Tweet
My original title for this post, "Arianna on Big Dog," was abandoned for obvious reasons.
Anyway, Crooks and Liars has a clip of Arianna discussing the Chris Wallace drubbing that Clinton delivered on Fox News today, and she also writes about it here. Amidst the praise that I do believe he deserves for calling out both Fox News and the wingnuts and placing the blame for 9/11 on the apathetic shoulders of George W. Bush, I think Arianna does much to place Clinton’s words and actions in context:
But instead of popping champagne corks, let’s make use of this moment by stepping back and giving it some context. What can we learn from what happened?
More specifically, what can Bill Clinton learn? That the bipartisan love-in he’s been engaged in over the last several years has resulted in jack-squat.
After providing President Bush cover for his disastrous handling of Katrina, after trying to get himself adopted by George Bush, Sr., after giving Laura Bush the keynote slot at his Global Initiative Conference, after going along with Rupert Murdoch’s fundraiser for Hillary — after all that, he got exactly nothing.
It’s quite clear from the content and the passion he showed during the interview that Clinton knows the score. So if he’s aware that Fox News is out to get him, why does his wife do fundraisers with Rupert Murdoch? If he knows that George W. Bush makes us less safe every day by virtue of his actions, why does he consistently provide cover for Commander Codpiece? As Arianna points out — he wants it both ways. And that is entirely problematic.
I’m glad Bill is finally fighting back against the wingnuts who have made his life a living hell since the day he took office, but I think Arianna is right — he needs to stop legitimizing them with the other hand for personal political gain. If he wants to step forward and lead in this particular battle I think that’s great, he’s a natural leader and nobody could draw attention to the critical issues he addresses in his interview like he can. But the fact remains that he’s going to have to show a little more consistency and let his actions match up with his words before people are going to feel good about falling in line behind him.
296 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Jane!!
Kobe!!
Arianna!!
Big Dog!!
And pumpkin muffins for everybody!!
And yes — Big Dog needs to walk the walk, be a REAL progressive. I’ll even settle for communitarian — but no more of this fence-riding. You’d think by now he’d be a bit sore from all that straddling anyhow.
The grassroots are starving for the authentic; every time the authentic surfaces, we race to reach for it like starving souls thrown a scrap of crust. The opposition sees it, changes the subject IMMEDIATELY as they did after the Clinton interview on Faux, by injecting the OBL uncertainty into the media. If the opposition sees it, why don’t our own progressive statesmen see it??
I think if he looked down deeper, he’d realize that it because he lost his grip on the authentic that he was crucified by the VRWC. They can’t compete with the authentic; they don’t understand it.
Fitz! Socks the Cat!
Not sure this is entirely fair. Clinton has tried to play the role of the elder statesman. Obviously that means nothing to the wingnuts, but he’s tried, and judging from his performance today, I’m sure he’s just about fed up, albeit belatedly.
Oh thank you Jane and Arianna– I am one happy progressive reading these words.
This is true and needed to be said.
Hillary, are you listening?
Demz!
While I don’t disagree with Arianna’s point, she was one of those right wingnuts who were criticizing Clinton since the moment he took office.
Shorter what I said in a thread yesterday:
Bush and the RW declared political “war” on Clinton way back when Clinton beat his daddy.
This is Cain/Abel, Jacob/Esau…Bush’s fight for political birthright knotted together with his personal daddy issues…ah’m better than you’m. And the 2006 campaign is just one of Bush’s proxy wars.
It has always been.
So Clinton goes on Faux News, rips Chris Wallace a gaping new asshole, and Ms. Huffington is still pissed off?
Howzabout pointing out all the Dems who have gone on Faux and said absolutely nothing when they had the chance?
Sit down and shut up, Arianna.
dr nobody @ 2
I hope you are right and Clinton is fed up, but the fact of the matter is that his actions have enabled the very people he is lashing out against. It would be great to see an end to that.
dave @ 8
I think her points are valid and she’s deserving of more respect than this.
Clinton is entirely emblematic of what’s wrong with the Democratic party and the progressive movement in general. No balls. Wants to be liked too much. Too beholden to corporate interests who are controlled by REPUKES to be able to really fight for anything that matters.
If you understand about the financial elite (which Clinton is a part of, now) and Saudi oil interests, you’ll understand Clinton can’t step on too many toes because his own day at the trough will be over the minute he does.
If he starts acting, on a DAILY basis, like he did with Chris Wallace today, I’ll change my opinion. But until MORE PEOPLE take on the repukes in the MSM like Bob Schieffer, Tim Russert, George Stephanopoulis, et al, (George is now a repuke. Look at the shit he spews and look at all the time he gives to whores like Cokie Roberts).
We have to attack like a pack of mad dogs. until we can do that, the repukes will remain in power.
Allen’s teammates say he used the n-word regularly back then.
I bet he was making up words then, too.
I don’t think I would ever tell anyone working toward restoring our country and our Constitution and our reputation in the world to sit down and shut up.
Yeah. I got torn to pieces over the last two days making the same point various places. Got called a concern troll. That’s fine, but it didn’t get us anywhere. Clinton should not have trusted Fox. No one should trust Fox.
ferg @
6
Yes, she was. I’m happy she has seen the light, but past performance does matter. Whatever she says should be taken with a big grain of salt.
ferg #6
dave #8
Arianna thrives on sticking knives in people’s backs, regardless.
Beware of Greeks, etc.
Big Dog has given these utter nazis cover for far too long. He could have done much to stop and/or discredit them since their illegal seizure of power in 2k. Now that they need to destroy him to draw attention away from Cheney/Chimpy’s failures, he’s finally pissed. I’ll take it.
Arianna has been true since her conversion. Give her a chance ands don’t be racist.
Sharkbabe: what ever happened to Socks the cat? I used to have a framed official picture of Socks above my cat’s food bowl.
ON the subject. WJC has a compulsive need to be liked and I think he has really bitten his tongue in order to respect the tradition of former presidents not attacking the current pres. I hope..hope he will finally call bullshit on Bush. WJC has an amazing mind and personality and could really help his and our country if he goes on the attack.
Jane Hamsher @ 10
I agree. Clinton needs to do the same thing across the board, not just when his own record is under attack and when the defense he has to make does not impinge on positions Senator Clinton has taken. Biggest problem Dems have is their unreliable/sporadic willingness to challenge the Republicans on national security issues — and his selective silence on that is not helpful.
(You okay, Jane?)
Jane Hamsher @ 10
I disagree. As pointed out above, she took plenty of shots at Clinton when she was on “the other side.”
And Ms. Huffington is plenty snarky with her “adoption” comment… and what does she mean when she says Clinton “got exactly nothing” out of his attempts at “perestroika” with the wingnuts? She should listen to his theories on what he’s trying to do with his Global Warming Initiatives as expressed on Jon Stewart last week.
Does she really think, because Clinton’s been working with Bush Sr. and let Laura Bush speak at his conference, that Clinton thought Faux News would go easy on him? That’s a nitwit idea. I have little doubt Clinton knew exactly what he was getting into when he sat down with Chris Wallace… in fact, I’ll bet he was counting on it.
Ms. Huffington is welcome to her snark, but let’s not pretend it’s anything but, and let’s not get upset because she gets snark in response.
Clinton needs to stand up and fight with us for control of at least one house of congress the next six weeks. It’s infuriating because he is so good at calling BS and throwing their crap right back in their faces.
I’m still angry with him for his fence straddling response to Larry King’s question about the Connecticut Senatorial race…
KING: What do you make of the Lieberman race?
CLINTON: It’s a complicated thing. There were reasons other than Iraq which caused problems, and now it seems to me that there are reasons other than Iraq which are muddying the water there. But, you know …
(CROSSTALK)
CLINTON: …most of the independent voters are against our Iraq policy, but most of the Republican voters are for it. So it just depends on how many Republican votes Joe gets, as opposed to the Republican nominee, and how many independent and Democratic votes Lamont gets. It’s really sort of an unpredictable race.
KING: Are you supporting Lamont?
CLINTON: I am but, you know, my — I don’t have the same view of this as some people do. My view is Connecticut is an unmitigated blessing for the Democrats because Lieberman has said if he wins he’s going to vote with us to organize the Senate.
Quite frankly, I don’t even think what he said made sense, i.e. Lieberman will win if the more Republicans vote for him than Dems and Independents vote for Lamont. But it’s okay if Lieberman wins?
Anyway – I hope he is serious about doing WHATEVER he can do to make sure at least one house goes Dem…
I’m interested in getting one of these houses back, because that’s the only way, I think, we can move away from the philosophical and political and economic direction the country has taken in the last five years. So I’m doing what I can to help the Democrats win the House and the Senate or both.
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRA…..kl.01.html
scarecrow @
20
I’m doing great, scarecrow. Thanks for your fabulous participation on book salon today, it was duly noted and appreciated.
Bill is walking on a tight rope trying to position his wife as a moderate for her presidential run. Conservatives don’t see that rope as a rope at all. They see it as a major dagger and they are pointing it right back at the Clintons.
The Clintons will NEVER be accepted by the Republicans.
Those of you who remember me from Friday night when I was a tad ‘over the top’ (right on, redshift, I was over the top); this was my initial post in that thread:
I’m glad to know that others worry about this as evidenced by this thread. But I also need to go into self-impose lurk mode for tonight lest I get worked up again.
Listening, learning, and loving FDL. Night all.
Come on people, for an ex-president to criticise a sitting president in any way is a huge deal. It is the third rail of ex-presidentitude. He is bound by traditition. A bullshit tradition, but one nonetheless.
To say he’s “given cover” to these neocons is just bullshit.
Clinton did well in the interview, but walking into an ambush still means someone screwed up.
Good intelligence allows us to avoid this sort of thing.
I couldn’t be happier that Big Dog ripped that little weasel Chris Wallace a new one. As for Rupert Murdoch and Laura Bush being at his Global Initiative Conference, jeeze, big deal, so what. He’s not President anymore. If “they” want to get on board with his Global Initiative goals, more power to them.
I watched Fox for the second time ever today just to see the big dog fly once again. Chris Wallace, well, does fox by makeup by the pound and could breathing that stuff cause political blindness?
The round table discussion afterward was as disgusting as one could imagine. When the torture issue was raised and Juan from NPR managed to slip a bit of truth in Brit Fumed demanded the issue be removed from the table and it was. Nothing to discuss here folks it’s all good.
SOB’s
The Big Dog is playing chess. Everyone else is playing checkers. By reaching out to 41 and Laura, he is cleverly and clearly isolating and exposing w. for the outlier he is.
As far as Rupert, who knows, down the road this might pay dividends. I don’t think FOX will ever be an organ of the left or even fair and balanced, but it might moderate a bit. In the mean time, his money will spend as well as anyone’s for good projects.
dave @ 21
If you read Christy this morning or me yesterday, you will know that according to Jay Carney, Clinton’s press secretary, Clinton got completely sandbagged and was both taken by surprise and plenty pissed. So unless you’d like to advance the argument that he’s lying through his teeth, I think there is a big, big hole in your central thesis.
I think Arianna says/writes things that need to be considered and listened to, but when she’s talking quickly her accent/articulation is sometimes a bit hard to comprehend (at first).
I did have to listen to that clip twice to fully understand her (to get used to her pronunciation). I think if she’d speak just a little bit slower it might help.
(I also realize these shows give limited time to reponses, so if one has a point to make you’d better speak quickly to get everything in.)
Now, for me, I want to know exactly what she’s saying. However, a viewer who hasn’t listened to her much before might just tune her out if they can’t understand her accent in the first sentence or so. Thus her contribution, for some, becomes moot and they ignore what she is saying.
#30,
Fox will never moderate. It is right-wing wacko all the way and forever.
Jane Hamsher @
31
I’ll be honest – I doubt that.
I don’t think it’s a “central thesis” however – the central thesis is, does Huffington think Clinton thinks by working with the wingnuts on his projects – in the way nearly all ex-presidents have worked with “opposing” sides – they’re going to go “easy” on him.
I don’t believe that for a minute.
Sharkbabe @ 17
Sharkebabe, I’m with you. What Clinton did in this interview is sooooooo much more than we’ve seen from any DEM in recent history that it (almost) got me out of the funk of I’ve been in for days. Would that our Democratic leaders in Congress would take note.
But beyond the cathartic rush of seeing Clinton actually defend his record is the fact that he actually set the record straight and he didn’t cave.
To me that’s the message to the Beltway elite — a message I’ve been preaching here for the last couple of weeks. Cave and you’re toast. Call them on their bullsh*t and make the Rethugs dance.
