20 September 2005
President Clinton Gets It
This weekend, President Clinton made rounds on the Sunday shows. Freedom & Progress has always been inspired by how well Clinton can articulate concepts and ideas in such a simple and straight forward way. Moreover, Clinton has this nack for breaking down complex problems and solutions into words and language ordinary people can understand. On NBC's Meet the Press and on ABC's This Week, President Clinton commented on many issues. F&P invites its readers to read the entirety of Clinton's words, however F&P specifically highlights the following:
On the Federal Budget: After addressing the rebuilding of New Orleans, Clinton answered Tim Russert's question on the Federal Deficit.
MR. RUSSERT: The president said we're going to rebuild New Orleans. It's estimated to cost probably close to $300 billion. How can we afford that? What is it going to do to the deficit? And what should we do about tax cuts and spending cuts?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: Now, in terms of the budget deficit--you know what I think. I mean, I think it was always a mistake for people in my income group to get tax cuts. I think before it was terrible. I think that we shouldn't be-- this--Katrina is going to force us to go back and think about three things. What are our obligations to the poor, there, and in America? What is the role of government? And who's going to pay for it?
Right now our position is--the American government's position, and everybody in the world knows this, this hurts us, is that we should be able to fight a war in Iraq, be aggressive in Afghanistan, deal with this massive expenditure of Katrina, have a big new benefit for senior citizens on drugs, and it should be paid for largely by borrowing money from countries, except for Japan and the U.K. that are not as wealthy as we are. The rest of the money we're borrowing from China, from Korea, from the Middle East. So we go into the debt market--we borrow this money every day to cover our deficit. In effect, we're borrowing the money to pay for Katrina, pay for Iraq, and pay for Bill Clinton's tax cuts. I don't approve of that. I think it's ethically not good, and I think it's terrible economics.
And to George Stephanopoulos:
PRESIDENT CLINTON: I think it's very important that Americans understand, you know, tax cuts are always popular, but about half of these tax cuts since 2001 have gone to people in my income group, the top 1 percent. I've gotten four tax cuts.
They're responsible for this big structural deficit, and they're not going away, the deficits aren't. Now, what Americans need to understand is that that means every single day of the year, our government goes into the market and borrows money from other countries to finance Iraq, Afghanistan, Katrina and our tax cuts. We have never done this before. Never in the history of our republic have we ever financed a conflict, military conflict, by borrowing money from somewhere else.
PRESIDENT CLINTON: I mean, sooner or later, just think what would happen if the Chinese — We're pressing the Chinese now, a country not nearly rich as America per capita, to keep loaning us money with low interest to cover my tax cut, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Katrina and at the same time to raise the value of their currency so their imports into our country will become more expensive, and our exports to them will become less expensive. And by the way, we don't want to let them buy any oil companies or anything like that.
So what if they just got tired of buying our debt? What if the Japanese got tired of doing it? Japan's economy is beginning to grow again. Suppose they decided they wanted to keep some of their money at home and invest it in Japan, because they're starting to grow?
We depend on Japan, China, the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia and Korea primarily to basically loan us money every day of the year to cover my tax cut and these conflicts and Katrina. I don't think it makes any sense. I think it's wrong.
On Iraq and Afghanistan:
STEPHANOPOULOS: So we're losing in Afghanistan, at risk of losing in Iraq. What do we do right now? What should the new strategy be?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: Well as I said, I don't know, because I'm not president, I don't know what his military options are. I don't know how many troops he's got where. But I know my view is if there is a reasonable chance that this constitutional process can be completed and that it will not be rejected under the terms that govern the vote, once that happens, I think that will give another boost to the civilian government. Then, I think that we will know how long it takes to train enough and equip enough forces that they ought to be able to defend themselves. When that happens, I think we can begin drawing down our presence.
But my problem with setting a date certain for withdrawal now is I always assumed that whoever I was competing against was smart. And suppose you were running the Iraqi insurgency, and I know you, and I know how smart you are. If I told you I was going to leave in six months, 12 months, or 18 months, and you could survive that long, there's no way in the wide world you would join the political process.
Now, let's look at the other thing: When the IRA says they're going to give up arms, and they want the international body to observe the blowup, and they want the representative of the Catholics and Church of England, the Protestants to observe the blowup, what does that say? They say they've decided they've got more to gain from the political process than from continuing the conflict.
When 13,000 armed guerrillas and paramilitaries in Colombia give up their weapons and rejoin civil society, and President Uribe, who's been so tough on them, offers them a chance to reconcile, why are they doing that? Because they know they're not going to win anymore, and they want to be part of a political process. [In Rwanda,] when the Hutu soldiers came home in response to President Kigami's welcome and rejoined civil society and did their community atonement work, why did they do that? Because they knew they couldn't win anymore.
