Clinton on Rove: "I am sick of Karl Rove's bullshit" (New Yorker)

[kpete]

Here is a non-exhaustive list of nuggets from the piece; those looking for a precis can find one of sorts in the New Yorker PR dept's aforementioned 1,066-word account, as well as a New Yorker Q&A with Remnick here.

Clinton on Rove: "I am sick of Karl Rove's bullshit."

Clinton on the Kerry campaign: "Like a deer caught in the headlights."

Clinton on the vote to go into Iraq: "I'm sick and tired of being told that if you voted for authorization you voted for the war. It was a mistake, and I would have made it, too....The administration did not shoot straight on the nuclear issue or on Saddam's supposed ties to Al Qaeda prior to 9/11."

Chelsea on her father's handling of the AIDS crisis after writing a thesis on the subject at Oxford: "I gave you a grade," she told her father. "What did I get?" Clinton asked. "C-plus." Her rationale: "You didn't do nearly enough. But you did more than anyone else in the world."

Clinton on dying: "I've reached an age now where it doesn't matter whatever happens to me...I just don't want anyone to die before their time anymore."

much more at:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eat-the-press/2006/09/18/remnick-on-clinton-on-eve_e_29704.html
http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:N4e4oqxJ41cJ:www.newyorker.com/press+Clinton+Remnick&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

[LTR]

1. Tellin' it like it is

Way to go Bill!

:yourock:

[liberalhistorian]

4. God, how I miss

him being president! Sure, he had his faults, flaws and foibles, but who doesn't and which president didn't? It makes me sick every time I think of Clinton and then have to look at the Boy King Impostor occupying the WH now.

[grytpype]

10. Our Last Non-Retarded President.

Yeah, I miss him too.

[barb162]

58. I agree. He always had a golden tongue too

[Opusnone]

2. DUPE

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x2166393

[KittyWampus]

3. What about sueing the living crap out of ABC?

Why haven't you gotten off your ass and spoken out about what you did to stem the Terrorist tide?

[wtmusic]

40. To take it to that extent

would be just giving ABC more legitimacy than it deserves. There's a point to pursue those things and a point to let them just die away, and this one will disappear quickly.

[elperromagico]

5. The observation about the Kerry campaign is, unfortunately, dead-on.

As for Karl Rove, well... we're all sick of his bullshit.

[INdemo]

18. And just what did Clinton base that remark on?

Remember the damn election was stolen..Had Clinton been the nominee.... elction stolen..

With that remark it appears he is simply planting seed for Hillary........

[blm]

24. But Clinton told ALTERNATE press he now thinks Kerry won and that RFK

made a compelling case. So how does Clinton reconcile his belief Kerry probably won when being questioned by ALTERNATE press AND his saying how Kerry lost in the mainstream press?

And does Clinton address why he spent 4 years SUPPORTING Bush and his policies publicly?

Or why HIS advice to Kerry for 2004 was that he should support anti-gay amendments in red states? That's how you win in Clinton's book?

Or why Clinton never mentioned BCCI in his book?

Or why he praised McCain in his book for the Vietnam reconciliation, when it was Kerry who led the effort and did the lion's share of work?

Or that his man Carville wrote an article in PRAISE of Karl Rove in Dec 2004?

[Matariki]

43. perhaps those aren't two contradictory statements

He said "Kerry campaign: 'Like a deer caught in the headlights.'"

There might be some truth to that even though he *did* win.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

48. Please don't hold two thoughts in head at once.

It is dangerous. :hi:

[NurseLefty]

115. "It's UNACCEPTABLE to think." - GWB n/t

[A-Schwarzenegger]

124. I think that's spelled UNEXCETPIBLE.

I mean, if I thought,
which I try to not.

[blm]

50. The deer was the DNC of Clintonites who didn't believe in machine fraud.

Because if they did their job and secured the machines and the voter rolls BEFORE the election, would Clinton be making this remark today?

Kerry and his campaign WON, and brought in about 15 million MORE votes than Clinton received. Clinton knows this.

Clinton's DNC oversaw the COLLAPSE of the Dem party infrastructure since 1997, and after 2000, even with all the heads up from the vote stealing that occurred in 2000, the DNC didn't lift a finger to COUNTER the RNC's vote suppression tactics, and didn't believe in machine fraud, so they lifted no finger to secure the machines BEFORE the vote.

Blaming Kerry distracts from the REALITY that the weak Dem party infrastructure in crucial states was left to collapse for years, and was too weak to get the votes counted that both Gore and Kerry EARNED.

Clinton OVERSAW that collapse with Terry McAuliffe - of course he'sd point the finger elsewhere.

[karynnj]

66. I agree they don't have to conflict

I simply think that Clinton's comment is self serving and I suspect that he knows it is dishonest. Clinton has been proven to be willing to lie straight faced if it is to his advantage.

[karynnj]

65. Actually it's not

Clinton attacks both Kerry and Gore as losers in this - forgetting that his inability to behave in an acceptable manner made Gore's election close enough to steal. How could Bush, with his history, run to "bring back honor" to the White House, if it weren't for Clinton.

Also, clinton shares a certain amount of responsibility for allowing the consolidation of the media.

In a different contest, the following analysis of 1992 was posted as part of a letter on Salon:

"". we always refer back to clinton when we want to talk about democrats who know how to win, but this sort of thinking seems to overlook the fact that clinton won his first election due to a series of enormously fortuitous circumstances: george h.w. bush's failure to honor his 'read my lips' promise; the entry of h. ross perot; the reluctance of popular democratic leaders like dick gephardt to enter the race against an imcumbent president coming off of a victorious 'war'; the fact that clinton's 'pussy problems' came out long before the primaries, when he wasn't even a contender, so they were essentially forgotten about before the real campaign got started; the ineptitude of his opponents in the primaries; george h. w. bush's obvious exhaustion and reluctance to campaign (checking his watch during debates; throwing up under the table in japan, etc.), and so forth.

bottom line: without ross perot, bill clinton never would have won.

