Bill Clinton’s Strategic Emotion

New York Times ^ | January 21, 2008 | Matthew Continetti

[america4vr]

Remember September 2006? It was a little over a month before Election Day when Bill Clinton gave an interview to Fox News Channel’s Chris Wallace. The peg for the interview was a summit held by the Clinton Global Initiative, one of the former president’s many philanthropic activities. Wallace asked several questions about the initiative, but four minutes into the interview also brought up criticisms of the Clinton administration’s counterterrorism policies that had been aired in Pulitzer-prize winning journalist Lawrence Wright’s history of Al Qaeda, “The Looming Tower.” Whereupon Clinton went … ballistic. His face turned red. His voice rose. He tore into Wallace, accusing the veteran journalist, who over the decades has worked for several “mainstream” networks and whose credibility seldom has been questioned, of being a right-wing shill. He claimed the “neocons” who now say he did too little to capture or kill Osama bin Laden had in fact during the 1990s been highly critical of his administration’s emphasis on counterterrorism, that they “thought I was too obsessed with bin Laden” and “had no meetings on bin Laden for nine months after I left office.”

The former president neglected to name which “neocons” had said he had been “obsessed” with bin Laden, nor did he directly rebut the specific criticisms made in Wright’s book. That’s not what mattered, however. What mattered was Clinton’s fury, his outburst, his apparently uncontrollable emotion.

The cable news channels, which traffic in sensation and which are on constant watch for signs of “feeling” and conflict among American politicians, spent the following week interpreting the outburst. Pundits floated various theories to explain Clinton’s answer: he was fed up with the so-called right-wing noise machine; he was hoping to gin up enthusiasm among Democratic partisans prior to the election;

[america4vr]

The conservative journalist John Fund reports that even the columnist and author Joe Klein, who is sympathetic and well-connected to the Clintons, recently speculated that the former president’s behavior might be attributed to a subconscious desire on his part to see his wife’s campaign fail.

And in the new issue of Newsweek, we learn that both Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts and Illinois Representative Rahm Emmanuel — the architect of the 2006 Democratic takeover of the House of Representatives who once worked in the Clinton White House — have voiced their concerns to the former president that his, shall we say, “combative” approach to campaigning has done more harm than good.

Wow. This is breathtaking in its unbridled criticism of former President Clintonm a series of political missteps, that dramatically validates the saying there's nothing sadder than a former President of the United States

That he wants his wife's campaign to fail shouldn't be a surprise to anyone for many obvious reasons.

Needless to say, Bill Clinton's days as active participant chief architect/strategist for Hillary seems if not numbered definitely severely curtailed as a consequence of the considerable political damage Bill has engendered.

[nothingnew]

But 37 percent of respondents said yes, they would vote for Bill Clinton if he were on the ballot — and Senator Clinton won these voters by 34 points.

Unbelievable....not.

Tagline says!...........I fear for my Republic due to marxist influence in our government. Open eyes/see

FMCDH(BITS)

[Telepathic Intruder]

"thought I was too obsessed with bin Laden"

I've only heard Clinton even mention bin Laden once, and that on a scratchy recording explaining why he decided not to capture him in Somalia. For someone obsessed, he sure knew how to hide it (obsessed with bin Laden I mean, not that other thing).

[garyhope]

Just one of the many bad things about the grifter Clintons is how much time and attention is showered or wasted on them and their insatiable greed for power, identity and narcissistic ego lust.

In some ways they are holding the entire country hostage to their greedy ego needs and psychodramas.

How did two such loathsome POS’s get this much power and acclaim? It’s depressing.

I hope we survive them.

Why does the left have such little insight into reason and reality?

[flowerplough]

New York Times writer that isn’t standing in line to kiss Clinton @ss. Interesting.

[PGalt]

The former president neglected to name which “neocons” had said he had been “obsessed” with bin Laden...

"I thought my virtual obsession with him was well placed and I was full of regret that I didn't get him." - Bill Clinton on Larry King Live, Sunday September 3, 2002

You're not full of regret you're full of shit you POS serial liar.

Thanks to Mia T archives for the documentation.

[jakota]

garyhope writes How did two such loathsome POS’s get this much power and acclaim? It’s depressing.

I watched the Frank Luntz (D) forum group after the Nev debate and all my questions about (D) ignorance were answered. These were the most ill-informed, ditsy group of people I have ever seen.

. . . and the Clintons are just the type of people these loons adore.

God Help Us!

[Timeout]

In some ways they are holding the entire country hostage to their greedy ego needs and psychodramas.

...
I hope we survive them.

Survive, indeed. Their whole schtick is like a season of "Survivor". I've never watched it, but it sure was a hit.

If it would help politically, Bill and Hillary would throw chairs at one another on the Springer show (another I haven't watched).

In short, there's a huge subculture out there whose brains are simply wired in a way I can't comprehend.

[Jimmy Valentine]

"How did two such loathsome POS’s get this much power and acclaim? It’s depressing."

As a Baby Boomer, this makes me weep for my generation. We paid too little attention when these two floated to the top of the punchbowl.

[digger48]

THE CLINTON LEGACY

RECORDS SET

- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance

- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates**

- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation

- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify

- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly

- First president sued for sexual harassment.

- First president accused of rape.

- First first lady to come under criminal investigation

- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case

- First president to establish a legal defense fund.

- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions

- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad

[Dr. Scarpetta]

Thanks for your list. The thought of him in the White House again is not good. Just seeing him on tv everyday now is annoying, and I’m doubting that any Democrat or Republican can beat her. Hillary and her husband are ruthless and will do anything to win, including destroying any and all opponents.

[rockinqsranch]

“Hillary and her husband are ruthless and will do anything to win, including destroying any and all opponents.”

...and this Nation.

[G Larry]

When is Obama going to attack Hillary about her handling of the Rose Lawfirm records, which went missing for 2 years and then mysteriously appeared in the White House?

[Bigg Red]

That he wants his wife’s campaign to fail....

&&
Why would he want her to fail? He is quite anxious to get his hands on the WH again, IMO.

[Humble Servant]

“... why he decided not to capture him in Somalia. ...”

Not sure, but I think that was Sudan.

[the invisib1e hand]

what about hillary’s strategic emote?

[the invisib1e hand]

But 37 percent of respondents said yes, they would vote for Bill Clinton if he were on the ballot — and Senator Clinton won these voters by 34 points.

believeable, not. this is bs.

[UCANSEE2]

“We paid too little attention when these two floated to the top of the punchbowl.”

...floated to the top of the septic tank.

[RipSawyer]

Why does the left have such little insight into reason and reality?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Because life in LaLa land is so much more pleasant than the real world. If you can join a group that makes you feel brilliant with your I.Q. of 80 and minimal ability and accomplishment why try to compete with real thinkers? Actual reasoning is hard work, that is why there is so little original thought. If the average person were willing and able to reason things out there would not be so many screwball religious cults and I am sure you know the main one I refer to.

[garyhope]

“In short, there’s a huge subculture out there whose brains are simply wired in a way I can’t comprehend.”

You must be talking about some of my friends and relatives and my ex and her family.