‘tr
dr nobody @
26
It’s a tradition that’s gone on FAR too long. Clinton has raised his arse for penetration by the Bushies, just like his goddamed wife did. They are both TRAITORS. I’m so FUCKING SICK of this bullshit.
If you don’t fight evil, especially when you’re in a position like WJC, you ARE evil. Bill has not fought evil. Ergo, he is evil. If he consistently goes on the attack like he did today, I might change my opinion, but until then, he’s a traitor to his party, every bit as much as that motherfucking Lieberman.
It’s as simple as that.
dr nobody @ 26
Please explain how he is “bound by tradition” to have Hillary accept a fundraiser from Rupert Murdoch.
I don’t think one single instance that Arianna cites involves a simple failure to criticize. They are actions, none of which “tradition” compels him to take.
The psychodynamics of this whole situation are about as rich and deep as it gets. But the fact remains, Clinton is intelligent, articulate, highly educated and a former President of the United States. And he still lights up the right wing like a Christmas tree. I was appalled at the way Chris Wallace completely shined him on given the fact that he was POTUS. You don’t see that happen much. But the true colors came out, and I’m not surprised at how Fox played it given how Clinton blew the varnish off his Wallace’s teeth.
I keep thinking about the statement Arianna made here the other day about Hillary. About how she wants to be accepted and reeks of fear. That’s one factor in Bill’s chokehold. It’s also just the simple fact that triangulation has been their meat and potatoes and survival tactic for so many years.
I’m encouraged by his breakout, and appreciate what Arianna has to say about it all. Let’s see if the dems recognize the price they have also paid to get along with these sociopaths.
well, the good news is: Bill is getting LOTS of airplay – even on the local news… the only station that has edited the tape in a wierd way (oh, I bet you can guess!) was the ABC news… looks like they used the Fox “unhinged” promo tape… CBS and NBC have played enough of the tape that there is some context…
I have to agree, Clinton’s wife had a fundraiser by Murdoch and Bill “went along.”
Obviously, being a woman, his wife, the US Senator, isn;t responsible for that.
Bill should have forbade it, like a real man. And if she was going to go ahead anyway, he should have grabbed her by the hair and dragged her out to the car.
Yeah.
Dems are constantly sandbagged on these bobble head shows. It’s high time they all learned to react exactly like Clinton did. I don’t think that’s too much to ask.
Keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer. At least that’s what they say in certain parts of Brooklyn. Clinton is many things, but not stupid. As witnessed on Fox, he knows when to draw the line in BOLD. As for cover for Katrina, no, he could hardly refuse to respond to Bush’s request. I’d like to think he did that for all the right reasons. If he is sincere in his effort to bring people together to remedy the world’s problems, it is win/win. The world doesn’t need politics all the time. The other side may do it that way, but it doesn’t make it attractive. Let reductionism be their game, Bill Clinton is a bigger man than that. Nobody is fooling him, and I don’t think he’ll change his ways.
dr nobody @ 26
Yes traditions are important and we should respect them. Thinks like not lying the country into unnecessary wars or attacking countries that don’t present a threat to us. Or adhering to the constitution, and obeying the laws, and honoring the Geneva Conventions and International agreements against war crimes; and working cooperatively with congress and not branding the loyal opposition as traitors and appeasers. There are lots of traditions that should be followed.
When these get respected, President Clinton can apply for statesman of the century and introduce Laura Bush to the village square dance. Until then, you don’t enable a lawless regime.
Sharkbabe @ 17
It is indeed gratifying to see him give it Wallace with both barrels, it seems that he was more concerned with protecting his “legacy” than actually fighting the rightwingers
Jane Hamsher @ 37
Somehow I doubt that Hillary sought, or needed, his approval for that.
right now, I’ll take whatever I can get… until these bastards are out of office, anyone who stands up to ‘em gets my support
scarecrow @
43
A-friggin-men, scarecrow.
I remember Clinton saying on Jon Stewart that (paraphrasing) he wants to treat the opposition as decent people and disagree with them when it’s appropriate.
The problem, Mr. Clinton, is that you have to realize that quite a few of the opposition *aren’t decent people*!! They’ll either screw you six ways to Sunday right off, or they’ll make nice-nice while stabbing you in the back!
I’ll take Arianna anyday … she’s dedicated a lot to build an alternative to the koolaid media and I respect actions over words.
Clinton was never a progressive – didn’t ever pretend to be one. His approach was “the third way” – not so different from the McCain, Bloomberg, etc rumours seen nowadays. It’s an approach that dismissed progressives and moved the game board to the center.
“As Arianna points out — he wants it both ways/”
That’s Clinton; his strength and weakness. Sometimes he gets it and why would anyone expect him to stop now.
Besides, if he was adopted by George the first he would be a sibling of George the second. Freedom to give a noogie might save the country.
#42,
Clinton does do things for the right reasons, but he still thinks rules of decorum apply. The Regressives are savages (sorry to be blunt) and one needs to anticipate the uncivilized behavior.
Uh…okay…but when Bill Clinton was President, was Arianna a Democrat or a Republican?
I get so confused.
dr nobody @ 15
Is there no room for redemption, for forgiveness, for welcome arms when people see the truth and come to a new understanding?
We are going to need several million of them, including hopefully a lot of powerful people, in order to turn this nation around.
Do not scorn their gradual turn towards the truth. Honor this. It is deeply embarrassing for many, especially men. Shameful to realize you have been on the wrong side morally.
I say welcome them with love and with open arms. WE NEED THEM.
*****NONE***** of the opposition are decent people. Not one fucking soul. They are ALL EVIL. Y’all better get that through your thick skulls.
Sigh…we’re going to lose again. Shit.
Suicide is looking like a better option.
I would like to send Bill a bumpersticker like mine:
“Bipartisan? Sure. I’ll hug your elephant and you kiss my ass”
dr nobody @ 26
I don’t know… I think Carter has been pretty blunt, thank God. Do you really think WJC should be quiet about torture, about Iraq, about wiretapping, about a march toward God knows what form of government?
I think his “statesmanship” has a lot to do with his wife’s political ambitions.
We’ve had lots of discussions over the past week about morality vs. politics, about “doing the right thing” vs winning an election. I think it’s fair to discuss Clinton in this context. We’re Sisyphus trying to roll a rock to the top of the mountain – and he could make that struggle a lot easier.
OT but on the subject of fighting back without fear..sounds like Tester gutted Burns in the debate.
dr nobody @ 45
If you are proceeding from the idea that they do not work in tandem I believe I have to disagree. As Digby says, they now have the ability to be one person working as two — Clinton can work the levers for Lieberman while Hillary comes out in support of Lamont, and whoever wins, they’ve got their bases covered. And if anything goes wrong, well, they’re not responsible for each others’ actions, but quite ready to reap the rewards if it’s a success.
There’s nothing wrong with that, it’s a legitimate political tactic. But to think that they are entirely separate nation states is to give that game a bit more latitude and freedom from responsibility than it deserves.
#55,
Where did you get that one?
I want one too.
SusanD @ 55
ohmygod, I have to have one of these bumper stickers. Please let me know where you got it.
I happen to think that Clinton was a great president who had an affair and got busted. I also know that he loves America. I’ll bet there are a lot of Republican Senators who have had affairs. Under our constitution, bills of rights, the Geneva Conventions, etc. they do not love our America.
Clinton may have lied about his affair, but today, he told Wallace the truth and Wallace would not acknowledge his truth. The only way for Wallace to prove it was not an attack, is to have Bush on the show next week and ask him the same questions.
***
This is wierd….
Guantanamo returnees to be freed during Ramadan
The United States this year sent 29 Saudis home after negotiating a framework agreement with Saudi Arabia for the return of its citizens from the controversial prison.
”All those detainees who came back from Guantanamo are being released for the whole month of Ramadan, to fast Ramadan with their families and celebrate Eid with their families,” Interior Minister spokesman Mansour al-Turki said.
“They will be back after Eid to complete the related procedures,” he said, adding they were serving various sentences. The Muslim fasting month of Ramadan begins this weekend and is followed by the Eid Al Fitr holiday.
Turki said the authorities had already released some over the past month to spend several days with their families in a programme he described as a success.
http://english.alarabonline.or…..=200699-23zalsoz923.htm&dismode=x&ts=23/09/2006 12:09:37
The bipartisan sticker comes from an online company called Northern Sun. Don’t have the link handy, but will look for it.
It’s not about welcoming former Republicans with open arms. A change of mind is a wonderful thing.
But here’s Arianna, who just recently switched sides basically, calling out Bill Clinton for giving too much consideration to the people she just recently supported.
It’s way beyond hypocrisy.
OldCoastie @ 39
ABC has always shown the most rightward bias of the broadcast networks. And they are not particuarly sutble about it.
We’ve had lots of discussions over the past week about morality vs. politics, about “doing the right thing” vs winning an election. I think it’s fair to discuss Clinton in this context. We’re Sisyphus trying to roll a rock to the top of the mountain – and he could make that struggle a lot easier.
I think she offers an nice critique of the situation.
I agree with her points. I’m glad she said what I had been thinking. She’s a strong voice for the change that we need in politics. Her critique opens the door to dialogue about how to move forward to a stronger position and she has the platform to be heard.
OT from Editor and Publisher,
That is one hell of a message to send to the families of the 2695 American dead and 19,945 wounded. Your sons and daughters, husbands and wives, died for a comma. Way to go, Bush.
This sentence saves tonight’s post:
Without it, the label “concern troll” comes to mind. With it, Jane hits the mark exactly, in my book.
Clinton can take care of himself, and he’s earned his stars. He doesn’t need any of us to tell him how to operate. But we are the citizens he might be trying to reach, and it is completely fair to tell him that if he really wants to reach us, then consistency is what we are looking for.
I think we’ll be able to tell whether he was trying to reach us (and help the Democrats in this election cycle) or the ditto-heads (and protect his legacy) in the next few weeks. I’m ready to get in line if he is ready to admit that triangulating with El Diablo makes no sense.
Okay, I misquoted it slightly (it’s on the back of my truck where I don’t see it often). It’s :
“Bipartisanship: I’ll hug your elephant if you kiss my ass”.
Carried at http://www.northernsun.com
By the way, Fred Hiatt is endorsing Lieberman, again.
Fred loves that Iraq War, but is squeamish about shrub’s torcher programs.
Fred disgusts me, I’m trying to sum it all up in this letter to the editor (the WaPo might not publish it, but I can, thanks to the tubez!).
Anyone have suggestions? I know already there is one happy freddy purple thumbs editorial that needs to be thrown back in his face.
Arianna got it right. While Clinton’s smack down of smarmy Wallace was well done, Clinton shouldn’t have been a bit surprised by the Faux-attack dog.
You would think that by now Democrats would have learned the republican version of bipartisanship–Dems just need to ask “How High?” when the GOP tells them to jump. And in Bill Clinton’s case, it means always having to say “I’m Sorry”…
bill clinton has always been part of the problem. he just looks so much better now in comparison tto the evil fascists we now have in power. and of course we need any help we can get and Clinton has such potential if he only had a heart and a spine.
maggie s. @
65
He won’t. Too many conflicting interests. He might, if Hilary divorced him but otherwise, forget it. He will not help us.
Northern Sun bumper stickers
http://tinyurl.com/qb8y9
1,269 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen Hamsher:
If Al Gore had unleashed Big Dawg in 2000 at least in Florida and Tennessee, the margin would not have been close enough to steal. And we now know that the same folks who created the DLC and stuffed Joltin’ Joe Lieberlier down Connectecutt’s throat hold the Dawg’s leash and pull Hillary’s strings…so let’s cut our psychological dependence on Clinton and not wait for ‘im to lead us anywhere. Let’s go in an entirely different direction and leave Hillary to fight it out for the GOP nomination in ‘08.
Let’s get real here…the fascists have only the ghost of Bill Clinton to blame for the reality they have created. Let ‘em use their resources in that way, in the meantime the die is cast for this November, they have nowhere ta hide and Clinton ain’t gunna give ‘em anymore cover. And for God’s sake somebody please tell Hillary that her game will only play on Republican turf!
KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION, ALL THEY GOT IS THE MONEY AND THEY’LL LOSE THAT BEFORE THE NEW YEAR!!!
I really don’t care who critizes this regime. All’s fair and anything goes. That includes Chavez and anyone else who has been impacted by these monsters.
Bushco broke the old model the moment they stole the Presidency and opened their mouths.
axis of evil, my a**.