The DU research forum thread on the K/E thread has been posted repeatedly. Kerry did respond. He had all the Navy documentation on his side, there was a Nixon tape where they bemoan that he was clean and a war hero, the people there mostly back Kerry 100%, The VN era SON Republican Senator Warner said he personally reviewed the Silver Star documentation and Senator Kerry deserved it. All that was known in the first few days after they appeared.

Clinton vaunted war room was a reaction because his past kept creeping in. There goal was to respond as positively as possible (or at least throw up flack) so the media would never have just the other side. In Kerry's case - the Naval records, alone - which the media had in the spring, was equivilent to what the Clinton people produced.

The difference was that the media willing played with the SBVT long after they were proved to have been liars. Note that the media still goes to O'Neil for quotes.

Kerry faced an environment far tougher than the one the self- satisfied egotist (Clinton)did.

- In previous elections, a group known to be associated with one candidate which levelled outrageous charges against the other would have backfired. All the Navy records back Kerry, a historian’s book backed Kerry and Kerry’s people disproved a huge number of lies. Instead of taking the campaign sponsoring this to task the media played with it.

- The media failed to cover his rallies or his major speeches - other than the convention - to the degree that was normal in past elections. Clinton's rallies were shown and there was a sense of momentum building up. Kerry's were hidden - showing the reporter as much as Kerry and a very narrow crowd shot.

- The government used terror warnings as political devises.

Stick with your fantansy of BIG DOG. I'll remember that in 2004

-Bill Clinton selfishly refused to delay the publishing of his book until after the election. Effectively stealing a couple of weeks right before Kerry's convention. (this and the death of Reagan "took" the oxygen away for at least 4-5 weeks in summer 2004.) Not to mention - what was the discussion when the book came out - the achievements of the Clinton years? No! Predictably, the first think I heard were the Monica Lewinsky parts. This is as clever as Jim McGreevey being on the cover of New York magazine and on every talk show in the run up to 2006. They should both be ashamed of themselves.

- I'll also remember that he advised Kerry to speak on the domestic issues, ignoring national security - because that's the Bush strength. Then he passed the fact that he did to every reporter he knew. So, Begala and Carville and others whined every time Kerry spoke on Iraq and National Security - which drove his numbers up. They also repeated the ABB nonsense. I have NEVER heard that used in a general election - the normal use is in primaries to block a front runner who is outside the mainstream. In any general election, there are a large number of people who never vote the other party - here they were designated ABB. (Well retroactively - I am ABB too - in 1992 - Clinton wasn't my primary favorite!)

- I'll also remember his idiotic recommendation that Kerry, with an outstanding career long record on civil rights for gays endorse all the gay bashing amendments. Kerry was not sufficiently caught in the headlights to do something that would be politically assinine, morally wrong and something that would compromise Kerry's very real integrity. The latter something Clinton might not understand.

Clinton is a two term president but Kerry is a far better man than Clinton could ever be.

-

[dansolo]

100. I think the Perot factor was a net zero gain

I've read that the people who voted for Perot were nearly split evenly between those who would have voted for Bush, those who would have voted for Clinton, and those who wouldn't have voted. One effect that Perot did have was that his entry into the race gave Bush two opponents to focus on. I believe that Clinton would have won even if Perot hadn't been in the race.

[karynnj]

102. Those studies ignore the dynamics of the election.

Perot was in the race for many months before the conventions. He and his charts were out for months arguing that the Bush administration was destroying the economy. (Remember the great sucking sound from Mexico). At one point in late spring, Clinton was actually polling 3rd out of 3.

The debates included all three. Perot mainly ignored Clinton and hammered Bush, who he considered the real competition. Perot ran an extemely populist campaign. Then suddenly he pulled out from the race, declaring that the dignified President of the US had people threatening to ruin his daughter's wedding. For most of us, that immediately designated him as "loony". At that point, the people alligned with Perot were left with no candidate - they had rejected Bush to come to Perot and they most of them didn't go back. It was at this time that Clinton for the first time polled ahead of Bush.

Then came the Democratic convention - I don't remember the number of hours of network coverage - but it was greater than the 9 hours Gore got or the 3 hours Kerry got. The media consolidation worked really well! This time allowed Clinton to define himself to a fawning press corps.

There was the Republican convention and the return of Perot, who never regained his earlier numbers. The studies that look only at the exit polls and ask Perot voters to chose, ignore the earlier effects of Perot.

[Imagevision]

108. Man, I come from the old school, Clinton? actions speak louder then words!

Bill yap-yap-yap, wonderful, colorful, I'm sure the conversation with Bush Sr. doing the tsunomi commercials were..informative? - shoot! even Babs was claiming you as an adopted son, that's when you got to be interesting to observe...

Bill says he's tired of Rove's Bullshit, Bill someone with your experience political acumen surely can be of some assistance to the party your wife belongs to that is attempting to regain the power in washington. - See what you can come up with.

[blue cat]

101. I agree with you

great post

[karynnj]

103. Thanks - I wish I wrote it in less anger

but it really bothers me that Clinton acts like a big slightly clumsy animal who seems to have no idea that he is knocking things over.

In a way, I am angrier at the Gore comments because Gore risked his own reputation to stand behind him when Clinton needed him.

[pinto]

6. Still one smart guy. I appreciate his continued presence in public life,

and suspect he wouldn't have it any other way. LOL. Ya gotta love it.

[ktlyon]

22. Yup, you got to be a ham to some degree to be President

unfortunately the President we have now is a ham sandwich, one worth inditing

[Smarmie Doofus]

7. Hmmm... Lots of DEMS, and the vast majority of people...

>>>It was a mistake, and I would have made it, too....The administration did not shoot straight on the nuclear issue or on Saddam's supposed ties to Al Qaeda prior to 9/11.">>>

in the western world knew it was a "mistake" at the time and knew the administration was not "shooting straight" at the time.

