Of course that's true, and I doubt that there's anyone who is so naive as to believe otherwise.
So maybe I'm one of the few FReepers who think what happened a few weeks ago was either a disgusting show of insincerity or, worse yet, a disgusting show of *sincerity*. But at least I don't have to worry about consistency issues.
I agree that President Bush's speech at the 'library' was disgusting and very hard to listen to. I didn't like it at all. That being said, I suppose I don't attach a lot of anger to it because they are merely words, delivered in the context of an uncomfortable social situation where he really needed to be gracious. To be otherwise would have dominated the news for the next year and distracted him from his work, which is of a far more tangible nature. Yes, he could have delivered a barn-burning speech that ripped Clinton up one side and down the other, but what would have have accomplished for the long term? It would only have given ammunition to the Left, of "Republican hate speech" and who knows what else. As it is now, everybody who knows anything knows that Clinton is worthless and that President Bush was merely trying to be polite. It's over and done with, and the words have evaporated into the air, whereas President Bush is accomplishing great, tangible things that will shape our nation and the world for generations to come.
I think that the President was being consistent in that he's keeping his eye on the ball...focusing on the tangible things and being a courteous and gracious man whenever possible.
The important thing is that he has succeeded in rolling back much of what the Clintons have done, and so at the end of the day what you have is an impeached jerk of an ex-President with a hideously ugly 'library' and the legacy of a criminal versus a good an honorable man who is doing good work for the world.
You're entirely welcome to focus a lot of anger and energy on President Bush's speech....I did too at the time, but I've since moved on and nowadays I find it interesting that Clinton has succeeded in changing the character of that community with little or no scrutiny from the press. If you think that changing street signs for political reasons is irrelevant, that's fine, you're welcome to your opinion.