Folks need to go back and really look at Clinton’s policies in office – there’s this aura that he was some kind of wonderful democrat – completely missing the anti-progressive analysis that formed his entire career and led to the establishment of all the Dems we fight against now. Giving the “big dog” a pass while trying to oust his buddies is missing how they got there.
Siun #49 — I’d sure hope by now Big Dog has disabused himself of the notion that the Third Way was viable once the right-wing pack of jackals took office.
And I sure hope HRC is clueing in.
Guitar Playing Bastard @ 73
sorry, that wasn’t my comment – I messed up with the quote.
Siun @ 77
absolutely.
drouse @
64
Heard a CBS News Radio report on it earlier today… they played a whole lot of excerpts of Clinton pointing out the “failures” of the “right wing” and the “neocons” before playing, at the very end, the quote about “I tried and failed”… but then they ended with “At least I tried – (Bush) didn’t even try”.
That came from the network, btw… heard it twice in one hour.
ifthethunderdontgetya @ 70
Here’s a suggeestion: Ned Lamont’s letter to Lieberman asking him to respond to the NIE assessment wrt Iraq is in a David Sirota post at dkos. You can use the spotlight link that Mark gave us to spotlight the sirota post with the Lamont letter to every political reporter at the Washington Post. Oh, and don’t forget to send a courtesy copy to Fred. I know he’ll appreciate it.
Guitar Playing Bastard @ 54
No, No, and No.
No #1. There ARE decent people in the opposition, and we are winning them over to our side more and more.
No #2. We are NOT going to lose again. There is unprecedented energy in House and Senate races. Keep up the momentum, not a done deal yet.
No #3. You owe it to your children, grandchildren, nieces and nephews, and neighbor children, to fight as hard as you can. YOU understand what is happening; they do not. They will be the bewildered survivors of the ruins of this nation. Get in line to be suicidal here, but duty is an over-riding goal. We live not for ourselves alone. Despite your pain, which I honor, you OWE it to them to keep fighting until you drop. Good God, man, hae ye no Scottish, Irish, or Welsh blood in ye?
FIGHT!!! SAVE THE CHILDREN!!!
@72 I don’t understand WJC even-though I have followed his career for more than 25 years. The one thing I do know, is that he has heart and spine. I know of no other political or public person who could have survived the 10-15 years of attacks funded by Mellon-Scaife.
What’s interesting about this discussion is the fact that over the past few days, scores of fdlers (including yours truly) have expressed feelings ranging from fury to despair that Dems in Congress have been missing in action on the torture issue.
Yet the one Democrat who clearly voiced his views was — Clinton. So, yes, he’s reached out, at different times, in different ways, to those on the other side. But unlike Frist, Cornyn, McCain, Graham, Lieberman, et al, he’s nobody’s toadie.
Former President Clinton Speaks Out Against White House Terror Legislation
By VOA News
21 September 2006
Former U.S. President Bill Clinton has voiced his opposition to anti-terrorism legislation backed by the White House, saying it would be wrong to approve torture for terrorism suspects.
Mr. Clinton’s comments were broadcast on U.S. radio Thursday, from an interview taped a day earlier. He was referring to President Bush’s proposal before the Senate to narrowly define international standards of treatment for prisoners. The plan would allow intelligence agents to use more aggressive interrogation methods for terror suspects.
Mr. Clinton said such legislation could institutionalize prisoner abuse. He warned that information obtained under such pressure could be unreliable, and he noted that other countries could then justify similar treatment for U.S. troops.
Both the House of Representatives and the Senate are considering President Bush’s legislation.
A House panel on Wednesday reversed itself and endorsed the plan. But the Senate Armed Services Committee has rejected Mr. Bush’s proposal in favor of one that gives prisoners more legal rights.
Slothrop @ 63
Then what about me? I sat there during the impeachment hearings alternating between crying for what was happening to the constitution and cheering on the Congressional Black Caucus.
It’s a pretty standard right-wing tactic to deny a critic the right to have an opinion rather than address the substance of the argument. And I think her points are valid. I do not know why I would reject her right to share them with me.
83,
I really like that. Not to me, but I feel inspired anyway.
Siun @ 77:
I agree. He lost me in 96. This is an interesting moment precisely because he might be giving signals out that he has realigned. Viewed from that angle, it is kind of nice to have Arianna, who knows something about realignment, to give him some tips.
If he keeps walking in this direction, I’ll be pleased. I’m not really expecting that he’ll be able to resist triangulating — because in his interviews this week, talking about what it is like to not be the president, he basically said that he doesn’t have to be responsible for the whole ship, so he can be his own man, and yet, he isn’t getting out in front. I’m not convinced yet. Need to see more before I’ll bite.
Jeez, I know everyone thinks Clinton has a magic wand, but really he doesn’t. Sometimes he even has feet of clay. Let’s not hang him without a trial, that’s what the opposition wants to do. Remember?
Siun @ 77
Yes, Siun. And then there’s executing the retarded.
“President Bill Clinton has Ricky Ray Rector’s death on his conscience. Rector, mentally defective due to a lobotomy, was put to death in Arkansas when Clinton, then the state’s governor, rushed back to Little Rock and oversaw his execution in the midst of the Democratic primary campaign in January 1992. This was a transparent attempt to prove his toughness on crime.”
Most of the link proves what a scumbag shrub is.
But there’s plenty of blame to share. I’d like to think Clinton is going to come round to seeing who the real enemy is, and doing what he can do about it. Now.
alittlemusicalityplease @ 85
And he should absolutely be commended for that. This isn’t a “bash Bill Clinton” session.
Greg Sargent had a wonderful quote about how David Broder only valued the theatrics of the supposed “centrism” of Joe Lieberman and John McCain when their actions betray that they are quite clearly nothing of the sort. The “theatrics”of the Fox appearance were superb. They’ve valuable. And I think that where you went skidding on the ice yesterday, Balrog, was when you tried to argue that they weren’t and folks disagreed with you.
Arianna was cheering Clinton on too, please see the article and the video. So was I. All anybody is asking is that the “theatrics” (and I mean that in a good way — don’t mistake me) get backed up with substance.
Did Arianna have anything to say about the impeachement, Jane — since she was a Republican during that period? Did she raise her voice then about it?
Where was the fearlessness back then when it really counted?
afterthought @ 87
Assuming you mean me I thank you. All encouragement helps.
Obviously there are a few here that don’t like Clinton now, and never did. Is Arianna in that category? I think that’s a fair question
One thing I believe Bill Clinton does owe America an apology for is his signing of the 1996 Telecommunications Act. By authorizing rampant media consolidation subject to FCC approval, it made the media not only more powerful but more beholden to the White House simply by increasing their potential upside.
The PT9/11 defamation and his Fox interview mark Clinton as a victim of a monster he helped create. This is not to call it fair comeuppance, since we all bear the cost. But what a step it would be for him to admit this mistake and lament what it’s given rise to, in the very thick of a campaign.
I was half-expecting Clinton to sue ABC over the docudrama. Apparently he decided not to. So be it. But he remains in high regard, and if he used his bully pulpit with no personal gain to be had and if he spoke in measured terms, he might help inoculate the public against what will surely be hitting it in the weeks ahead.
Steve @ 84
i should have said “good heart” just because wjc survived the right wing attacks does not mean his POLICIES are good. if he helps now, good…. but we’re fooling ourselves if we think je’s going to do our work for us. and BTW, rwanda, lanny gunier, executing a retarded person, omnibus crime bill, health care failures, come onnnnn
I think it’s fair to say that what has occurred in our country over the course of our lives brings us all to a point where some people just evolved and switched loyalties out of the sheer horror that has been foisted upon us most recently.
I don’t blame one of these now kindred souls for their prior views– heck I meet people all the time that have sworn off the republicans forever thanks to bushco. I have a real problem with those that cannot or will not see.
This is our opportunity and I want all of them in our tent.
Clinton’s support of Lieberman, Rayne, shows that he’s still playing the same game.
Remember that under Clinton, up to half a million Iraqi children died due to sanctions and his sec of state said “the price is worth it” …
Slothrop @ 92
What’s your point? Do you want to send her back to the GOP? What exactly does this have to do with the opinions expressed in either her post or mine?
All I can see is an attempt to de-legitimze her opinions by de-legitimizing her for things that have nothing to do with the central argument, and that strikes me as being in bad faith.
Slothrop @ 92
Slothrop my dear, and I miss your son, I love you guys. But can we please stop the friendly fire? Stop shooting at our own troops, there is a war on, which we might very well lose.
Line up, gird your loins, and aim at the enemy. We might not have another chance.
If we survive this one, then we can spend some time around the campfire arguing over who was purer earlier. Til then , pick up your weapons and FIGHT!!!!
#98 Siun,
Maybe it is time to look forward.
I am not defending sanctions, but the misery bestowed upon Iraq by Chimpy McCodpiece is far worse.
It is the curse that keeps giving.
So, Clinton will defend himself and his legacy. That’s how I read the event. Will he step up for “us”? I doubt it. It’s one thing to defend ones’ self when attacked. It’s quite another to go on the offensive, and start saying things that “shouldn’t be said” about the criminal BushCo. regime. I think Bill and Hill have a deal, spoken or not, and are basically two peas in a pod. Bill wants his legacy intact, and Hill wants to be President. Personal power, “politics”, and funding for Hill at this point trumps anything else.
Jane Hamsher @
58
yes yes yes.
egregious @
83
#1. Name some.
2. I’ll bet you $100 we lose and get another eight years of Neocon in 2008.
3. I have no children, and if you knew me, the LAST thing you’d do is use THAT appeal. I ain’t a kid person, so that line of “reasoning” won’t work. You shoud have said “cats.” I’m an animal person. Sorry.
I’ll tell you what it feels like – and while this analogy may seem trivial, it’s pretty illustrative.
I’m a big fan of the San Francisco 49ers. For a long time, more than 20 years, they were riding high (analagous to the Clinton years in many ways). They won five Super Bowls. Life was good.
Then the ownership, (Eddie Debartolo in this case) was forced out (Clinton was by term limits but the result was the same). The Niners started losing. And they’ve kept on losing.
Last week, they beat the hated Rams, a traditional rival. Nice win. Felt good.
Today they played the Philadelphia Eagles. Damn good team. The beat the Niners up pretty badly, but the Niners made some good plays. Still, in the end, they lost. Beat themselves with turnovers. There is hope for next year, maybe, but for now, they’re going to mostly lose.
This is how the Dems have been since the coup d’tat took place in 2000. They have been losers for a long, long time. Yeah, we beat that pseudo repuke Lieberman in CT, kinda like the Niners beating ass on the Rams.
But in the larger arena, I see nothing to give me hope, no big plays being made by an overachieving defense, no heroics by an inexperienced but damned plucky QB. Lieberman is going to win the general in CT (I’ll eat crow if I’m wrong, but I’m not) and the Dems in the senate will welcome his Benedict Arnold ass back into the DLC with open fucking arms.
We are plucky, improving. But honestly, in the 15-20 years of life I may have left, I see nothing to give me a shred of hope we’ll see a progressive USA. 20 more years of this is what I see and honestly, I do indeed question whether life in that is worth living. I don’t have a gun at my head or a bottle of pills in my hand, but I’ve always believed life was worth living when I could live on my terms. Quality of life.
doG help me, I’ll be pleased as punch to have you lambast me on election night if I’m wrong, but there just doesn’t seem to be any FIGHT in progressives. I mean get-down-and-dirty, kick the motherfuckers in the balls, cut their eyes out with a switchblade FIGHT. I know that sounds harsh but we are dealing with an enemy (every republican is not just “the opposition,” they are THE ENEMY, and need to be vanquished, if not destroyed) and we MUST take the fight to them on their terms…evil, dirty stab them in the back fighting,. because they will do that to us. And as long as we wave peace flags and TALK about taking the high road, we will lose.
So, yes, I believe we will lose because we are not willing to fight dirty enough.
#102 fab,
Clinton defending his actions WRT Osama is not so much legacy as truth. If you let Fox take the truth we will all be lost.
Maybe there are mixed loyalties, but for him to stand up helps us all.
If only the Dems would stand up to the Joe Stalin Torture and Gulag agreement.
Big Dog started caving the moment he took office, see eg, gays in the military, and showed no spine at any time. If he comes around fine, and he sure looks good compared to raving lunatic we have now, but I would not trust him to do anything requiring any real balls. I’m reminded of an old lawyer who told me that he’d rather be respected than liked, and too many of our Dems prefer the reverse.
Although a lot of people may try to revise his history, Bill Clinton is all we’ve got to celebrate. I don’t know how anyone survives this modern world when you are in the number one leadership role there is.