So the reason I don't want to see an announcement made is I see no reasonable prospect that this insurgency can be transformed into a political process, and the Sunnis who are alienated will come back if they know all they have to do is wait. It may not work. I've never known whether it would work. All I know is a majority of the Iraqis would like it to work. We'd be better off, and the Middle East would be better off if it did work.
A lot of good Americans have given their lives; thousands of others have been horribly wounded. So I have been in a position where I wanted the strategy to work. Whether it will or not, I don't know. But the only thing I would sacrifice it to is if I thought we were going to lose in Afghanistan. We cannot lose in Afghanistan. We cannot let the Taliban come back. We cannot let Karzai fail. We cannot relax our efforts to try to keep undermining al Qaeda, because that's still by far a bigger threat to our security.
On Iraq as the Clash of Civilizations:
MR. RUSSERT: When you talk about religion, how concerned are you that we are, in fact, in a religious war, Islam vs. Christianity?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: A little bit, but I think the important thing--you know, we had the king of Jordan here, who did an astonishing thing several months ago. He brought in the leaders of every major sect of Islam, and none of them would say that the Koran justified the killing of innocent civilians, whether they were Muslims or non-Muslims. My experience has been that most of these terrorists have political objectives which can be clearly defined, and then try to give them a religious overlay. Now, maybe some of the people they get to go do suicide bombings are in the grip of a religious fervor or have been convinced that God wanted them to do this, but religion has been used by people for political reasons, just the way Milosevic used ethnic differences in Bosnia. I still believe behind a lot of this is just cold-blooded power concerns and people fighting over land and resources and all the things people have fought over since the beginning of time.
MR. RUSSERT: Are you concerned that Iraq may wind up with a fundamentalist Islamic regime?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: A little bit. I think there has been an effort to make it a representative constitution, and I think the American ambassador there has exerted extraordinary positive efforts. And keep in mind there are very few countries in the world that have the kind of separation between church and state that we do. It's been a blessing to us. And one of the reasons America is the most religious big country in the world in terms of participation in religious services and devotion to one's faith is that we don't pretend that politics is religion. We don't pretend that politics is perfect and we don't mess up people's ability to practice their faith. On the other hand, Iraq can have a recognition of the role of Islam in the Sunni and Shia traditions and the presence of non-Muslims in Iraq and still have--be a freer place than it was before. We just have to watch it and encourage them, work with them.
On the Federal Budget: After addressing the rebuilding of New Orleans, Clinton answered Tim Russert's question on the Federal Deficit.
MR. RUSSERT: The president said we're going to rebuild New Orleans. It's estimated to cost probably close to $300 billion. How can we afford that? What is it going to do to the deficit? And what should we do about tax cuts and spending cuts?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: Now, in terms of the budget deficit--you know what I think. I mean, I think it was always a mistake for people in my income group to get tax cuts. I think before it was terrible. I think that we shouldn't be-- this--Katrina is going to force us to go back and think about three things. What are our obligations to the poor, there, and in America? What is the role of government? And who's going to pay for it?
Right now our position is--the American government's position, and everybody in the world knows this, this hurts us, is that we should be able to fight a war in Iraq, be aggressive in Afghanistan, deal with this massive expenditure of Katrina, have a big new benefit for senior citizens on drugs, and it should be paid for largely by borrowing money from countries, except for Japan and the U.K. that are not as wealthy as we are. The rest of the money we're borrowing from China, from Korea, from the Middle East. So we go into the debt market--we borrow this money every day to cover our deficit. In effect, we're borrowing the money to pay for Katrina, pay for Iraq, and pay for Bill Clinton's tax cuts. I don't approve of that. I think it's ethically not good, and I think it's terrible economics.
And to George Stephanopoulos:
PRESIDENT CLINTON: I think it's very important that Americans understand, you know, tax cuts are always popular, but about half of these tax cuts since 2001 have gone to people in my income group, the top 1 percent. I've gotten four tax cuts.
They're responsible for this big structural deficit, and they're not going away, the deficits aren't. Now, what Americans need to understand is that that means every single day of the year, our government goes into the market and borrows money from other countries to finance Iraq, Afghanistan, Katrina and our tax cuts. We have never done this before. Never in the history of our republic have we ever financed a conflict, military conflict, by borrowing money from somewhere else.
PRESIDENT CLINTON: I mean, sooner or later, just think what would happen if the Chinese — We're pressing the Chinese now, a country not nearly rich as America per capita, to keep loaning us money with low interest to cover my tax cut, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Katrina and at the same time to raise the value of their currency so their imports into our country will become more expensive, and our exports to them will become less expensive. And by the way, we don't want to let them buy any oil companies or anything like that.