What does it say about Bill... and Hillary... that that they couldn't figure that out ?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

39. Yes, including 22 Dems and 1 Indepedent...

in the Senate who saw through thte bullshit and voted against authorizing this war.

Anyone who claims ignorance or that this wasn't a vote for war is just a lying sack of shit.

Read what Sen. Robert Byrd said on the Senate floor before the vote and tell me the Senate didn't know they were voting for a war on Iraq, but still wanted the weasel room to put the blame on Bush for going in by claiming "we didn't know" or "we we authorized military action as a last resort":

...The Senate is rushing to vote on whether to declare war on Iraq without pausing to ask why. Why is war being dealt with not as a last resort but as a first resort? Why is Congress being pressured to act now, as of today, 33 days before a general election when a third of the Senate and the entire House of Representatives are in the final, highly politicized, weeks of election campaigns? As recently as Tuesday (Oct. 1), the President said he had not yet made up his mind about whether to go to war with Iraq. And yet Congress is being exhorted to give the President open-ended authority now, to exercise whenever he pleases, in the event that he decides to invade Iraq. Why is Congress elbowing past the President to authorize a military campaign that the President may or may not even decide to pursue? Aren't we getting ahead of ourselves?

...So where does Iraq enter the equation? No one in the Administration has been able to produce any solid evidence linking Iraq to the September 11 attack. Iraq had biological and chemical weapons long before September 11. We knew it then, and we know it now. Iraq has been an enemy of the United States for more than a decade. If Saddam Hussein is such an imminent threat to the United States, why hasn't he attacked us already? The fact that Osama bin Laden attacked the United States does not, de facto, mean that Saddam Hussein is now in a lock and load position and is readying an attack on the United States. In truth, there is nothing in the deluge of Administration rhetoric over Iraq that is of such moment that it would preclude the Senate from setting its own timetable and taking the time for a thorough and informed discussion of this crucial issue.

...The questions surrounding the wisdom of declaring war on Iraq are many and serious. The answers are too few and too glib. This is no way to embark on war. The Senate must address these questions before acting on this kind of sweeping use of force resolution. We don't need more rhetoric. We don't need more campaign slogans or fund raising letters. We need - the American people need - information and informed debate.

[karynnj]

109. It was never a majority of people in the US

Even AFTER the inspectors were in the numbers barely touched the 40% range at the highest. I was following them and my husband 3 kids and I protested in DC and NYC in Jan and Feb 2003 respectively.

In October, 2002 when Powell was lying, before Wilson spoke out, when Blair (heretofore normal) agreed, when the inspectors weren't in yet, the percent who believed we should do "something" was well over 50%. In addition, Bush himself was saying it wasn't a vote for war.

Bill had been President 2 years before - he likely knew more intelligence than most Senators.

[rubberducky]

8. I would much rather a president that prefers......

bj`s to torture!

[Ilsa]

9. "I've reached an age now where it doesn't matter whatever happens to me...

WHAT??? Of course it matters! THere is still so much he can do with his wit, humor, support of causes, etc. His word is still gold for many in the world, and he is alot more trusted and trustworthy than his successor.

Every once in a while I dream I get to meet The Big Dawg. It's always a really cool, stimulating meeting with the most charismatic man on the planet.

[mtnsnake]

11. How the hell did we go from such smart men like Clinton & Carter to

a babbling fucking dunce like that semi-literate stuttering idiot who can't even spell his own middle initial right.

[kpete]

12. more

Clinton on the Bush administration: "It just makes me mad...I just wish I were there trying to articulate an alternative vision."

On the fact that he is not: "You have to bloom where you're planted."

[LuckyLib]

57. He may not be prez, but he has a HUGE voice. And he needs to

use it loudly and often. Call it like it is, Bill. We have an almost dead press, we need every loud national voice we can get!

[karynnj]

67. True

Where was this big voice in fall 2002 and early 2003, when the inspectors were in and it was far more obvious than in october 2002 when inspectors hadn't been in Iraq for 4 years? He know says that getting the inspectors in was why his wife and others voted as they did - but where were he and Hillary then? (There ARE Kerry op-eds, and speeches against rushing to war - to my knowledge NO Clinton ones.)

[INdemo]

13. Lets assume that Clinton could have and would have ran against Bush in

2004.considering Diebold and all other E-voting machines and election fraud, Bush would have stolen the election from him as well..

[appal_jack]

21. Diebold-ing is only possible if...

Diebold-ing is only possible if the two candidates/parties are so close in the polls that a little electronic funny-business can go unnoticed/ignored by a majority of the populace.

I'm not saying that electronic voting isn't a problem: vapor ballots endanger democracy in a big way. Rather, I'm saying that to effectively combat Diebold & co. at present, we need a firebrand of a candidate who can rally a substantial plurality - not try to win via careful triangulation that shoots for 51% at best. It's too easy for machines to change 51% into 49%.

I dream of a (Democratic) candidate who really gets going on single-payer national healthcare, sustainable energy, an end to the failed drug war (plus a re-invigoration of all citizen liberties/Constitutional rights), a re-direction of national defense toward securing our people rather than propping up a corporate empire, and a re-structured tax system that rewards job-creation and penalizes pollution (i.e.- Gore's recent speech). I truly believe that 75% of America could rally behind such a campaign if the candidate could preach these concepts with fire and passion.

-app

[blm]

26. When votes are switching from candidate A to candidate B, margins mean zip

Candidate B is STILL getting the votes no matter what the margin.

Subtract 5 million from Bush's total and add 5million to Kerry's - it's beyond 2%

[Ignacio Upton]

86. How about running against him in 2000?

Clinton is someone that the VRWC (term coined by Hillary) couldn't beat.

[CarlVK]

14. "like a deeer caught in the headlights"

I hope the Kerry Hit Squad around here remembers this the next time they are made to bear some criticism of their man. I didn't say it....

BILL CLINTON DID.

[TankLV]

17. And I agree whole heartedly with that observation.

"Like a deer in the headlights".