Isn’t it remarkable how this man survived even though he was hung in effigy every Sunday by the talking heads and every working day by Republicans everywhere.
Look at his record again in those circumstances and you just may think again about viewing him so harshly.
Siun @ 98
I don’t think Clinton was a perfect president, nor a perfect human being by any stretch of the imagination. But on many issues I think he “GOT IT.”
Terrorism is one of those issues. (And isn’t that the in-your-face-issue today?) Just look at his Omnibus Terrorism Bill of 1995, which so many Republican senators criticized as “totalitarian” in scope because it contained provisions for expanded surveillance and following the money.
Seems to me a key point of this discussion should be that Clinton was out in front of this issue and hasn’t wavered.
fab @ 102
I’m not sure about this. I feel we are on the precipe of a plunge into fascism. And anyone we can get on our side is someone we need. Jim Webb in Virginia is a good example. He’s got some blameworthy baggage, but if he can beat Senator Macaca, we’re all better off.
Let’s not just lie down and cry a month before November’s elections, because that would make Rove happy. I believe our jobs as citizens is to make Rove sad.
Ah, vanity…vanity…vanity.,.and more endless vanity. In spite of all his strengths Bill Clinton’s deep weakness for social class seems to get in the way. As hard as this is to believe, the problem might be as simple as that and makes the man in a basic way unreliable. He will never take sides against the Bushs, never, because it isn’t ‘civil’ and they’re ‘nice people’.
Glory Halleluya!
Somebody, more than jes one too, has finally woken up to the fact that the ‘Big Dog’ and his wife are not very progressive. That Big Dog is one of the main reasons we got us a ‘Dumbya’ in the W.H….that the Democrat Party and the ReThuglican Party are the same party; the party of….
Money!
Now les git down to work and elect some real progressives to Congress and…
Drive the Republicans and their Democrat Buddies into the Sea!
’stead of swooning over a guy what fucked up his chance to be a great president.
By the by, Jane, thank you for this very eloquent rebuttal to those who might have been concerned that your attendance at the Clinton blogolunch constituted some kind of buy into the system.
Damn Jane, you sure took a bat to the hornet’s nest tonight!
A.Citizen @ 111
amen
I have to say I agree with GPB at 104. We are bringing a knife to a gun fight. I was heavily involved in the Vietnam protests in the late 60s at Berkeley, and we were on the streets everyday, now we have polite chats in cyberspace. To the barricades firepups.
I just was reminded of how nice it was to have a President that could string five words together, to make a complete sentence.
Twisted Martini @ 113
LOL
If Clinton takes on Bush on trying to co-opt national security, I’ll will cheer him on. If he dissembles on Iraq, as he did in Connecticut, I have to oppose him. This is not all one or the other.
Bill Clinton did us a huge disservice in Connecticut. He did not have to interene in the primary, but he did, and in a big way. He campaigned all over the state and allowed himself to be used in ads and phone recordings that went to every Democrat in that final week. His intervention stopped Lamont’s momentum that final week and significantly closed the gap between Lamont and Lieberman. The result was a race much closer than we wanted, and it allowed Lieberman to make the argument to supporters and contributors that he could pull off an independent candidacy. A wider margin would have knocked Lieberman out.
In the process of supporting Lieberman, Clinton told Connecticut voters that they should put aside their differences on Iraq, because there were other issues. True, but he told them not to base their vote on Iraq. In saying that, he didn’t just hurt Lamont, he hurt Democrats all over the country who are trying to run against Bush and their opponent’s support for Bush and the war.
The Bid Dawg owes us big time for that one, and I haven’t heard nearly enough to make up for it. Indeed, in claiming that we shouldn’t worry about Lieberman vs Lamont, because either way we get a Dem ignores that on the two issues most important to me — (1) how will you vote on the next war (with Iran)? and (2) how would you vote on the next judicial appointments? Lieberman is the same as a Republican vote. For Clinton to pretend this is not true is disingenuous.
The Fox News smackdown was great. I cheered for Bill every minute, because in those few minutes, he was not just protecting his own record, he was fighting our fight too. I want him fighting the rest of our fight, not just the part about his record that just so happens to be consistent with Senator Clinton’s own positions. You want my support, you hang in there for the whole war, not just the battles you want.
jinny @ 74
I like the sticker: “Your silence will not protect you”
Clinton has a long-standing reputation (from well before he was president) for treating his enemies better than they deserve.
He also has an equally long-standing reputation for furious outbursts in which he shows that he knows exactly what their game is.
Arianna’s points (and Jane’s) are well taken, but I wouldn’t expect either of these traits to change at this point. He is who he is.
The Big Dog is playing chess. Everyone else is playing checkers. By reaching out to 41 and Laura, he is cleverly and clearly isolating and exposing w. for the outlier he is.
As far as Rupert, who knows, down the road this might pay dividends.
This is nonsense, another contortion to put a strategic face on Clinton’s obvious cowardice over the past couple of years. Just contrast the speeches Al Gore’s given over the past 2 years indicting this administration, and Jimmy Carter’s frequent speaking out (he wrote a book about it), and you know all you need to know about Bill Clinton. He’s playing it safe while the country (and the Constitution) are trashed.
Nothing can excuse his silence. We’re way into indelible damage, on every single front, to the basic fabric of American society. It will take a generation or two to repair, if that’s even possible. America may find itself in eclipse. But Bill Clinton will prosper (as he tells us often enough).
It’s unconscionable. Especially if you posit that he’s trying to protect the political viability – remember that phrase from his past? – of his wife.
petedownunder @ 115
I don’t agree with GPB, because it sounds too much like lie down and surrender. F That!
Bill Clinton was the best Republican president since Eisenhower.
Sharkbabe,
you were wondering what happened to Socks the First Cat?
GPB said
You are right. We have a bunch of bullys in our midst and they will respond to one of two things. A punch right in the kisser or jail time and we are not ready to deliver either one.
scarecrow @ 118– that goes for Bill, Hill and all the rest of the Dems.
Tell me please, who in America is going to be worse off, less cared about, less safe, less happy and less healthy with a true progressive in charge?
nobody.
ifthethunderdontgetya- I agree with your first comments. However, I was giving my own assessment as to the likelihood that we could count on Clinton to go into attack BushCo. mode, henceforth. Good for him for coming back at Wallace. But, I doubt that he will do anything “radical” to stop “the plunge into fascism.” And, BTW, I’m not lying down and crying- I don’t know what I said that gave you that idea.
Also, Bill Clinton’s “genius” in his first two years in office is how we got a Republican Congress in the first place. Thanks Bill!
maggie s. @ 79
It was mine – I mess up on this quoting thing all the time. It’s hard when you want to use only a portion of someone’s previous comments.
ifthethunderdontgetya @
122
I am NOT about lay down and surrender at ALL. It’s what you Volvo-circuit “progressives” have been about since Carter was elected. If *I* were king of the forest, the use of the word “bipartisanship” in any format, would be grounds for summary execution. We have to FIGHT, we have to be as dirty and evil as they are. Once we WIN, we can raise the level of discourse but until people Like Jane Hamsher and other high-profile “progressives” rebuff the Big Dog, it’s all a mixed message.
Had I been in Jane Hamsher’s shoes, I’d have said “I won’t meet with you because you endorsed Lieberman.”
I haven’t heard about anyone asking any tough questions during the meet with Clinton so I have to believe none were asked.
We have to let those who would betray us, and both Clintons fall into that category, fall away like so much flotsam. We have to DEMAND proper positions from so-called “progressives” and we must demand they fight as nasty as our enemies. If they don’t, every one of my predictions will come true. Believe it. I’ll be here election night to tell you “I told you guys…”
well said everyone. at this point, talking about clinton is just jerking-off.
focus on the fact that bush and company are no less than war criminals and devils in the true sense of the word. it’s so typical that we accept bush’ use of the word evil. Goebbels had nothing nothing on these guys. Every time someone mentions bush they should mention at least one of his seriously criminal acts.
and his party are more than rubber-stampers, they have enabled atrocities in much of the world. let’s not get sidetracked by clinton, he’s not the issue or the answer.
In times of desperation, I do not insist on perfect allies, only effective ones.
GuitarPB – you are really out of line in your comments above, making nasty little comments about the participants here and making assumptions about what Jane may or may not have said in that meeting. It may fit nicely into your “I’m the only one fighting hard enough” mindset but it disrespects the very serious and continous work that so many here are doing to stop the madness.
bdu @
12
Uh, first time poster here, uh, I think this needs full attention from all you FighterDockLikers.
We need to save Sen. Macac-er-Allen’s name here!
Back to lurk, engaging in self criticism…
BBQueen – You have a good point.
HOWEVER, there has to be a trend among ppregressives, to fight hard and dirty. Yeah, I know, I’m a broken record but look how many “progressives” went to meet with Clinton, when he is an OBVIOUS traitor to anything progressive.
We have to adopt a certain level of ideological puritanism because without that, we are betrayed by people who see a path of least resistance to wealth at the trough of Saudi oil by engaging in the kind of betrayal the Clintons have.
doG help me, I hope the Dems aren’t STUPID ENOUGH to nominate Hilary. I’ve never abstained in an election but that might force me to. There would be no lesser of two evils to vote for.
scarecrow @118 – you nailed it! What Clinton did in Connecticut was almost unforgivable. I was trying to move on in the hopes that he would do the right thing this fall, but his response to Larry King got me angry all over again.
He.still.doesn’t.get.it.
By the standards that people are using to judge WJC, no president has been worth a shit since Honest Abe. FDR most of his social programs were flawed,and he locked up a few Japanese Americans. HST poorly thought of when president and nuked Japan. JFK hid chronic illness, drug addict, didn’t push civil rights.
LBJ very flawed and Vietnam but pushed huge social changes. Carter,Clinton etc. All the Dems have been very flawed men but have generally made us a better country. Except for TR all repubs have been on the wrong side of history.
Say what you will about Clinton but no other Dem could have won and we would have had GHWBx2 and Bob Dole x2. Yikes!
Hey, y’all.
I don’t know what’s up with Clinton, or what motivates him beyond his own self-interest. It doesn’t matter. That numbnuts Wallace sandbagged the wrong guy, and it’s getting massive play. That’s what matters.
Think about how this fuckin’ “Path to 9/11″ has been the exploding cigar for these people. It was supposed to set ‘em up not only for the elections, but for going into Iran. Instead, it generated a lot of publicity and tanked. That’s quite a trick. Meantime, Bush went around talking terror for a week to deafening silence.
Then, ’cause they suck at defense, they call the same play and try to blame Clinton to his face. Not a good move, and his comprehensive smackdown is all over tv and the web.
They’ve fucked Iraq up and nobody’s buying their bullshit on 9/11 and terror. Time for the coup de grace.
I don’t give a shit about the McCain kabuki. Our people need to hang the torture issue around the Republicans’ necks like the boat anchor it is. Somebody needs to finally kick that party into the wilderness where it belongs, to spend however many generations necessary to regain its soul.
fab @ 127
I think electing some of our finer Democratic insurgents this November is as radically sufficient as we can hope for. We had Tony Trupiano stop by yesterday. Some people preferred to stay in another thread and bitch. There’ll be plenty of time for that after November 7, otherwise you’re just bring a smile to Karl’s fat face.
Siun @ 133
No. I’m not. They can ban me if they want, after all, banning the speech you don’t like IS the American way.
If any President wants to invite me to sit down and talk, I am going to accept because it’s an opportunity.
I would have a very difficult time having dubya beam at me or glad-hand me. I would turn my back and run.
But if a former President or sitting President wanted to hear what I have to say and engage in discourse with me?
I would gladly seize the day.
GPB- exactly how is it possible to change people’s minds, it you’re not willing to talk to them? Yeah, if there were still a draft, *maybe* people would be out in the streets, like they were in the 60s-70s. Can’t turn back the clock to your glory days, guy.
Welcome Gorlab, let’s hear from you often!
cleter @
128
Cleter, maybe so but ya gotta remember what it was like back then. The conservative avalanche was, after years in the theoretical stage, finally rolling full steam over everything in its path.
No matter what Big Dog had done, it would have had he same end. Flattened.
It’s good to hear Clinton just for a reminder of what a moderate with a brain sounds like.
Moderates are not speaking out loud enough against our loss of the Geneva Conventions and immunities from violations.
Tonight in what may the worlds final hours of protection under GC, I have a candle burning for all of us who will fall into the torture, rape or rendition without any hope of a trial or mercy because we didn’t fight hard enough.
egregious @ 143
Sorry egregious, but it’s me Balrog, breaking my self-imposed ban.