So what if they just got tired of buying our debt? What if the Japanese got tired of doing it? Japan's economy is beginning to grow again. Suppose they decided they wanted to keep some of their money at home and invest it in Japan, because they're starting to grow?
We depend on Japan, China, the United Kingdom, Saudi Arabia and Korea primarily to basically loan us money every day of the year to cover my tax cut and these conflicts and Katrina. I don't think it makes any sense. I think it's wrong.
On Iraq and Afghanistan:
STEPHANOPOULOS: So we're losing in Afghanistan, at risk of losing in Iraq. What do we do right now? What should the new strategy be?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: Well as I said, I don't know, because I'm not president, I don't know what his military options are. I don't know how many troops he's got where. But I know my view is if there is a reasonable chance that this constitutional process can be completed and that it will not be rejected under the terms that govern the vote, once that happens, I think that will give another boost to the civilian government. Then, I think that we will know how long it takes to train enough and equip enough forces that they ought to be able to defend themselves. When that happens, I think we can begin drawing down our presence.
But my problem with setting a date certain for withdrawal now is I always assumed that whoever I was competing against was smart. And suppose you were running the Iraqi insurgency, and I know you, and I know how smart you are. If I told you I was going to leave in six months, 12 months, or 18 months, and you could survive that long, there's no way in the wide world you would join the political process.
Now, let's look at the other thing: When the IRA says they're going to give up arms, and they want the international body to observe the blowup, and they want the representative of the Catholics and Church of England, the Protestants to observe the blowup, what does that say? They say they've decided they've got more to gain from the political process than from continuing the conflict.
When 13,000 armed guerrillas and paramilitaries in Colombia give up their weapons and rejoin civil society, and President Uribe, who's been so tough on them, offers them a chance to reconcile, why are they doing that? Because they know they're not going to win anymore, and they want to be part of a political process. [In Rwanda,] when the Hutu soldiers came home in response to President Kigami's welcome and rejoined civil society and did their community atonement work, why did they do that? Because they knew they couldn't win anymore.
So the reason I don't want to see an announcement made is I see no reasonable prospect that this insurgency can be transformed into a political process, and the Sunnis who are alienated will come back if they know all they have to do is wait. It may not work. I've never known whether it would work. All I know is a majority of the Iraqis would like it to work. We'd be better off, and the Middle East would be better off if it did work.
A lot of good Americans have given their lives; thousands of others have been horribly wounded. So I have been in a position where I wanted the strategy to work. Whether it will or not, I don't know. But the only thing I would sacrifice it to is if I thought we were going to lose in Afghanistan. We cannot lose in Afghanistan. We cannot let the Taliban come back. We cannot let Karzai fail. We cannot relax our efforts to try to keep undermining al Qaeda, because that's still by far a bigger threat to our security.
On Iraq as the Clash of Civilizations:
MR. RUSSERT: When you talk about religion, how concerned are you that we are, in fact, in a religious war, Islam vs. Christianity?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: A little bit, but I think the important thing--you know, we had the king of Jordan here, who did an astonishing thing several months ago. He brought in the leaders of every major sect of Islam, and none of them would say that the Koran justified the killing of innocent civilians, whether they were Muslims or non-Muslims. My experience has been that most of these terrorists have political objectives which can be clearly defined, and then try to give them a religious overlay. Now, maybe some of the people they get to go do suicide bombings are in the grip of a religious fervor or have been convinced that God wanted them to do this, but religion has been used by people for political reasons, just the way Milosevic used ethnic differences in Bosnia. I still believe behind a lot of this is just cold-blooded power concerns and people fighting over land and resources and all the things people have fought over since the beginning of time.
MR. RUSSERT: Are you concerned that Iraq may wind up with a fundamentalist Islamic regime?
PRESIDENT CLINTON: A little bit. I think there has been an effort to make it a representative constitution, and I think the American ambassador there has exerted extraordinary positive efforts. And keep in mind there are very few countries in the world that have the kind of separation between church and state that we do. It's been a blessing to us. And one of the reasons America is the most religious big country in the world in terms of participation in religious services and devotion to one's faith is that we don't pretend that politics is religion. We don't pretend that politics is perfect and we don't mess up people's ability to practice their faith. On the other hand, Iraq can have a recognition of the role of Islam in the Sunni and Shia traditions and the presence of non-Muslims in Iraq and still have--be a freer place than it was before. We just have to watch it and encourage them, work with them.
# posted by Publicola @ 10:45 AM 