Perfect.

We can do better.

Much better...

[blm]

25. Bill "RFK Jr. makes a compelling case that Kerry won" Clinton?

Of course, he said that to ALTERNATE press only.

Bill "Thank god for IranContra and BCCI investigations or I could never have won in 1992" Clinton?

Bill "Democrats have to stop opposing Bush and speak hopefully" Clinton?

Bill "I closed the books on Bush's crimes so he could have a peaceful retirement" Clinton?

Bill "Kerry needs to support anti-gay amendments on the ballot in red states" Clinton?

THAT Bill Clinton?

[tomreedtoon]

77. So Clinton flew the planes into the WTC, eh?

Don't blame Clinton for Kerry's loss. Remember, Kerry and his campaign insisted that Clinton stay quiet during the campaign. They didn't want his help. They didn't want anyone else's help, even when Bush stole votes and Kerry didn't want to protest the results.

Well, Kerry sure proved he wasn't a candidate like Clinton. Clinton won and accepted his win.

[blm]

79. HORSEpoo. No one has EVER said Kerry told Clinton to be quiet. That's

pure fantasy.

And Clinton's people in charge of the DNC are the ones who FAILED to secure the voting machines and the voter rolls BEFORE the vote. AFTER is too late with rigged machines set up for one time use and then completely UNTRACEABLE.

Clinton and McAuliffe didn't believe in machine fraus, and their Voter Integrity unit didn't exactly counter the tactics of the RNC very effectively did they?

Gore and Kerry both won - they DID their job - the collapsed party infrastructure in too many states made certain that their votes would never be counted properly. DNC and their Voter Integrity division bears the blame - they didn't do the job.

[karynnj]

116. Why do think Clinton would have listened?

I agree that not only is it unlikely that Kerry told Clinton not to speak on this, consider what he did speak about:

From memory, before Congress even came together, Clinton had:
-made a comment that he liked both Kerry and Bush.
-told reporters that he advised Kerry to endorse the gay bashing bills - a move that likely would have made the margin for Bush far greater - as it would show as nothing else REALLY did - that he was a flip flopper. Kerry, to his credit, stayed true to his life long beliefs on civil rights.

A test of how much sway Kerry had after losing is that at the point where he was the Democratic standard bearer there were many stories that his people wanted Clinton to delay his book 6 months until after the election. Instead, in a move emmulated by ex Governor McGreevey this year in NJ, he put the book out about 4 weeks before Kerry's convention. This and Reagan's death took media time away from Kerry in the weeks leading up to the convention.

Consider what replaced stories that could have helped introduced Kerry and Edwards.

- Hours of coverage cannonizing Reagan, which helped Bush as his ideological descendant and made any mention of Iran Contra a landmine - even though Kerry was the good guy.

- The rush to be the first to cover Clinton's book ... by going to the index, looking in the Ls and seeing what he had to say about that mess. In 2000, it was unavoidable that Clinton's behavior was still pretty recent. By 2004, this was about 6 years old and though still there was fading. Clinton and Kerry himself in speeches spoke of the 8 years of peace and prosperity. The coverage of the book brought back the less positive side. This also helped Bush and hurt Kerry.

So, if Kerry couldn't stop him in June 2004, how could he in Nov 2004.

[ray of light]

80. you bought the rumor HOOK, LINE, & sinker!

And this was the MAIN STREAM MEDIA who spread that little lie. And you believed them.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[CarlVK]

82. Attacking Bill Clinton in favor of Kerry. That's a new one!

LOL

[blm]

93. Can you refute what was said? Nope.

.

[flpoljunkie]

32. What Bill won't say or do to promote Hillary's presidential aspirations--

This from a man who took political advice from the likes of Dick Morris in his 1996 campaign. The man apparently has no shame.

[madfloridian]

49. She's why he met with "selected" bloggers.

Which was really a divisive thing to do. He angered a lot of bloggers.

[flpoljunkie]

64. Yep! Totally transparent act.

[karynnj]

69. Dick Morris - ugggh

As one who has moved to dislike as far as Clinton is concerned, I was sorry for Clinton when I heard Morris on the radio stabbing Clinton in the back repeatedly on the PT911.

[karynnj]

68. And Clinton never lies or distorts the truth?

This is all about feeding his egotism and pushing Hillary.

[datasuspect]

73. i can't shake the nagging suspicion

that kerry was in somebody's pocket from the get go.

[Fovea]

15. As someone who desperately needs universal health care

that sentence is goddamn hard to read without crying.

[Democrat 4 Ever]

16. That article in The New Yorker was worth the price of the

subscription alone. TNY has long, in depth discussions that the editors lets the authors fully develop.

The Clinton article was 24 full pages and was as good a job as any I've seen done. It didn't ignore his foibles, it went into his failures in office, his successes, what he is doing now. Just made me nostalgic for the good old days.

The New Yorker doesn't appear to have the article posted online yet. If you find it, it is well worth the read.

[AtomicKitten]

59. thanks for the tip

Despite the selective criticism of Clinton's audacity to * ahem * speak candidly about certain candidates of choice around here, he did a damn fine job as president overall (yes, Virginia, I am aware of his shortcomings). I, of course, acknowledge that as a human being we all fall short of perfection. A nostalgic review of life before this nightmare would be most welcome.

[blm]

76. He disses Gore, too. See, Gore and Kerry won he sez to one crowd and then

to MOST crowds he complains that they lost but never mentions one word about election fraud.

Nor does he tell them how HE really feels, that if Kerry would have taken HIS advice and supported anti-gay amendments on the ballots, he would have won.

So, let's talk about how "candid" Clinton really is.

[AtomicKitten]

91. Clinton was asked and gave campaign advice

on how Kerry could take some red states. It is what it is. Strategy. Period.

You are perfectly entitled to disagree as is everybody else without feeling the need to turn defense into offense against all that is perceived to stand in the way of your favorite politician. Life is not that simplistic and neither is politics.