I tried! I really tried!
Wigwam—Right On!
1,269 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen Hamsher:
I think that Slothrop is expressin’ a bit of distrust of Ms. Huffington…and I don’t blame ‘im. I do, however, agree with you that we’ve gotta accept or reject her argument on its merits…attack the argument not the arguer. Given all that, Ariana is correct and I think we must (sadly) leave BOTH Clinton’s behind us in forging a new American politics. There would be a couple a good places for Dawg in an Al Gore administration but let’s get get BOTH Clinton’s outta our electoral process.
KEEP THE FAITH AND YOUR GLASSES CLEAN, IT’S GETTIN’ REAL HARD TA TELL THE BAD GUYS THROUGH ALL THE BULLSHIT!!
Guitar Playing Bastard @
11
I’m as driven crazy by the MSM as the next girl, but we have seen moments of them standing up here and there, and while it’s nowhere near enough, it is something. Case in point: Stephanopolous sticking with his line of questioning of Bill Frist this morning and making him look like an idiot. I mean, he had Frist claiming that as Senate majority leader, he hadn’t seen the NIE because it’s classified and yammering out talking points like the tape in his head got stuck. So while GS doensn’t always do the kind of intelligent questioning I’d like to see, he let Frist hang himself this morning simply by being a skeptic and following up on some of Frist’s absurdities.
GPB @ 130:
I don’t have a Volvo. Or even a car.
Gorlab @ 146
Speak the truth WITH LOVE.
That’s all we ask
Guitar Playing Bastard @
135
I grant that Clinton isn’t a progressive. Neither are the libertarians at anitwar.com. But I’m happy to make common cause with them in fighting the neocon’s efforts to establish an American Fourth Riech.
So, as a sporadic reader/commenter (due to job commitments), I’m totally confused.
For the past few weeks and months, the posts and comments have ranged from furious rants to incisive critiques of the current illegal, immoral administration. along with laments about the impotence of Washington’s Democratic leaderhship.
Tonight, just six weeks away from a crucial election, it’s all about the failures, duplicity, sellout, and self-centered interests of the last Democratic president we may see in a very long time — if we don’t show a littler solidarity here.
I was furious at Clinton and still am for his lapses of judgment on far too many issues. But c’mon, guys, he is not the enemy. Far from it. And it doesn’t serve our interests to spend so much energy dissecting his failures in the face of real and lethal danger.
GuitarPB – it you get banned it will be for your basis lack of respect for the other people in the conversation not for your politics. We welcome serious political discussion, we don’t tolerate disrespect to the other participants in the discussion.
There was an interview with Clinton in Fortune in which he talked at length about his charity. He point out that the problems he wants to solve are not ideological, but practical. It doesn’t matter to him who puts the money up as long as they want to solve the problem.
That explains Murdoch’s involvement. That deserves respect. Anyone who can get money to deal with AIDS or global warming from that dinosaur is doing much good.
Slothrop @ 63
Recently? How much time has to pass after you realize the people you were supporting are fanatics and fools before you can begin critising them or critising people, like Clinton who are enabling them?
fab @
142
We DO have a draft. These days, it’s a sneaky, back-door draft. And the only people it’s affecting are the people who were chumps enough to believe the US military were honorable institutions, at the high levels.
I give up. have your symposiums, have meetings with the big dog. And we’ll keep losing. I liked winning the Super Bowl. No such thing as a moral victory.
I like WJC as a person just fine. He’s wicked smart, good sense of humor, plays the good ol’ boy about right.
I have never cared for his policies. At a time when Reagan’s and Bush I’s right-wing policies needed to be pulled back to the center, WJC’s “third way” prescription pretty much treaded water, and we never got back to center. Not a whole lot was accomplished legislatively. I can remember one of my unions officials telling me how important it was for a Democrat to hold the White House – Republicans could not muster a veto-proof vote. I remember thinking, why don’t we bust ass to roll back some Republican shit?
Then there was NAFTA, without proper labor and environmental safeguards. Clinton’s a bright guy – he knew the consequences, and look at the whirlwind we have reaped.
It has long been my opinion money is the ruination of most Democrat pols – give them some, and they get above their raisin’.
My thinking extends to Senator Clinton, who is also freighted with her Iraq position.
I will have no truck with country-club Democrats. Bring on Feingold, Murtha or Edwards. I want somebody who realizes the danger our Constitution and way of life is in, and is ready to lay it on the line!
Well said, Arianna, and thank you, Jane, for highlighting her.
I did read the article in Salon about Macacadude that bdu linked to @ 12 and was/am jumping for joy! I even ran off to make a couple of phone calls.
Go Webb!
Quite a good post. it was wrong on so many levels it illustrates what’s wrong with the left even now.
First Clinton is the only politician the left has with a clue, so maybe instead of criticising him for not parroting the same loser strategy the rest of the Dems have they should be analysing what he said.
Second, no one fought back more than Clinton when he was president. No one. In fact he still fights back more even now than any others Dems do. So until the rest of the Democratic Party grows a spine they should maybe look at how someone acts who has one.
Third, Clinton knew exactly what he was doing going on Fox, and was ready for what they tried on him. The result was it was a major victory for the Dems and egg on the face for Fox. See how many other Dems including Arriana can say that when they are on TV.
Fourth, Clinton says his strategy is to fight back, but the Dems don’t seem to remember what fighting back means. You have to do it in a certain way or you come over as shrill or crazy. The Dems are the master of the shrill and crazy response, and being baited into giving up their talking points, but are clueless with the concept of fighting back effectively. So when they see Clinton do it properly they get all confused.
Fifth, fighting back has several important rules, just like in a schoolyard fight. You have to fight back precisely in terms of the original attack. So Clinton responded only about actual attacks that the right made on him. That way you are seen as defended yourself, highlighting the original unfair attack, exposing it as wrong, and showing you are not violent yourself. But Dems in blogs and elsewhere mess all this up. They counterattack on some other issue and thereby appear crazed, shrill, and just as bad as the Right. In any fight by law you are entitled to defend yourself only from the original attack with the force necessary to stop that attack, no more and no less. You are not allowed to attack something else for revenge. So that’s all the Dems need to do to win elections again. Defend precisely from the Rove attack, explain exactly what the attack was, and why that level of counterattack was necessary. Then people even on the right can see it as justified. If the Right attacks in a morally wrong way, then the Left needs to counterattack in a morally impeccable effective way or they will be seen as just as bad.
Sixth, Clinton uses bipartisanship to highlight how the original attacks on him were unfair. So he fights back only to repulse the exact original attack and then extends the olive branch, using carrot and stick. So he makes the right look stupid for a badly conceived attack, like crooks for lying, and unfit to lead the country because they refuse the offer of bipartisanship.
Seventh, the Dems are the worst left wing party in any democratic country in the world, bar none. No other party has done less for their base than the Dems have. No other has a stronger case for being elected than the Dems currently have, and are blowing it so badly. No other is as clueless in how to handle the right as the Dems are. maybe instead of trying the same ridiculous tactics over and over they should swallow their pride and see how the left wins elections in other countries. Blair for examples counterattacks just like Clinton, and does just as well as Clinton did. Blair never attacks the right on anything except on precisely what they attacked him on. Since this makes the right look so bad they have virtually given up on attacking him there. If the left did this here then the right would eventually have to give it up here as well.
ifthethunderdontgetya @ 150
I saw you driving to the Greek Theater in ‘89 in a ‘67 VW Bus. Smoke was pouring out of it ala Cheech and Chong and Jeff Spicoli.
Come clean, Mr. Wheel.
SusanD @
69
Just placed another good one on my car yesterday:
“Democrats are Sexy:
Whoever heard of a good piece of elephant?”
I’ve had comments on it already, and it is available from: http://www.unemployeddemocrats.com
Slothrop @ 92, people CHANGE. Have you held the same beliefs since babyhood? As for Clinton, yeah, he was a great president, and NAFTA is his legacy.
cleter @ 123
Clinton warts and all probably was the best President of either party since Eisenhower. We have had 46 years of failed Presidencies for one reason or another. Overall Clinton’s was the best of a bad lot.
I disagree with those who think that Clinton was one affair away from being a great President. If you remember those times, the Republicans were dying to hang something on him. The affair was just what stuck but they had already tried with Whitewater and continued with the Special Prosecutor/Inquisitor for years afterwards.
I agree with those who think that Clinton’s passion and vehement defense sprang from a desire to protect his record from a fairly hamfisted attack.
I think our reaction largely springs from the dearth of Democratic voices to speak up on the issues, any issues with the same combination of fire, logic, and eloquence that Clinton showed. We all agree the Republicans are a disaster but that only brings us to the next question: Where are the Democrats? Why isn’t Hillary or Reid or Schumer or Emanuel speaking out on Iraq, torture, wiretaps, the Republican addiction to illegality with the same articulate intensity that Clinton showed on Fox? Where are the Democrats?
What an interesting post and so is the commentary!
I’m neither afraid of the “food fights” we at times have here, nor do I take animus at either side of the debate this evening on this Arianna – Big Dawg’s Faux News Interview topic.
Jane, Arianna and commenters on that side have raised some fine points, and so have commenters on the other side of the debate.
One thing that I hope doesn’t get lost in the attempt to analyze Bill’s motives, strategy, past performance, or for that matter, the size of his dick *g*, is what the reaction to Bill’s interview will be with the general non-aligned voting public.
Without over analyzing it, I think Bill’s interview and his smashback at Faux News (If it Lies, It Flys!), at wingnuts in general, and more specifically at the Junya’s criminally insane and incompetent rule for the past 6 years will resonate strongly with the general non-aligned voting public.
You know, those folks in all the polls who say they are very dissatisfied with the direction of this country, who are very distrustful of Junya and his harpies, who are very concerned with the Iraq war, etc.
Many of the folks will probably not spend a smidgen of the time that we do debating the Big Dawg’s underlying motivation and allegiances.
Instead I think they will react quite positively to Bill’s performance. Many in their heart of hearts would dearly love to tell Faux News, wingnuts, and in particular, Junya to STFU!
So in closing, I thank Jane, Arianna, and all commenters here on every side of this topic.
As I said at the beginning, it’s been interesting.
But let’s not allow it to interfere with our observation of how this plays to the American public.
It is surely getting a lot of media play (leads CNN’s 9 PM broadcast), and I suspect we’ll see a good deal more of it on the local news and papers.
Not bad stuff to keep those fires burning that we all believe necessary to take back this country.
Ta!
Steve @ 137
Respectfully disagree. Virtually any competent Democrat could have beaten mortally wounded Bush 1.0. All the big Democrats–Gore, Gephardt, Bradley, Cuomo et al–sat out 1992, because in 1991, Bush 1.0 had huge post-Gulf War approval ratings. They all made the pragmatic decision to wait and run against Quayle in 1996. Except that never happened. Clinton had the advantage of an unusually weak primary field, and an unusually crappy incumbent being slammed by the strongest third party challenge in decades. Before Perot temporarily dropped out, Clinton was running third in many polls. Had Perot stayed in the whole time, Clinton might well have gone down in history as the poor incompetent bastard who presided over the Democrat’s decline to ignominious third party status.
tommy yum @ 138
Tommy – Maybe Feingold will come out swinging tomorrow and actually rally some support.(I can dream *s*) If he could I think it would win both mid terms and ruin McCains presidential hopes. This is another wasted opportunity for dems progressive or moderate.
I thought cleter had a great comment yeterday.
bold mine…
sure clinton’s piss-off with the little wallace puke will get all the headlines, because it’s show-biz, pushing off the front page the NIE on terrorism and the torture is ok bill and the gutting of habeas bill. is we fucked or is we fucked?
Balrog @ 161
Thanks for the smile, Balrog.
cleter – good analysis of the Clinton win! I was disappointed we did not get a chance to vote for Bradley or Cuomo that year … and remember being mighty afraid as soon as I started reading about Clinton and his move to the right strategy.
Mr. Guitar Playing Balrog has been here for a long time. I don’t recall him being this challenging, but I vote for giving him a pass this time. He has contributed on many an occasion, and I know from experience how bad vibes from the news can turn posts dicey.
Senator Macaca has, however, used up all of his passes and more.
Well, as usual, the evening wrapup on CNN was all about Clinton’s anger on the Wallace show. And, of course, thay had a snipette on him saying I failed to get Bin Laden.
bbqueen @
168
We fucked. We fucked bad.
Carot @ 160
Totally disagree. What you describe is playing strictly defense, and playing in the Republicans’ frame. We have to demolish their frame, not accept our place in it.
