**UPDATED** Bill Clinton Pointing Fingers And Other Lie Detectors
September 25, 2006
Every time Bill Clinton leans forward and points his finger, he lies.
When he leaned forward, looked into the camera and said, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman,” he was lying. As it turns out, Monica, not Bill, was telling the truth.
He leaned forward and vehemently denied having an affair with Gennifer Flowers, too. Later, in a deposition, he admitted to the affair.
Now, Mr Clinton was a very good liar-Bob Kerrey (former Governor of Nebraska) said so himself.
“Clinton’s an unusually good liar. Unusually good. Do you realize that?”
Of course, behavior patterns rarely change. In Mr Clinton’s case, with his long and distinguished career of deceit (political, personal and every other iteration). leaning forward and pointing his finger (deliberate behaviors meant to emphasize sincerity and believability) are the kind of body language that are dead give aways to even the most mediocre and ill informed students of psychology. That’s right- you would be aware of that truth even if you graduated at the bottom of the night school at Addis Ababa Technical Community College.
In the case of Mr Clinton, the best lie detectors are his sincerity and self proclaimed victim status. Here are a few examples. On June 8, 1996, Bill Clinton publicly- and painfully said, said,
I have vivid and painful memories of black churches being burned in my own state when I was a child.
There is no record of a Black church burning in Arkansas when Bill Clinton was a child.
On February 21, 1996, Bill Clinton, with the greatest sincerity said,
“Since I was a little boy, I’ve heard about the Iowa caucuses. That’s why I would really like to do well in them.”
In fact, the Iowa caucuses began in 1972, when Mr Clinton was in Oxford.
The list is long, but there is no point in repeating what everyone already knows.
Bill Clinton was not responsible for 9/11, any more than was George Bush. We noted Mr Clinton’s remarks in We Went To War Because Bill Clinton Told The Truth that
So we will pursue a long-term strategy to contain Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction and work toward the day when Iraq has a government worthy of its people.
First, we must be prepared to use force again if Saddam takes threatening actions, such as trying to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction or their delivery systems, threatening his neighbors, challenging allied aircraft over Iraq or moving against his own Kurdish citizens…
The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the world.
Here’s the deal. The war on terror isn’t about Bill Clinton or how wonderful he thinks he is. The war on terror isn’t about Fox News, or how much he would like to make Fox News an issue. Mr Clinton did some smart things in fighting terror and he did some stupid things in fighting terror- and nothing he says can change that reality.
He had 8 years to fight terror and he did the best he could, given the circumstances. As he noted in the interview, Mr Bush was in office 8 months. The additional 8 months prior to 9/11 could not have prevented that from happening.
The war on terror is about facing the truth about our adversaries and those who would threaten us. Mr Clinton ought to be making every effort to be telling the truth when it comes to the security of our nation.
Bill Clinton doesn’t have much of a track record when it comes to telling the truth.
“The final policy paper on national security that President Clinton submitted to Congress — 45,000 words long — makes no mention of al Qaeda and refers to Osama bin Laden by name just four times. The scarce references to bin Laden and his terror network undercut claims by former White House terrorism analyst Richard A. Clarke that the Clinton administration considered al Qaeda an “urgent” threat, while President Bush’s national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, “ignored” it. The Clinton document, titled “A National Security Strategy for a Global Age,” is dated December 2000 and is the final official assessment of national security policy and strategy by the Clinton team. The document is publicly available, though no U.S. media outlets have examined it in the context of Mr. Clarke’s testimony and new book.”
More reality. The Anchoress puts on a 3 pointer clinic:
One of the quotes I had missed before reading the transcript of Bill Clinton’s spontaneous (or maybe not so spontaneous ) rage-fest this weekend was the former president saying “now, I have never criticized President Bush…”Which is just too funny, because he has done it before both foreign and domestic audiences – in fact it was his criticisms of Bush just about a year ago…
This is very troubling stuff to consider. Very sad, troubling stuff. When a void needs to be filled with love, but it cannot be because love is confusing, or threatening, or simply not in the plans, then the void will be filled with something else.
I wonder if in Clinton’s profound need to be loved, either by “his public” or his “Bush parents” he is not approaching a place that is very self-destructive. Hate and love are separated by a thin line, and the thin line is often made up of equal parts self-loathing and doubt…
There is just so much more… Read it all.