[blm]

94. I am quite certain I have read all the many layers to all these characters

I tried the simplistic approach with Clinton, till I read his book.

And the point was that Clinton doesn't tell his audiences what REALLY transpired and what he REALLY thinks so he's hardly being candid as you say.

Was he being candid with the ALTERNATE press when he's concerned that RFKs article was compelling and he now thinks Kerry won or is he candid when he complains about why he now says Kerry lost?

[AtomicKitten]

97. ***

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2166701&mesg_id=2173753

[karynnj]

70. I agree - He is infuriating, but he is doing good onsome things

He is a very flawed extraordinary person. It didn't make me nostalgic as much as angry that I accepted in him what I would have condemned in a Republican.

[OzarkDem]

19. Completely agree w/ his comments on death

spoken like a political activist who has faced their own mortality.

He also seems to have learned a lot since his term in office. I wish there were some way to let him serve again.

[Mad_Dem_X]

20. WE MISS YOU, PRESIDENT CLINTON!

Now here was a president. Down-to-earth, intelligent, and willing to own up to his mistakes.

[wisteria]

23. Well, I am sick of Clinton and his ego.

He criticizes two other Dem's to make his wife look better. Funny,I never got the impression that Kerry looked like a wide eyed deer. maybe he is getting old and confused or has been spending to much time with the Bush's, because if anyone looked like a deer caught in the headlights it was our current President-Bush. As for his ego, he was lucky to have won two races,but lets face it they weren't tough ones and he won despite himself.Bush the first, was an awful campaigner and the Republican vote was split because of R. Pierrot, his first election and look who challenged him the second time- Dole- no contest there at all. Kerry brought out more voters and came within 2.3% of beating an incumbent war time president. Gore and Kerry lost many votes on moral issues and that is directly attributable to Clinton. So Clinton needs to STFU about other Democrats and just concentrate on the Republicans.

[INdemo]

28. You got it

Unfortunate comment by Bill .By the way Bill forgot to thank you for NAFTA..

Of course he is laying the groundwork for Hillary...Now (not saying Kerry will win) but when the primaries start and Hillary makes that early exit(I dont care how much money she has)what excuse will Bill have for her..... It certainly would have been more appropriate if he would have commented on the fraudulent election.

[Catherine Vincent]

30. "..concentrate on the Republicans. "

Well he was commenting on them too.

[fudge stripe cookays]

35. 2 words.

Fairness Doctrine.

I can never forget the fact that he had EIGHT FUCKING YEARS in office to bring it back. And we're suffering for it now by the stranglehold companies like Clear Channel and Newscorp have over our media.

Point the finger at whomever you want, Big Dawg. Part of the blame lies with you.

[wtmusic]

38. Good point

in fairness to the Dog, his second term was with a GOP-controlled congress, and it wouldn't have passed anyway. For his first term I don't think anyone saw the broader implications of what was happening. Even in the eighties the Doctrine was showing its age--is it really practical or necessary to offer equal time on hundreds of different competing cable channels?

IMO the important word here is "competing", and the problem lies in corporate consolidation, not in content. If Clinton was aggressively anti-merger it wouldn't have mattered that Rush had his little syndicated bullshit show. There would be lots of others from which to choose.

[LoZoccolo]

52. I'm sick of Clinton bashing and am putting you on ignore.

I barely even read any of your post. What do you think about that?

[savemefromdumbya]

56. Clinton was good for American relations with other countries

unlike some we know

[LoZoccolo]

61. I heard that while I was petitioning to get Dean on the primary ballot.

Someone from Kenya told me that he couldn't sign it because he wasn't a citizen, but stuck around to tell me how good of a president Clinton was in "selling" America to other countries, making visits and such.

[BlueJac]

27. We need more people to say that......

Like all the Dems.

[HamdenRice]

29. Has Chelsea enlisted yet?

I agree with all the fond sentiments about the Big Dog when he was president, but frankly, Hillary's refusal to come out openly against the war and Bill's cozying up to the dictator's family has been making me sick.

Since the article mentions Chelsea's views on AIDS, I want to know what the hell she is doing investment banking when there is a gun and uniform waiting for her.

In all past major wars, the children of our political leaders who supported those wars enlisted -- most prominently for current political discussions, the son of Sen. Gore, Al Gore Jr., went to Vietnam.

I really and honestly believe that Chelsea, Jenna and Barbara need to get their asses into uniform and go to Iraq if their parents are so gung ho to "finish the mission."

[muryan]

85. why should chelsea, jenna and barbara go

they didnt vote for it, their parents did.

[Smarmie Doofus]

87. If memory serves, Gore Sr. was against the war....

>>>In all past major wars, the children of our political leaders who supported those wars enlisted -- most prominently for current political discussions, the son of Sen. Gore, Al Gore Jr., went to Vietnam.>>>>>

by the time Gore Jr. went to VN. Although Gore Sr. did vote for the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution.

But yes....Chelsea and the girls need to be on the front lines; and *would* be if their parents had any credibility.

[politicasista]

89. Chelsea has a right to do what she pleases

How come Jenna and Barbara haven't enlisted? You aren't helping Gore that much by bashing other Dems just to promote him.

[ProSense]

31. Bill Clinton on Bush uranium line: 'Everybody makes mistakes'

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/23/clinton.iraq.sotu/

[flpoljunkie]

34. Thanks for the link, and the reminder of how Bill stood with Bush.

[madfloridian]

47. That was dead wrong for him to say that.

No one should make mistakes like that.

[Strawman]

33. The problem with "the winning business"

Clinton says:

"We've got to be in the winning business," he would say, "because without winning"-without taking power-"it's the other guy, and the other guy's ideas, that prevail."

The problem is if you go too far in accomodating the other side's ideas in order to win, you have to govern with those ideas.

We have to be in the business of winning with our ideas.

[EnemyCombatant]

36. Remember Al Gore

Excuse me.