Style point: paragraph breaks are the bomb.
ifthethunderdontgetya @ 169
Hilarious. Turned on some newbies at work to this on Friday. The neural network is still strong, grasshopper.
The one guy whose reaction I could care less about is Rove’s–whether he laughs or cries before or after the election matters not one bit. It’s no longer an “October surprise” when everyone is anticipating one. His game is up. He’s just a fat little man who plays dirty tricks. Buh-bye.
And I do think some democrats are playing rough. The latest piece on G.Allen in Salon, where they interviewed all members of his college football team is just bordering on fair.(Still, I say so what. Republicans do that all the time to their opposition and far worse.) I have to say, though, that putting a doe’s head in the mailbox belonging to someone in an African-American neighborhood is gruesome, even if it were 30 years ago. And looks like Bill Kristol of the Weekly STandard just threw Allen under the bus for being one idiot they don’t want around for 08.
ccmask @ 172
And just yesterday I heard some jackass yammering about how Fox is crap, but CNN and MSNBC bend over backwards to pander to the left wing. I don’t know where these people get their delusions.
Balrog @ 171
Dude, I’m a bastard. A dirty bastard. and I’m not sorry.
And I admit to being VERY cranky tonight. I apologize to one and all for my crankiness…I’m just so frustrated at the passiveness I see…You should see some of the polite but incredibly TERSE emails Babs Boxer gets from me…
Guitar Playing Bastard @ 173
Um, never mind. Billy Bibbit to the medical tent immediately.
Anyone have a link to macaca at salon?
Slothrop @ 92
From a 98 NYT online article about the sex scandal.
Conservative columnist Arianna Huffington has been anything but silent about the scandal. In an interview, Ms. Huffington called Mrs. Clinton “a classic enabler of a sex addict” and said the president “expresses himself sexually like a frat boy.”
She also said not all conservatives were reacting in the same way, or for the same reasons.
“There are those on the right,” she said, “who have once a week, every week, been asking for the president’s impeachment on different charges, some of them fabricated, and those of us who feel character matters and that we made a Faustian bargain” in electing him.
“We,” she said of the latter group, “have been vindicated.”
Pretending that her husband was straight must have made arianna a little bitchy.
Not that I agree with you on this topic. I was just interested in your question.
I think that if peoples minds are active their minds can be changed and it seems that huffington has legitimately changed hers.
cleter @ 166
Perhaps my memory fails, but as I remember it, Gore was very much a candidate in 1992. I vastly preferred him to Clinton, but alas Clinton won. I was disappointed, and still think that Gore would have been a better president. But I was pleasantly surprised at Clinton. He was surprisingly effective in some very difficult times.
I like Clinton, and I voted for him twice. His smackdown of Wallace was great, but Arianna is right. The man has been a Lieberman enabler, let us not forget.
Guitar Playing Bastard @ 178
I know, but it sucks to have to review my own posts in the morning when I’ve been kerfufflish. Maybe call ‘er a night and see what the morning brings.
Don’t wanna lose you here.
Right now any Dems sitting in safe seats for the election better get their voices heard starting tomorrow morning or risk our wrath.
ccmask @ 185
GPB’s wrath, no less.
Hugh @ 67
That’s because when the real war breaks out Iraq will look so small…
cleter@166.. you may be right but the operative thought is they miscalculated and sat it out. There was luck in Clinton’s win but there was a large amount of calculation on his part. There was talk of Clinton running in ‘87 and I remember a conversation
Siun-Thanks. I think a big part of getting elected President is timing. You have to admire Clinton for saying “screw you guys, I’m running now.” He recognized that he had a better shot at the nomination with a weak primary field. None of the party bigwigs like Cuomo wanted to waste their shot against a war-winning incumbent, when they could run against America’s Dumbest Vice-President ever. If Cuomo had run, he would have beaten the crap out of Bush, and Bill Clinton would be best remembered as Secretary of Agriculture during President Cuomo’s first term. Or the guy whose nomination to be on Cuomo’s cabinet exploded and sank because of a sex scandal.
Bill Clinton has some skills, but he’s not FDR.
We are witnessing the collapse of the American narrative, and it’s happened with shocking rapidity. Six years ago no one would have disagreed with the idea that Americans never start a fight, only finish it. The first Gulf War was touted as something of a course correction after Vietnam.
Why do you think no one ever talks about the Spanish-American War? ‘Cause it was bullshit!
Iraq has been the most afflictive operation since. We attacked a sovereign nation that did not pose a threat to us. To skirt the issue, people have clung to various lies about WMD, or “liberation” or some nebulous terror connection. To do otherwise would be to admit we’ve lost our way. The shredding of the GC furthers this obscenity. It has to stop, now. It seems such a simple matter to say “we don’t invade countries who haven’t attacked us and we don’t torture. That’s un-American.”
One other thing: I must disagree with Arianna on this point:
I think it’s possible to do both! Who’s up for some refreshments?
Dana @ 176
I love this particular moment in time… the truth is emerging and it is beautiful.
More, please. Allen has shot himself in the face many, many times. It’s all his fault for being a liar, a racist, and a big fake. And Dana, yeah– 30 years ago does not excuse that grotesquerie.
here’s the link to the salon article from bdu at 14, ccmask:
http://www.salon.com/news/feat….._football/
ruffian @ 187
2,695…19,945…and a number of Iraqis that can only be estimated but definitely includes a comma. Heckuva job, Bushie. Heckuva job.
Balrog @
184
Yeah, maybe so. Go play the Tele and finish off my Sunday burger. Yeah I’m a burger and Tele guy.
{sigh}
“After providing President Bush cover for his disastrous handling of Katrina, after trying to get himself adopted by George Bush, Sr., after giving Laura Bush the keynote slot at his Global Initiative Conference, after going along with Rupert Murdoch’s fundraiser for Hillary — after all that, he got exactly nothing.”
I’m getting a different view of it from here.
He’s doing what he thinks is right, and he gets hatred from those in power.
You think people will forget that? I personally think it’s as Christian a story as I have ever heard. He’s doing the right thing as he sees it, and is persecuted. He speaks evil of no one, yet they speak evil of him, they purely delight in it.
For the many people in this country who have little, who have no health care, who ask relatives for money to buy medicine, for the people who have lost hope, how do you think this looks? Goddamn. They know.
This is powerful. Just my view.
I don’t think Gore was in the 92 primary. 88, but not 92
Thanks for the link Angie! You’re so helpful and I’m so lazy.
something happened to me at 188 it wasn’t important.
1,269 DAYS AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Mad Dogs:
I hope yer right brother but I’m not sure that the Fox attempt to smear Dawg’s response as out of control or over the top (like they try and tatoo on Howard Dean’s forhead) won’t work with the brain dead regular FOX viewers.
And for those FDLers who want to create a new anti-fascist coalition, just remember that the politics of coalition building means that you must be careful to keep the political definition of the coalition as the issue you are opposing. That means that if you want the Libertarian anti-war folks to join you, you are NOT askin’ ‘em to pledge feilty to your party or it’s other issues and values. Remember that you are forging the coalition in order to effect a NEGATIVE change…you want folks to vote AGAINST somethin and for only the common value of NON-fascism. The creation of a new politics with progressive Democratic values is separate and emerges after elimination of the common enemy.
KEEP THE FAITH AND KEEP YER EYES ON THE PRIZE!!!
ccmask @ 180
http://www.salon.com/news/feat….._football/
Wigwam–
Gore ran in 1988, opted out in 1992, despite the Democratic establishment begging him to run. At one point, the only Dem running was Tsongas.
Guitar Playing Bastard says:
September 24th, 2006 at 7:18 pm
So because we aren’t willing to become SOBs like our opposition, you’re willing to write off all of us?
I’d say it’s been nice knowing you, but I’m not at all sure of either the nice or the knowing. You have been rude to a lot of people tonight, sorry for having to say so.
BTW, do you remember the year before Bill W became head coach? I do. Giving up is not how you get to be a winner!
cleter @ 200
Thanks for the correction. I has been too long.
I haven’t read the thread but I did read the post.
Here’s my take:
Clinton experienced the ultimate hotseat and has tried to appeal to the presumed grown-ups who are part of the King-maker class. In part, because he knows from experience how much can be accomplished with the money the kingmakers can offer.
He has different goals now, laudable goals in my opinion, and he probably feels too much partisan behaviour will imperil those goals.
I stopped watching Faux Snooze for any reason whatsoever a month or so ago. I made an exception today and I’m glad I did. Big Dog made his first and probably last appearance on Faux. Geeze, gang. How many here have been begging for a Democrat to show some cajones? How many Dems have gone on Faux on a regular basis and continue to act like a Faux doormat?
Final Score:
Big Dog 1
Faux 0
egregious @
100
In defense of Balrogs, this is the message I was eschewing last Friday night. That, and the fact that WJC’s performance was rewarding but not necessarily signs of victory.
Coincidence? Probably. But all of my favorite blogs are now shouting ‘Keep the faith and KICK ASS!’
Norske, my hero. You are the original. Your time has come; may I ride?
OT again,
Trex was wondering a thread or two ago why Bush’s JARs had risen. Gas prices have declined where I live by more than $1.20 a gallon in less than two months. High gas prices were fueling a lot of anger and frustration on a daily basis and for the time being that is gone. Bush looks better as a result. That his bounce has only been 5-7 points is an indication that he doesn’t look that much better but it still is a boost to Republicans before the election.
What Norske at 198 says. Right on. We can tinker with the coalition later. Eyes on the prize, people. If Clinton helps us, that’s nice. If he wants to go back to being shitty 1996 triangulating Clinton, well, that’s his call. We’ll do it with or without him. Pine not for some mythical past Clinton golden age. Just worry about the now.
P J Evans @
201
I’m sorry you don’t get the analogy. G’night.
I can be very rude, it’s true.
Cozumel @ 205
Totally agree.
Only thing I’ve been wondering is how many Xanax did Chris Wallace have to down after running from that interview. ;)
Agree with Tommy yum@190.. especially if we nuke Iran, the USA will become a second rate economic and political power in my lifetime and I’m 63. Dumb me, I thought that would happen hundreds of years from now.
op99 @ 174
And that’s why the Dems keep losing. The right perceives this kind of attack as unjustified because it is not linked to the original right attack. So in a schoolyard fight if you defend yourself in the original attack no one blames you. If you wait until the next day and attack them unprovoked in a tit for tat people think you are just as bad as them.
Being wronged by the Right doesn’t mean any way of counterattacking is acceptable. The Right deliberately baits the Left into just the kind of attack you suggest. In fact people like you who fall for it are the biggest asset the Republican party has. And you criticise Clinton who is the only one in recent history who actually beat them.
Eureka Springs: Great story on Allen. I’ll bet when he read it he felt like a deer caught in headlights, I mean, mailbox.
NorskeFlamethrower @ 198
Yeah, but those folks are that 20% of Junya’s base that are out and out batshit crazy, and we all know it.
I’m more interested in the folks who don’t watch Faux News, ya know, those 60% in the middle who are relatively normal.
Those folks are the ones who I think will be hearing and seeing this secondhand (CNN, CBS, local news and papers), and nodding there heads that it’s about time somebody kicked those wingnuts in the gonads.
My main point to my earlier post is pretty simple:
I don’t care who or why somebody is bringing wood to the bonfire.
I’m just going to pleasantly ask; got a light? *g*
Clinton was very, very prepared, Wallace was the poor dumb rightwing s.o.b. that got him started. Clinton was sending a message to Bush, that there are some lines not to be crossed. I just hope some more messages will come across.
Like he said, he did more in 2/3 months after the Cole than Bush in 9 months, before 911.
Steve @
211
That is what all the scratching and clawing are about. America is about to tumble off what it believes are it’s ethical, moral, and political moorings and in the process, will no longer be the macho superpower it wants to be. Loss of power to the likes of people the world over who are not European is making the dynasty flip their collective wig.
Guitar Playing Bastard @
193
I gotta http://www.mtdbass.com/.
Wanna jam?
Chris Squire Phil Lesh Alphonso Johnson Jack Bruce Any Other Questions?
I like Burgers too. Jorma said I could.
Mad Dogs @ 214
Margot @
211
Have you heard about the Xanax diet?
Take 4 in the morning and food falls out of your mouth all day.
===moderator comment- X*nax would be a better word. Spam, and all that===
I think Arianna is absolutely right. This is the gift of triangulation. I don’t expect him to be able to convince his wife of the necessity of confrontation, if, indeed, he believes it himself. These people would have been with Stephen Douglas in 1854.
ccmask – For all of us who went to high school or collage with idiots just like that, well, it’s funny too.
