If that was “whining”, then bring on more whining.
Seriously, that was a WWWF style smackdown.
About bloody time, too.
Scylla, I believe Mr. Clinton is considering how the current adminstration ignored everything his out going administration warned them about OBL. “OBL Dertirmined to Attack inside the US”. Does that ring a bell?
Bush, pre-9/11, didn’t do a damn thing about OBL and just went his merry way, gutting all environmental provisions, cutting taxes, (especially for the rich) and letting Dick Cheney and some Oil and Coal guys come up with an energy policy that suits the producers of energy.
That’s what he is talking about. The fact that Bush and his gal Condi, ignored the warnings of Clinton and Richard Clarke.
That was my evidence that he was engaged in fantasy. I thought the whining to be readily apparent “Oh, it’s such an unfair question, I bet you don’t ask Replublicans those questions. Their so mean to me saying I didn’t do enough Waaaahhhh!”
You know, that stuff.
Oh, I understand the meme. I have a hard time buying it. Clinton had seven years, Bus had 8 months. Criticizing Bush for not doing enough in his 8 months is a losing argument, considering the preceding 7 years.
Frankly, I have no fault with Clinton on OBL in terms of what he actually did, nor with Bush. I thought they both acted appropriately prior to 9/11, and I expected prescience from neither.
What stuff was that, exactly? He called Fox out for its bias, which I thought was pretty well established. He may have lumped them in (fairly or not) with the producers of ABC’s Path to 9/11 but I don’t perceive anything close to whining or your hyperbolic “Waaaahhhh!” Clinton acquitted himself very well in the face of a violation of the interview format Fox had agreed to (i.e. half the time on Clinton’s Global Initiative) and which Wallace tried to backpedal from when Clinton defended himself adequately and threw in a valid counterattack against Fox for good measure.
Amazing what you can see if you work hard enough at it.
Daniel
Do you mean this?
"WALLACE: I want to ask a question. You don’t think that’s a legitimate question?
CLINTON: It was a perfectly legitimate question, but I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked this question of.
I want to know how many people in the Bush administration you asked, Why didn’t you do anything about the Cole?
I want to know how many you asked, Why did you fire Dick Clarke?
I want to know how many people you asked…
WALLACE: We asked — we asked…
CLINTON: I don’t…
WALLACE: Do you ever watch Fox News Sunday, sir?
CLINTON: I don’t believe you asked them that.
WALLACE: We ask plenty of questions of…
CLINTON: You didn’t ask that, did you? Tell the truth, Chris.
WALLACE: About the USS Cole?
CLINTON: Tell the truth, Chris.
WALLACE: With Iraq and Afghanistan, there’s plenty of stuff to ask.
CLINTON: Did you ever ask that?
You set this meeting up because you were going to get a lot of criticism from your viewers because Rupert Murdoch’s supporting my work on climate change.
And you came here under false pretenses and said that you’d spend half the time talking about — you said you’d spend half the time talking about what we did out there to raise $7-billion-plus in three days from 215 different commitments. And you don’t care.
WALLACE: But, President Clinton, if you look at the questions here, you’ll see half the questions are about that. I didn’t think this was going to set you off on such a tear.
CLINTON: You launched it — it set me off on a tear because you didn’t formulate it in an honest way and because you people ask me questions you don’t ask the other side.
WALLACE: That’s not true. Sir, that is not true."
Is this what you call whining?
You wouldn’t happen to be just a wee bit partisan, would you? 
Oh, I’d call it whining…on Wallace’s part, that is.
Scylla, don’t you remember the complaints about how Clinton was ‘wagging the dog’ about this Bin Laden guy in Afghanistan, to get away from Monicagate? That and the pharmacutical factory he hit when he did go after 'im? I do. That’s exactly why I thought of Bin Laden first when the Towers were hit and it was clear it wasn’t an accident. Well, first when I started thinking about what the hell it was.
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/08/21/wag.the.dog/
Of course not - Clinton spoke in complete and coherent sentences.
BWAHAHAHAHA!