How come Al Gore knew not to vote for this war.
How come Al Gore knows the patriot act needs to be ripped.

You see people, that's the difference between Gore and Clinton.

Bill hangs out with old man Bush, while Gore is trying to save the planet and is getting ripped a new one for doing so.

Now Bill Clinton will not even mention Al Gore's name, even when talking about climate change. Go figure.

[karynnj]

71. Agree on almost everything you said

except - Bill Clinton DID mention Al Gore's name in this article - in at least two places.

To call Al Gore a LOSER, unlike himself. He linked Gore and Kerry to McGovern, Dukakis, and Mondale.

Only H*I"L*L*A*R*Y can save the party.

[Uncle Joe]

121. Welcome to D.U. EnemyCombatant

:hi:

[LoZoccolo]

53. Bullshit, that's an exaggeration.

And until November, I can't be bothered with exaggerations.

[Strawman]

74. There's a point where Clinton concedes too much

He's mixing together strategic gaffes by Kerry and trying to justify his own compromises of principle. Not hitting back hard enough at the Swift Boaters back was not a validation of Clinton's triangulation on core issues, it was just dumb strategy.

This is the guy who advised Kerry to come out for anti-gay marriage referrenda. That's the kind of shit I'm talking about. I don't think there's anything wrong with sensible compromise, but Clinton has gone too far sometimes. That's a legitimate critique of Clinton.

In any case, I think if Kerry had half of Clinton's charisma, he could've won handily and compromised on principle even less than he actually did. I don't think that's "bullshit." We just disagree on how and why we win elections and what the implications of differing strategies are.

[DWilliamsamh]

75. Well that assumes we want to be honorable......

The other side has no problem running on one set of positions (balanced budgets, no nation building, smaller government, uniting not dividing, elevating the political discourse in DC ETC., ETC., ETC., ) and then doing a 180 once elected. LOL

[confludemocrat]

37. Any words critical of Bush, as deadly accurate as his Kerry quip was?

I see the Kerry operatives are here with their attempt to blunt the incisiveness of Clintons characterization of what a reaming their boy took in '04. But I would have liked to see an equally tough take on his friends dimwit son.

[blm]

42. Kerry won even with Clinton publicaly supporting Bush from 2001-2004

Clinton defends successor's push for war
Says Bush 'couldn't responsibly ignore' chance Iraq had WMDs

Wednesday, June 23, 2004 Posted: 7:55 AM EDT (1155 GMT)


(CNN) -- Former President Clinton has revealed that he continues to support President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq but chastised the administration over the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison.

"I have repeatedly defended President Bush against the left on Iraq, even though I think he should have waited until the U.N. inspections were over," Clinton said in a Time magazine interview that will hit newsstands Monday, a day before the publication of his book "My Life."

Clinton, who was interviewed Thursday, said he did not believe that Bush went to war in Iraq over oil or for imperialist reasons but out of a genuine belief that large quantities of weapons of mass destruction remained unaccounted for.

Noting that Bush had to be "reeling" in the wake of the attacks of September 11, 2001, Clinton said Bush's first priority was to keep al Qaeda and other terrorist networks from obtaining "chemical and biological weapons or small amounts of fissile material."

"That's why I supported the Iraq thing. There was a lot of stuff unaccounted for," Clinton said in reference to Iraq and the fact that U.N. weapons inspectors left the country in 1998.

"So I thought the president had an absolute responsibility to go to the U.N. and say, 'Look, guys, after 9/11, you have got to demand that Saddam Hussein lets us finish the inspection process.' You couldn't responsibly ignore a tyrant had these stocks," Clinton said.
>>>>

[wisteria]

44. I strongly disagree with your own fantasied version of the 04 election,

however, I will agree with the comment that Clinton needs to be commenting on Bush.

[karynnj]

72. Why would Clinton do that? It doesn't help Hillary

[ray of light]

81. opreatives? geez you have a heck of an imagination!

So the next time you post on Clinton, Gore, Edwards or whomever...I guess you're an 'operative' too.

geez...talk about tin-foil!

[confludemocrat]

122. Hit a nerve did I? The usual Kerry operatives are here.

Why do I call them operatives (not of my coinage by the way, another poster can be credited)? Because they have the same modus operandi: Kerry is flawless, everyone is wrong about his failures in '04, we just can't see it. He has a spotless record as a liberal (usually his ADA rating only), and his vote for the Iraq war was some convoluted thing other than that and he is always the courageous leader of the pack. And his rapid capitulation after the election is of no consequence as he is a leader of the pack on voting irregularities too. All bunk.

[ProSense]

41. "deer caught in the headlights"

Here's one:

Clinton defends successor's push for war

Says Bush 'couldn't responsibly ignore' chance Iraq had WMDs

Wednesday, June 23, 2004 Posted: 7:55 AM EDT (1155 GMT)

(CNN) -- Former President Clinton has revealed that he continues to support President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq but chastised the administration over the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison.

"I have repeatedly defended President Bush against the left on Iraq, even though I think he should have waited until the U.N. inspections were over," Clinton said in a Time magazine interview that will hit newsstands Monday, a day before the publication of his book "My Life."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/19/clinton.iraq/index.html

If Bill Clinton is tired of Rove's BS, he needs to stop spewing it, which is what he's doing with this claim. He must have forgotten that Kerry got 12 million more votes than he did!

[AtomicKitten]

62. you are attributing

... an overall impression by many Democrats to RW spin. Ironically it is your bait and switch tactic to deflect that which makes you feel uncomfortable that is right out of the GOP playbook.

[ray of light]

84. This is ridiculous...Clinton is trying to boost Hillary's chances

by bashing the possible future opponent. It's interesting, because he actually MET with Kerry in the hospital and gave KERRY advice which the campaign TOOK! AND that is proven by the people who were added/dismissed after that hospital visit.

AND not only that, but many of those EXPERIENCED campaigners were the SAME people in charge of Al Gore's 2000 campaign. So...something tells me that the wrong person is being villified. The same way they vilified Al Gore in 2000 they're doing to Kerry in 04.