Does anyone have info on when or where Feingolds speach will be tomorrow?
Both-ways Bill is just like Say Anything Joe. Both Lieberman and Clinton insist on having things both ways. This is supposed to somehow make them “bipartisan”, or “above the fray of partisan polarization”.
The truth is that the words and actions of both Clinton and Lieberman are toxic, both to the Democratic party and to all Americans. Both of these men should be ashamed of themselves, and stand up for Democratic principles, come what may.
Our country is too much trouble for Clinton, Lieberman, and their ilk to continue their “triangulation”.
In my opinion…
Special Report
The 400 Richest Americans
Edited by Matthew Miller and Tatiana Serafin 09.21.06, 6:00 PM ET
A nine-figure fortune won’t get you much mention these days, at least not here. This year, for the first time, everyone in The Forbes 400 has at least $1 billion. The collective net worth of the nation’s wealthiest climbed $120 billion, to $1.25 trillion. Surging real estate, oil and other asset prices paved the way for 28 new members and 14 returnees.
http://www.forbes.com/lists/20….._Rank.html
Harry #216,
I agree Clinton was prepared despite being blindsided. Contrast that with Democratic leaders in the Bush years who, knowing that they were going to be asked about a certain issue, were nevertheless incoherent, often accepting the Administration’s talking points in the process. I think what so many of us miss is that simple ability to speak directly to a point without accepting the frame that the White House or the media want to put on it.
1,269 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Mad Dogs:
I understand, dogman, and for election politics I agree with you…I work door ta door and the phones for our County Democratic Party. Most of the votes we are tryin’ ta get out are already persuaded, we just hafta convince ‘em that it will make a difference. There are a Lotta discouraged and disenfranchised workin’ class voters out there…young ones too who have learned who the enemy is and they think the fix is in. So I don’t know that an argument like the one on FOX is gunna do ANYthing other than maybe give a lift to some a those who haven’t heard a Democrat fight back before.
KEEP THE FAITH AND KEEP YER SPIRITS UP!!
Clinton vs Fox is getting a lot of play. It even made ferrarichat, an car blog.
Balrog @
218
I’m a Delbert McClinton/Lee Roy Parnell/T Graham Brown/Bekka Bramlett/Sonny andreth kinda guy. Know any Delbert? ;)
My favorite bassist is a guy named Stephen Mackey. Steve used to be with Wynonna. George Hawkins (now with Fogerty) is another personal fave.
Guitar Playing Bastard @ 193
I’m neutral on burgers and disagree with your comments in this thread, but it’s nice to know I’m not the only Tele player at FDL.
If I had one request of you Jane, it is that you would acknowledge the fact that your own website’s denizens had called all of this before Arianna did.
Let’s properly source sources. Arianna picked all of this up 2 days later. Maybe after reading FDL???
Cheeses Crust, am I the only one here who doesn’t own some kind of spectacular guitar?
Jane Hamsher @ 99
What was the name of that book? “Live from the Lincoln bedroom”? And what was Clinton’s big sin in Arianna’s eyes? Oh yeah, sleepovers ans “coffees” at the WH.
Arianna has always ben about…..Arianna.
Jane.
You are WAY too smart to be star struck by a fair weather freind like this.
Let us go in peace and love to serve democracy,
LHP
meta @ 217
The multi purpose detention centers funded by homeland security will not hold enough illegal mexicans. imo they would hold a fair portion of Iranian Americans. And we can torture them as well. Think Cheney will sell ringside tickets?
http://www.salon.com/news/feat….._football/
Balrog @ 220
(Sorry to the mod for the x word!)
Balrog, if you like Jorma, he’s on the radio here:
http://www.publicbroadcasting…….guidemain
http://www.woub.org/
Eureka Springs, AR:
All I can find is that the Senate convenes at 2pm, Arlen Specter has a speech at 1pm at the National Press Club (both on cspan2) and the tireless Byron Dorgan is holding Iraq War hearings with the DPC tomorrow at 130 pm on cspan3.
My guess– after 2 on the Senate floor, early on in “morning business”.
Swopa @
229
:-D
Mine is a Fender Japan ‘52RI with Alan Hamel pickups. It’s going to need a fret job this winter. I’ve got divots from first to about 12th frets and a lot of them are pretty flat. I’m nervous about the frets, maple necks are easy to screw up. I’ve also got an Esquire. :)
You don’t have to agree with me. No one does.
Consulted again with my dog Jake tonight about this guy Clinton
getting steamed up and heart thumping mad on Fox about being
cast as soft on terrorism. Jake tells me it’s all part of the the Rethug
plan of attack and diversion of the oppostions focus. Jake says that
if all Clinton does now is roll around in self-pity and righteous
indignation and the left stays focused on him too much the cause
may be lost for Nov. 4. Jake tells me Clinton has to go on the
offensive with other big guns of the oppostion and re-focus the
attack to how badly mismanaged this country is, how unsafe we
are, how corrupt and criminal this administration is. Jake says if
Big Dog can’t do this soon then retire him to an
old age home for tired old Big Dogs and let him hobnob with ex-
Old Dogs. We do not have the time nor the luxury to pin our hopes
on Clinton coming through. Jake has been very distracted recently
with all the current events swirling in the news—Iran-Chavez,
Bin Laden, Spinach e-coli, midwest weather, absence of Fitz,
Pope’s crusade comments re Muslims. He tells me he’s not getting
any rest nor focus on catching all the rats running around in the
night; Just a parable from my trusty oracular dog.
cleter @
189
I’m guessing maybe FDR’s efforts against the Progressives and the NetRootz were aided by the fact that they WEREN’T.
Lets compare like fruits whenever we can.
1,269 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
cleter:
Right on, brother, right on!!! I hope yer workin’ yer neighborhood for local candidates or if yer lucky enough ta be in a congressional district that needs ta throw a bum out I hope yer like a pig in bad stuff out on the turf for the good guys.
KEEP THE FAITH, KEEP YER HANDS UP AND KNOCK ‘EM BACK INTA LAST WEEK!!!
Guitar Playing Bastard @ 236
sorry wrong linky.
here it is
http://www.marketwatch.com/New…..aspx?guid={62C8724D-AE8A-4B5C-94C7-70171315C0A0}&dateid=38741.5136277662-858254656
Guitar Playing Bastard @
234
Wrong. You may be a bit hasty, but wise for a Hobbit.
Questionable Deaths, in Secret
http://tinyurl.com/p7raz
Guitar Playing Bastard @ 104
Will you promise to live for Egregious? Will you promise to live for me? Please?
Guitar Playing Bastard @
226
Oh, yeah!
Thanks angie, I am anticipating something good from dear Russ.
Thanks for your kind words earlier as well. *s*
Margot @
232
Thanks Margot, very much.
Check out Monterey Pop for ‘Fixin’ to Die Blues’ and ‘Today’. Then the outtakes.
Balrog @
240
Heh heh, I’m guessing you meant *nasty* but thanks for the benefit of the doubt. :-D
Hi, Sam. Nice to see you and Jake around again.
Guitar Playing Bastard @ 246
No. Hasty. The Two Towers – J.R. Tolkien.
So there’s alot of talk nowadaze around Blognia-Herzegovia about framing, and how the Republic Party seems to frame every issue in their favor with the help of the corporate-controlled media. One of their favorite tactics for years now to rally their base has been bashing Bill and Hillary.
Why the Hell are we spending so much time talking about Bill Clinton all of a sudden, when we have a rogue band of elitists killing thousands of people in a made-up “war”, and robbing the US Treasury for their buddies?!? Have you seen the coporate media coverage, or wingnut radio, or freeper blogs?? They love having this out there to hang their hats of deception on, and not have to defend the indefensible anymore (read: Iraq, Plame, Torture, etc.). Their fans are getting whipped into a frenzy just in time for the elections! Dangle a little Clinton meat in front of them and let the salivating begin…
Seems to me everyone’s taking the bait, especially Bill. Yes, he is obviously quite smart (whatever that means), and that makes me wonder if he’s doing all this on purpose to satisfy his sugar-daddies like Murdoch. He has a long track record of this. The Telecommunications Act of 1996, which Bill enthusiastically signed, was basically written by Rupert Murdoch, so is it any wonder they’re fast friends to this day?
C’mon, let’s stay on task here. I expect the corporate media to play along, but the blogs were always an oasis from the nonsense. We’ve got a lot of work to do and should not get distracted. Let’s make sure GPB won’t be saying “I told you so!” come November.
Sam!!! Where ever have you been? Thought we’d lost you and Jake!!! Welcome back.
1,269 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen Hamsher:
Score one for Looseheadprop @ #232…many of us are just a bit weary AND wary of Ms. Huffington. She’s often been a bit late ta the table and when she gets there she acts like she’s the first ta discover mashed potatoes. She’s always been more about herself than about advancin’ progressive politics.
You and your site here have always been ahead of Ms. Huffington’s curves.
KEEP THE FAITH AND BELIEVE NONE A WHATCHA HEAR AND ONLY HALF A WHATCHA SEE!!!
OT “Tester.. I don’t want to weaken the Patriot Act.. I want to repeal it”
new thread – Late Night is up
NorskeFlamethrower @ 253
Tell it! ; )
KEEP THE FAITH AND QUIT BEATIN’ UP ON BILL CLINTON THE FAUX SLAYER. DON’T SHOOT YER SELF IN THE FOOT
As for cover for Katrina, no, he could hardly refuse to respond to Bush’s request.
He could hardly refuse if he was a chicken-ass. A real patriot would have stood up for the people of New Orleans and basic humanity instead of playing “elder statesman” as if anyone gave a damn. But Bill is selfish, weak, and easily manipulated. The true crime of the impeachment was not that the republicans played so dirty, but that Bill clinton refused to fight back – because he didn’t take his responsibilities to the public as seriously as his responsibilities to the DC Pundits and Wall Street.
all of you people that are looking down your noses at Clinton:
26 YEARS. think about it.
Bill Clinton knew how to get elected. No other Democrat, much less a progressive, has been able to figure that out since Jimmie Carter.
38 YEARS. think about that.
less than one third of that time has a Democrat been in office.
where do you think you’re living?
in other words, get with anything that moves the boulder up the mountain a little bit further or STFU. there’s a hellofalot of work to do. Bill Clinton did his job this weekend. Good on ‘im! Case closed.
Oh, GPB. cut the crap with that suicide shit. it’s a pretty limp attention getting device.
OK, folks. I’ve got to get ready for work. have a nice night.
Scarecrow at 118.
On target and perceptive. Thanks.
Teammates: Allen used “N-word” in college. Bye, bye!
http://salon.com/news/feature/….._football/
Bill Clinton knew how to get elected. No other Democrat, much less a progressive, has been able to figure that out since Jimmie Carter.
And what did he do in office? Started to reverse Reagan’s packing of the courts? Nah. Built a grass roots party that could combat the evangelical/astro-turf alliance? Sorry. Opened the archives to expose the crimes of Bush 1 on Iran-gate and Contra-gate ? Whoops. Put progressives into the FBI and CIA to counterbalance the wackos and opus dei traitors? That was too hard. Cracked down on Republican cronyism that funds their machine? Dream on. Draw a line in the sand when Les Aspin put Rush Limbough on Armed forces radio 3 hours a day? Too many important things to do. Stopped Murdoch and Disney from consolidating media ownership? No way. Its a long sad story of betrayal and date-rape bipartisanship.
People have got to stop treating politics as a fairy tale. Clinton is a useful ally and a very sharp politician who has shown throughout his career that he will sell out his “constituents” for a pat on the head from authority figures. Arianna is a very smart and media saavy progressive who likes the limelight and used to be a winger. Neither of them is here to accept our sins and lead us to the promised land. And neither of them is sulferous.
Guitar Playing Bastard @
54
Just getting up to speed here and thinking out my thoughts on this, but please, please do not make statements like this. If you need help from us, we are here. If this was meant as snark, it just doesn’t qualify.
I think this is the only blog that is throwing Clinton under the bus. Most of the other blogs are praising him.
Good luck in getting people to vote for a third party.
PB #262:
Molly Ivins said “the lesser of two evils is less evil” and my disagreement with the Greens and Naderists and Counter-Punchians is that I prefer less evil. But that doesn’t mean we can’t be clear eyed about the limitations of the less evil politicians. Bill Clinton was the most powerful man in the world and he let the Republicans and his dick take precedence over doing his job. I applaud his deft destruction of that pathetic heap of smarm, but I mourn his fecklessness as president and after.
