An Interview With Bill Clinton (long)

I am telling you he wants a debate most of all. He wants to prove himself more popular than President Bush. I will NEVER forget his slimy attack on Bush right before the Republican convention. It was full of malice and envy, couched in jokey language. You know it was bad if Dad Bush got ticked off.

He wants a debate.

NO.

Good post, Jean, but if I actually read the whole thing, that would have meant I care about what he thinks.

I don't.

If you scroll about half-way down, weegee has posted it with comments, and all the "I" words in bold. The weegee-ized version is much easier to read, and there are some interesting little bits in this article.

At least we have something in writing that was posted, so we can see what a duplicitous creep he is. (As if we didn't know..ha!)

Thanks for the ping. Been waiting for weeks to read this.

I'm glad to hear that you appreciate my effort with this article.

One of the things that comes out is that Bubba Clinton wants to remain on the public stage as peer to the sitting President rather than return to civilian status.

Thus he acknowledges wanting to hold debates with past and present presidents on the issues of the day and speaking out on issues that the administration seems to be silent on.

Bubba claims that he wansn't "criticizing" President George W. Bush when he spoke out but in truth Bubba has criticized this administration repeatedly on the handling of the issues.

There is some faint agreement about the problems with Iraq that he admits to setting aside for a later date rather than resolving. Sounds like his plan with Osama, al Qaida, and terrorism in general. Bubba may have voiced this now because of wife's apparent coming flip flop on the war on Iraq.

We knew before election 2000 that this man was going to have to be dragged kicking and screaming from the White House and Washington, DC. He still wants to be in the loop. Have any other former presidents ever complained in interviews about no longer being briefed about national security issues?

He sounds like the high school football star that went on to be a shoe salesman. He peaked too early in life and has no place to go but down.

Thank you for doing that; I consider that laying down your life for this country. :-)

I laid down too much of the time of a day to really think about it. I knew that I'd have to go through the article to clean up the formating after the block replacements and the only way to do that was to read what Bubba had to say. The only way I could bear to read what he had to say without posting a lot of responses was to include my comments as I went from the top down.

Towards the end I just wanted out of this man's head and looked for formatting errors. I left in the footnote problems (that is why there is a recurring letter number code sequence in the article itself). It was in the original and I didn't want to spend more time with it.

Can you imagine how boring his book is going to be?

There was a bit of hyperbole in the historical discussions in this article; I expect the same about his growing up experiences (the most, the biggest, the poorest, I was the first...). I expect there to be a whitewash of his wrongs, attacks on conservatives (as there are in this article), blaming other presidents (Reagan and Bush notably) for problems he had to deal with "and I solved!!!" < /vomit >, criticism about how this and future administrations may have undone all of his good works before they bore fruit, and a lot victimhood whining.

I won't even touch it. What would be the point? The man won't be honest that there were legitimate reasons not to trust his word before he was elected. He later proved himself to be a man who would lie on camera, lie under oath, and cry on cue.

I wouldn't waste my time with any biographical texts on this man either. I pity the school children that will have to read condensed accounts of his administration.

When I was in primary grade through high school (early 1970s through the mid1980s) I never read a text book account that went any further than the mid-1970s (unless except a current affairs class). Actually all history after world history after WWII was sort of glossed over.

I am hesitantly intersted to see how text books cover X42's administration, his critics, and the election 2000 lawsuit. Better have a reminder of how the electoral college works; easiest thing to say is that the Albert Gore II's popular vote victory was only 0.52% more than the votes that George W. Bush got (and that's without including all of the absentee ballots in a number of states, not investigating election fraud, misread ballots, etc.). If our nation relied purely on the popular vote, we would have been faced with the Flordia legal debacle in every county in the nation as they would all need to retally the vote.

Denser populated areas would dominate the political will of America. The "Bush Country" map clearly shows how that would happen in an election based on popular vote; "flyover country" would be ignored in campaigns, large cities would be promised hand outs and jobs.

If might makes right (even though this is not a democracy), those who oppose the electoral college should be also complaining about the Senate, why should puny Rhode Island get the same number of senators as Texas or California?