[AtomicKitten]

88. unless you are sleeping under Clinton's bed

you are in no position to dictate what he thinks, feels, or is trying to do. THAT kind of extrapolation (reads guessing) is what is ridiculous.

[karynnj]

92. If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck

it may possibly be one. Clinton's pushing Hillary is NOT a secret or even mysterious. As to cutting others down to get what he wants - read the Stephanopolis book. He clearly derailed Kerrey.

[ray of light]

112. lol--riiiiiiiiiiiight...and I'm sure that when he wagged his

finger and said, "I didn't have sexual relations with that woman" that I needed to be in that room to know he was trying to save his own sexual promiscuity too.

Please...the guy and Hillary have made no bones about the fact they want her to run. Particularly Bill Clinton has shown he wants to cozy up to the bloggers in cyberspace for Hillary. Plus...he did her dirty work supporting Lieberman so she wouldn't have to take the netroots ire on that one too.

His and her motives are so transparant that I don't even need to put on my glasses to see the writing on the wall.

[karynnj]

90. Did you read the 23 page New Yorker article? Not online

I subscribe to it and read it. You should read it because you may actually agree with what she is saying. One major theme that Clinton brings up twice is that there are winners and there are losers. In one instance, he then says that Gore and Kerry, "both honorable men" are losers. He then puffs himself up as a winner. The second time he is simply speaking again about being a winner and he lists Kerry and Gore in with McGovern, Mondale and Dukakis.

I don't have the magazine at hand, I think my husband took it to work. Before blasting Prosense, read the article.

He also speaks as though only Hillary could possibly be a strong candidate. I was surprised he was no obnoxious with Gore, because someone posted they were reconciled. (It's clear that he is not close to Kerry.)

[ProSense]

95. "I have repeatedly defended President Bush against the left on Iraq"

Actually, that is what makes me uncomfortable.

[AtomicKitten]

96. tell ya what, kerry fans

Been there, done that.

I don't agree with you and you aren't going to let it rest and will continue to belabor your point accelerating to the point of punctuating your frustration with snotty name-calling and ridicule because I won't yield, and I'm not going to bite.

I disagree with you. Get over it.

[ProSense]

98. Excellent bait and switch and extrapolation! n/t

[AtomicKitten]

104. If you had a clue what those terms meant

you might be able to use them correctly and effect a proper insult.

Maybe someone could draw you a map.

[ProSense]

110. Here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bait_and_switch

http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?extrapolation

Map: See post 96

[AtomicKitten]

113. Okay, I'll draw it for you since you need help.

I realize you must have the last word, but you also clearly need some information in your pathetic effort to insult me.

bait and switch:
see post #41

Now here in trying to comes to terms with the fact you are sad it is the consensus that Kerry's campaign could be characterized by the phrase "deer in the headlights," you have tried switching the focus to the accuser, offering completely off-topic information as subterfuge, ergo bait and switch. A technique BTW used frequently albeit unsuccessfully by the wingnuts.

extrapolation:
see post #84

Here a tag-team fan in an effort to process the comment about Kerry has decided to attack Clinton's intentions, starting with his theory and working backwards making up crap along the way to see what sticks. A technique BTW often employed at DU when a substantive argument cannot be made so good old-fashioned guessing and piecing together of pseudofacts will do.


*** Now, we all know how important it is for you to have the last word. This time, I want you to put on your thinking cap, reach deep, and come up with a real zinger (it has to make sense this time) to win the approval of your cheering section which we all know doesn't take much, but I know you can do better.

[ProSense]

114. "you have tried switching the focus to the accuser"

Full text of post 41:

"deer caught in the headlights"

Here's one:

Clinton defends successor's push for war

Says Bush 'couldn't responsibly ignore' chance Iraq had WMDs

Wednesday, June 23, 2004 Posted: 7:55 AM EDT (1155 GMT)

(CNN) -- Former President Clinton has revealed that he continues to support President Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq but chastised the administration over the abuses at Abu Ghraib prison.

"I have repeatedly defended President Bush against the left on Iraq, even though I think he should have waited until the U.N. inspections were over," Clinton said in a Time magazine interview that will hit newsstands Monday, a day before the publication of his book "My Life."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/19/clinton.iraq/index.html

If Bill Clinton is tired of Rove's BS, he needs to stop spewing it, which is what he's doing with this claim. He must have forgotten that Kerry got 12 million more votes than he did!

See post 62!

[karynnj]

119. Atomic Kitten

Your message made me see the light.

I will take everything said by Bill Clinton as gospel truth. I will ignore any time in the past where there was reason to see Bill Clinton as ever saying things to further an agenda. I will ignore the fact that everyone says that Hillary is a front runner in 2008. I will ignore that it is likely that if Hillary runs, her own husband will support her.

No, I seriously can't do that - you have to look at the past to understand the present and to predict the future.

I do ask, did YOU read the 23 page New Yorker article? My comments are based on having read it. I stand behind every FACT and every OPINION I posted.

I also happen to think that Clinton's comments calling Kerry, whose National Security credentials are among the best the Democrats have, as weak on defense was detrimental to the party. Especially as:

- Clinton has picked up Kerry's 2004 call for improving port security and implementing the 911 recommendation
- Clinton has picked up Kerry's call to realize that Afghanistan is a problem (It's interesting that Clinton criticized Kerry speaking out on Tora Bora in 2002)
- George Will and others have commented that Kerry was right on the WoT in 2004
- Kerry has a real Iraq plan, Clinton doesn't even have a clear position
- Clinton is now crediting to Hillary and all Democrats (except Lieberman), Kerry's reason for voting for IWR - though Kerry did speak out before the war and the Clintons, who had a bigger voice, didn't.
- Kerry is, as Clinton said, a decorated war hero.

Clinton CONTRASTED Hillary's "strong" position to Kerry's "weak" position - we are not making up that Clinton is trying to push his wife for President.

