so that when I announce them, it will be well thought out." OMG!
posted by kliuless at 11:25 AM on August 16, 2002

well, NOW we're fucked.
posted by quonsar at 11:29 AM on August 16, 2002

If they're concerned about the bitter partisan tone then I'd like to suggest they check in-house for the entire 90s and consider another editor. And for God's sake, if you're gonna blame the partisan tone on somebody don'tcha think the doorsteps of Newt and Rush would be a better place?

I seem to remember about a hundred or more WeaklyTalibanStandard articles that all could have been entitled "Clinton's Cock!, Clinton's Cock!."
posted by nofundy at 11:55 AM on August 16, 2002

Huh. What the hell is this guy talking about? What about Jimmy Carter, even, who completely embarassed Bush very, very recently. That wasn't criticizing Bush's foreign policy?

And quite honestly, there's a LOT to criticize. Billy Boy porked an intern and republicans wanted to freaking impeach him. They spent millions and millions prying into Whitewater and found, hmmm, one minor player who did something illegal.

I really haven't seen anything done about Enron. I mean, come on... could you think of a worse scandal? Or how about the fact that the Bin Ladens and Bushes were working together to put a pipeline through Afghanistan. What about his brother's state throwing out thousands of black votes illegally? All of these issues just seem to be stalled by red tape, or swept out of public interest by more "kill the oil-squatters" news.

If anything, I'm surprised there hasn't been MORE criticism. I hear very little, and there's so much to criticize. I think people are afraid of being targetted by Bush's oh-so-powerful "You must hate 'Merka, 'cause you don't want to kill people for oil!" rhetoric, or even worse, to be assassinated like Baxter, the ex-Enron exec. (If that was suicide, I'm the queen of England.)
posted by zekinskia at 11:58 AM on August 16, 2002

to be assassinated like Baxter, the ex-Enron exec. (If that was suicide, I'm the queen of England.)

The ghost of Vince Foster must be giggling a blue streak.
posted by UncleFes at 12:06 PM on August 16, 2002

Sorry, the ghost of Vince Foster must be giggling a blue streak, your Highness.
posted by UncleFes at 12:10 PM on August 16, 2002

What a bunch of pansy-asses. Real conservative Republican types would never whine about how mean the other guys are.
posted by TskTsk at 12:27 PM on August 16, 2002

Sorry, the ghost of Vince Foster must be giggling a blue streak, your Highness.

Vince Foster is really dead?

I thought I heard Rush Limbaugh or one of the other noted authorities at FreeRepublic.com assure us that Vince Foster's body was really Linda Tripp's plastic-surgery altered corpse -- Linda having been brutally murdered by Hillary Clinton just before Hillary's ruthless takeover of Our Beloved Country with her fleet of Whitewater-financed black helicopters.

Yeah. So what if Bush has mishandled the economy and killed civilians around the world. I'm talking about the need for harsh criticism on real issues -- like Republican righteous indignation at the removal of W's from White House computer keyboards.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 12:40 PM on August 16, 2002

If there were a permanent civil service in the USA

There is, but 70% of them will be retiring in the next 10-20 years, I believe. The issue is with those being put in charge of the bureaucracies every 4 years. Many of them are screw-ups. We can thank Andrew Jackson for the spoils system, by the way.

that former Clinton administration officials are unfairly criticizing the Bush administration

What's wrong with that writer, does he think they're all supposed to be on the same team? Starship America, I 'spect.
posted by insomnyuk at 12:41 PM on August 16, 2002

If George Bush didn't want to criticize Bill Clinton he wouldn't have sent his son out to replace him.

(Paints self white to deflect the blast)
posted by XQUZYPHYR at 12:46 PM on August 16, 2002

Josh Marshall has nailed this one already.
posted by nicwolff at 12:55 PM on August 16, 2002

Gore? Venomous? Yeah, like a mosquito. It's just complaining.
posted by DenOfSizer at 1:03 PM on August 16, 2002

I'd like some of what fred Barnes is smoking. Along with the whining about Media Whores, boycotting of Crossfire, one would say that the GOP can't take as good as they got. And until we reach - say - an impeachment proceeding, the bar for political fighting has been considerably lowered.

Wussies.
posted by owillis at 1:09 PM on August 16, 2002

And until we reach - say - an impeachment proceeding

owillis--from your lips to god's ears!
posted by amberglow at 4:03 PM on August 16, 2002

Fred Barnes--that gasbag?--who takes him seriously?
posted by y2karl at 4:34 PM on August 16, 2002