You people are doing exactly what the republicans are doing, blaming Clinton. I bet they must be laughing their asses off.
Clinton is correct when he accuses Wallace of trying to sandbag him, no doubt in my mind with the approval of whoever he reports to at FNC.
What they forgot was that when it comes to politics, Cliinton is the smartest guy, the smartest person in the room – any room. Clinton was prepared for the questions about Bin Laden, Somalia, terrorism, etc. Wallace was not prepared for the answers.
If I was Mike I would ask for a DNA test, toot sweet.
Or maybe Chris Wallace is a Democratic mole. That would explain why he gave Clinton an opportunity to torpedo the Republican ooga booga fear campaign as he did. Either that or he is an incompetent journalist, in which case he should be recruited by the George II administration.
I managed to watch a few minutes of The Beltway Boys on FNC last night. It was hilarious seeing Fred Barnes try to spin this interview against Clinton. In his world, everything that happens is good for Republicans and conservatives. If W. was caught in bed with a live boy and a dead goat it would somehow be bad for liberals. He must be paid very well to mouth on television what he must know to be falsehoods. Or he has no capacity for shame or embarrassment.
Either way, he always gives me a belly laugh.
Please, folks, stop the Arianna bashing. This is the kind of internecine BS that takes up too much valuable time. She’s been a fantastically brave and articulate advocate for sense and morality at a time when both have been in short supply (well, nonexistent from the top down). Who gives a damn if she was a Repub in the past? She looked, listened, and learned! Imagine freaks like Bush, Cheney, Rice, Rumsfeld et al. changing their minds when situations change? It’s inconceivable. They’ll jump lemming-like off the cliff and try to take the rest of us with them before they’ll examine their attitudes and make any noticeable adjustments. Let’s welcome evolution as evidenced by the great Arianna, ‘k?
mamazboy @
266
Thank you for that. I don’t know what kind of ideological purity test she’s supposed to pass before she can have an opinion, but whatever it is I have a quite different past and the same opinion.
It’s all so right-wing it’s quite off-putting.
zennurse @
261
No snark. Some days, I see what’s going on and I fall into deep despair. Today was one of those days. The whole self-congratulatory stuff about Clinton set it right off.
Clinton, as others have said, was defending himself. He wasn’t standing up for other Democrats or really rebuking any right-wing talkng points other than the ones saying he was bad, m’kay?
Until I see him campaigning for Lamont, Tester, Carter and other real progressives, I just can’t take him seriously. Sometimes the stuff I see that makes me think irrational thoughts. If that doesn’t suit the folks who run this place, they can ban me.
Larry Jones @
265
Live boy, dead goat…
No wonder I can’t fall asleep, this imagery is whacked!
Chris,
You and I share journalism as a calling. And you have made it way bigger than me. I salute you. I have, at 36, recently moved into my mother’s basement. I do have a job, but also a hefty credit card payment deluged by skiing last winter. I’ll start looking to move out of here soon after I pay it off, ’cause I hate the bitch. (Well, you can love someone with liking them, right?) She has Fox News on like 12 hours a day and I get to watch often and think a bit.
After witnessing the Clinton interview, I have to wonder: Do you feel as good about your journalism as you do about your station’s social engineering project? Mr. Journalist? Hello?!?!? Your station makes me feel shitty about life in general, and now I have to worry about my presumably noble profession? Were you indeed a journalist, Chris, you would seek to confirm the factual statements Clinton made. You did not. The news to your station was Clinton’s nerve to become aggressive. Were you listening, you might have learned something. Your audience wouldn’t be happy to know it was Republicans who wanted out of Somalia after Blackhawk Down. Commentators on your station, Chris, have called Democrats pussies for pulling out of Somalia. I would, in fact, refer you to Californial Republican Bob Dornan’s pussy-whipped plea on the floor of the House for a pullout: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/…..06OC3-756:
Your station breeds paranoia and hatred, Chris. I watch it, I absorb it and I feel like it is inevitable that a terrorist will blow me up as I’m walking outside my home here in middle America. You are wrong. Check out the Reichstag Fire, the Enabling Act of 1933, the aftermath. That is the fearful thing, the thing I am paranoid about. Be a journalist, Chris, not a bitch. What will your kids think?
“he got exactly nothing.”
not true, he got a ring wing campaign to blame 9/11 on him and his administration.
Quite frankly, i would have thought he would have known that there is no legitimate rational way to deal with “those people”, that they are completely unscrupulous, and will use and abuse anyone and everyone they feel like when it suits their fancy – he should have just asked the disgraced and disgraceful Colin Powell.
.
oops, ring wing = right wing, you know the asshole scum of the earth, scourge of humanity.
.
Wants it both ways? What else would one expect from a Clinton. He and Hillary better start fighting for themselves. Maybe if they do that, they’ll start fighting for us. Repealing NAFTA would be a first step.
Clinton is also giving Bush cover on Iraq. I wish he would just shut his mouth on the subject.
GPB,could you email me? I know we don’t “know”each other,but I’d like to get your opinion on something….just click on my name and it will lead you to finding my email addy.
I’m not sure what it is about this remark from Arianna, but in my gut I feel it is unfair.
She’s using Clinton’s “let’s put this in context” line from the interview, so it’s a clever turn of phrase from her. But still…to read all that Clinton did in terms of raising money for tsunami victims, for Katrina victims, the CGI- -to reduce all that to a “bipartisan love-in” seems, well…more than a bit cynical. And exactlly what does it mean to say that Clinton provided “cover” for Bush? By helping people? It seems to me that Clinton gave “cover” to people in need–for the benefit of this country. I don’t see how his actions helped Bush one bit. To the contrary, I think in those moments he made Bush look like even more of a bumbling idiot tripping over his shoelaces.
After watching that Clinton interview, none of us were sitting around and popping champagne corks. Before Arianna made this observation, the discussion on Clinton was level headed, cautious, optimistic, but tough on him for the past few years.
So, Kudos to Arianna for being a strong voice. But this time out, it should have been Huffington quoting Hamsher, not the other way around.
Part of Clinton’s genius was his ability to see advantage in both sides of a discussion. This is a reflection of his intelligence. It is not always the most effective thing to live and die by some polar belief for the sake of being right. Clinton pissed people off because most of the time he was trying to do what would be most effective, and sometimes that meant doing something that benefited the other side. That isn’t always going to square with both sides of a polar issue.
While it’s nice to have someone who agrees with all my views there is also something very important about having someone who thinks on their own. It might not always jive with my perspective but the outcome is where the measurement is taken. He made mistakes. But there was a lot of things he did effectively. I study and use the dialectic to square my polar ideas and this is an eye opener for me most of the time. I find there their are kernals of truth in both sides of discussion that I have huge feelings about. My feelings are not facts.
For me there is not a Yea, or Nay on Clinton. He’s a mixed bag. But my thoughts are that the most effective folks will most likely be a mixed bag. I wouldn’t necessarily want a rubber stamp for all my ideas anymore than someone else’s.
The dems are like one big co-dependent spouse facing an alcoholic husband/ruler. We must have compassion first, stand up for what we believe in and set boundaries where we can. We must focus on our own effectiveness (within our party) and understand that the current president is sick. Very sick with the disease of addiction. (whether it be alcohol, cocaine, money or power). The only thing I know that works in the face of addiction is to leave the situation or work on being the best you can be. We dems need to focus on being the most effective party and stop focusing on how totally sick this presidency is. We must solve the problems even if we didn’t create them.
The cure is effectiveness in the democratic party. We must do what works and that is what will bring people are way. We have to stop thinking we can control this diseased man. We can’t. He will always take it farther, dirtier than any of us can imagine. Anyone who has ever been married or loved an alcoholic knows this. If you fight their battle you just begin the spiral dance of death. I think Clinton is trying to do recovery work but he hasn’t figure out the middle ground. Bless him. At least he is trying. Now for the rest of us….
They really are trying to put a lid on this one. The front page of the Murdoch-owned Boston Herald today:
RAGING BILL: Irate Bubba Freaks Over Terror Quiz
Interestingly enough, the online article drops the “irate.”
Clinton was always a pro-business “moderate” who struck the liberal pose to get us to tolerate him. Color the cabinet with women and minorities, say you are concerned about healthcare, etc.; but when the heavy lifting came, it was NAFTA, welfare “reform,” the erosion of civil liberties, and the quest for pseudo-empire.
He’s simply partying with his people when he goes on Fox or off to visit the Bushes.
Arianna annoyed me just as she annoyed me during the summer of impeachment. She wasted that air time in chastising WJC rather than reiterating WJC’s statements. She wasn’t wrong in her statements, it’s that it was the wrong time and place to make them.
An Angry Old Broad @
275
Heh, why do I feel like this is a setup?
Email sent…
Jeffrey Feldman @
276
Then I guess you did not read me very carefully the other day, because when I said “no prisoners, Bubba” this is exactly what I meant.
Clinton goes on fox. Armed with nothing but the truth, he slams Rove, Fox and Bush to the ground and kicks them silly. What do we do?
We celebrate by having a big circle jerk contemplating how bad Clinton really is.
I don’t remembering the Republicans ever using this tactic to win an election.
I’ll bet Clinton JUMPED for the chance to go on Fox and kick ass. So those of you who tell him not to – boy, you are just silly.
as for arianna, she’d attend the opening of an envelope for publicity.
Jane Hamsher @
282
Thanks for the response.
I had read it carefully–even participated in the discussion–that’s part of the reason I was talking it up in this comment….because I liked that other thread…alot.
We (e.g., you in that last post) weren’t popping corks at all, because we (ditto) were talking about the opportunity created by the Clinton incident to reframe the debate (e.g., before Arianna brought it up).
Anyway…the point of this comment was just to suggest that perhaps Arianna could have read your “no prisoners” post more carefully–and to draw attention back to it. But based on your response, I got that wrong.
scarecrow @
118
Yes!
“You want my support, you hang in there for the whole war, not just the battles you want”.
It’s about 40 days to the election. And Clinton did something that was exactly right.
What do democrats do? Rather than hyping it, they see it as an opportunity to take a shot. If Rove were to read the comments here, he would be doing the tarrantella in front of the Whitehouse.
How about this: wait until the election is over, get Arianna, and the whole gang together. Rent a bus and go to Westchester and throw rocks at Clinton’s house.
That’ll make you feel better.
I think he realizes how much partisan politics hurt his own presidency, and how much more good he could have done without them in the way. He’s just been trying to do his part to help Republicans and Democrats, left-wingers and right-wingers, work together on some key issues (world health). I don’t think its fair to blame him for trying, regardless of the outcome. I don’t think he’s trying to play it both ways, ride the fence or pander to conservatives, I think he just understands how much more he can get done with everyone’s help.
Jimmie Johnson of Paducah,Ky.
Dear Anyone with Balls:
FAUX news a mouthpiece for neoconservatives.
Yea !!! Clinton, It’s’ about time Bill stood up and defended his Administration. I know he wanted to kill the SOB. Clinton has honored more flag draped coffins than “W” wienee has the nerve to.
Some one needs to put FOX in their place.
Jimmie Johnson
[Mod Note; Hey Jimmie, ya new around these parts? That’s an interesting salutation for a blog run by two women]
afterthought @ 14
afterthought @ 14
Sad, but true. That a “news service” is so controlled politically. I was amazed that he even took the bait from Fox. The only thing that Fox does right is football, and thats it!!
I just watched Olbermann (Monday night) who made another great editorial comment about Bush/Fox propagandists. Olbermann is a hero. So is Jane Hamsher.
He got exactly what Blair got from Bush–a big fat nothing. At least Bill’s career is not ruined.
Bill’s tirade was a one-off triggered not by a more general realization of the need to forthrightly engage the minions of Bush but by specific criticisms of Bill’s own record on terrorism, of Bill’s ability to defend this country, and of Bill’s legacy as President.
Simply put, the Wallace interview is not about Bill fighting for us. It is about Bill fighting for Bill.
Mind you; I’m not saying Clinton shouldn’t vigorously defend himself and his record at every opportunity, and any collateral benefit that rubs off on the rest of the Dems is always welcome.
But anyone who thinks Clinton’s emotional outburst signals a change from his consistent record of enabling right wing messaging that doesn’t involve him (or Hillary) personally is likely in for a disappointment.
So why is Clinton hanging with Murdoch, Bush 41 et al?
Well, the old saying says “Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer.”
Give Bill a pass here; I think he’s knows what he’s doing.
As Arianna points out — he wants it both ways. And that is entirely problematic.
Unlike the bloggers who went to his office for the photo-op and a fried chicken lunch.