[karynnj]

107. Nice catch, Prosense

Note that even in at the end of June, 2004, Clinton was still supporting Bush's decision to go to war. Very helpful to HIS candidate,.... if he prefered Bush. Also note that the people against the war are referred to as "the left", who Clinton was protecting Bush from.

Odd, that his book didn't give Kerry credit where credit was due - on things like the POW/MIA committee - which by McCain's account Kerry contributed far more to. Clinton gave minimal credit to anyone, other than himself - what he did give gave most of the credit to McCain. Kerry, the chair of the committee was mentioned only in the list of all the Senators involved.

The book came out at the end of June. The 2004 nominee was known by March. The book was not completed by then - a few paragraphs crediting the candidate for work done in over 900 pages wouldn't be unreasonable to expect. Instead there was a strange description of the Kerry/Weld race. Clinton speaks about how Weld was his favorite governor, but decides he "didn't want to lose" Kerry because he was a top Democrat on technology and the environment. He then had a tortured sentence that said that Kerry had spent an enormous amount of time and effort on youth violence an issue that had concerned him since he was a prosecutor ALTHOUGH IT WAS AN ISSUE THAT EARNED NO VOTES but he guessed that wasn't a bad thing for a politician. To me, that sentence crystalized the difference in the two men.

[confludemocrat]

123. Neither here nor there, Prosense, a "bobble" at best and a fumble really

since essentially Clinton out and out and (wrongly) supported Bush in the war (and didn't mince words) while Kerry danced around it and spun his "opposition" as I-could-do-it-better, while essentially standing by his support of the war with his essential confirmation that "knowing what I know now, I would still have voted the way I did" (my paraphrase)!

[Bushladen]

45. Well

It sure was great to see him on the Daily Show last night. And it also scares me that he hangs with the Bush crime family. I watched this video last night http://www.8thestate.com/?page_id=12
and it was really interesting to see that Clinton was involved in drug smuggling in Arkansas with the help of the Bush crime family. The video is the "Who killed John O'Neill"

[madfloridian]

46. He blasts Kerry, then hangs around with all the Bushes....I resent that.

He should not have made comments about Democrats that were critical while hanging with the Bush family, now even Laura and GWB, I hear.

He messed with the 04 primaries. He should not have done that.

He needs to criticize the Bushes more and hang with Democrats.

[CarlVK]

83. He called himself an Eisenhower Republican. What else do you want?

seems pretty clear to me.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

51. Wow, nobody has a problem with this?:

Clinton on the vote to go into Iraq: "I'm sick and tired of being told that if you voted for authorization you voted for the war. It was a mistake, and I would have made it, too....The administration did not shoot straight on the nuclear issue or on Saddam's supposed ties to Al Qaeda prior to 9/11."

Seems like a few Congress folks saw through the utter bullshit. Wasnt a vote for authorization in fact a vote for war, knowing what everybody knew about bushco's lust for war on Iraq? How many of the ones who didnt see through the horseshit admit it was a mistake. How many of those who voted for authorization truly believed the Saddam-Al Qaeda connection? Could the statement have anything to do with Hillary?

[rman]

54. Bill talks, nothing happens

[LoZoccolo]

55. You talk, I don't hear it.

[ProSense]

60. Clinton: I am very proud of John Kerry and the campaign he has run.

"Transcript: President Clinton and Senator Kerry in Philadelphia
October 25, 2004
Philadelphia, PA

Our friends on the other side want a world where they concentrate wealth and power on the far right, do what they want to when they can and cooperate with others only when they have to. I am very proud of John Kerry and the campaign he has run. He never gives up.
(Applause)

He never gives up. I remember in the primary campaign, very early, they were saying, "Oh, Kerry's dead. He's dashed expectations. He can't win." He just kept being John Kerry. And he won in Iowa. He won in New Hampshire. And he won the nomination for president.
(Applause)

I remember, early in this campaign, they said, "Oh, Kerry's beat. He's too far behind. He's dead as a door nail." And then he gave us three magnificent performances in those debates, and he's leading in this race.
(Applause)

CLINTON: I am proud that John Kerry has treated the voters of America with genuine respect. He's given them his specific plans on jobs, on health care, on energy, on security...

http://www.clintonfoundation.org/102504-cf-gn-ele-usa-ts-wjc-and-senator-kerry-in-philadelphia.htm

[AtomicKitten]

63. it's a speech

He's saying what he's supposed to say and you'd really be screaming if he didn't. He is not only entitled to his opinion when speaking candidly after the fact, but he is doing precisely what he is supposed to in supporting the Democratic candidate in a campaign.

[blm]

78. If he was speaking candidly he'd say what he really thinks - Kerry should

have taken his advice and supported states' anti-gay amendments on the ballots.

[Joanne98]

99. Clinton on the voting machines! "chirp chirp"

[Imagevision]

106. Clinton on the voting machines! "chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp chirp"!!

[Imagevision]

105. Mr. Clinton should share a plan to deal with Rove election antics

Bill can be very colorful in speeches, but a plan to help in the November elections would be a well accepted contribution from him.

Countless millions are fed up with Karl Roves' bullshit, what's your plan Bill...?

[njdemocrat106]

111. To the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008:

Please consider hiring Bill Clinton as your campaign advisor. The man knows what it takes to win.

[blm]

120. Clinton advised Kerry to support anti-gay amendments during the campaign.

And it waa Clinton's DNC tean led by McAuliffe that chose to ignore election fraud issues from 2001 thru 2004, even though there was an office of Voter Integrity that was charged with countering the RNCs tactics of suppression.

How did they do?

[spanone]

117. My advice to Bill would be to expose that BS at every opportunity.

Fly coast to coast. Go on every news/talk show to expose the BS. Take proof. The people will listen.

People (soldiers & civilians) are dying before their time as we speak.

[Rosemary2205]

118. Bill Clinton has a pottymouth?

I knew I liked him! :)