Bill Frickin’ Clinton whining that someone is being dishonest!
BWAHAHAHAHA…
Well, you know what they say, Bill, live by the sword and all that.
Yeah, ralph124c, I saw the finger…and I found I couldn’t (necessarily) believe anything he said from that point on.
What a fuckin’ putz he is!
He sandbagged some other interviewer not long ago, too. (Brian Williams, maybe?) Anyway, it’s not really too difficult to leave an interviewer with mouth agape with such behavior. No one expects a guest to go off like that, and no one can possibly be prepared to challenge whatever random claims their guests might make during such a tirade as that.
Clinton knew damn good and well what he was gonna say and what he was gonna state by way of evidence, and he knew that Wallace (or any other interviewer for that matter) would be ill prepared to respond in any kind of meaningful way.
Clinton is a fucking bully and a fucking liar who is singularly lacking in character and it speaks volumes to me that so many people here long for the likes of him to be president again.
There aren’t enough :rolleyes: available to adequately express my detestation of that phony, lying, duplicitious asshole!
WTF?! Are you freakin’ KIDDING me?! Wallace ambushed Clinton with that question, and subsequently got his ass handed to him.
And a “bully?” Good God, man. Bush invades a nation for no reason, and Clinton is a bully?
My God. It’s like watching a Bizarro-Doper post.
Then Wallace should do his homework before he brings the subject up, shouldn’t he?
If you’d rather use this than an actual argument… okay, I guess.
I get the impression an angry reaction from Clinton was exactly what Wallace wanted because it makes for interesting, endlessly repeatable TV. I just don’t get the impression that Wallace was expecting Clinton to be angry and articulate. I think the ultimate “win” for Fox would have been for Clinton to stand up, disconnect his mike and storm off the set. I credit Clinton for having the determination to fully answer a bad question.
If Wallace was really caught flatfooted by the content of Clinton’s response, then Wallace is an ill-prepared incompetent. Note that he didn’t offer up any serious challenge to Clinton’s facts - his response was to mock-jokingly try to steer the interview back to the CGI, after Wallace himself had hijacked it. Note that in the second segment, Wallace brings up Bush43’s policies regarding Islamic democratic reforms, gets a reasoned response from Clinton, asks two questions about philanthropic fundraising (which is what Clinton wanted to focus on) but then clumsily segued with “Let’s talk some politics” and invokes Karl Rove’s name, dragging the subject away from the CGI and straight to two-party election strategy. Evidently philanthropy makes for dull TV.
Volumes? Could you give us a paragraph of two of those volumes, because that last paragraph sounds rather weaselly like a shot at the Clinton supporters on this board without actually venturing any solid arguments in support.
I gathered. Your emotional investment is apparent - now how about offering some facts?
Yeah, Let’s see, who’s TV show was it? Who convinced the former president to appear on the show? Do you suppose that enticement included the question that set Clinton off? Who set the agenda for the broadcast? Who led the guest into the trap by seemingly asking promised questions, then switching topics?
False pretenses, hatchet job? You bet! And when Wallace got his head handed to him, while he cowered in fear, Bill Clinton defended himself like a real man, not some new england, cowboy wannabe, phony swaggering, mumble mouthed, draft dodging, asshole who has set this country back a complete generation and caused the lives of thousands of people.
Clinton, despite his personal indescretions, will go down in history as one of the best, while dubya is destined to be placed along side, if not below, the likes of Pierce, Buchanan and A. Johnson.cite
Ya know, there’s journalists (as opposed to newsanchors) and photojournalists who share the same risks as military personnel on a daily basis, many of them have even earned the respect and admiration of seasoned combat vetrans, not because of the story or photograph or film the journalist produced, but because of how well they handled themselves under fire. One of those journalists made a name for himself broadcasting from rooftops in London during the Blitz, and he taught Chris Wallace’s old man everything he knows. Methinks that if Chris Wallace had to spend any time embedded with the troops, he’d quickly get his ass fragged for being such a chickenshit.
I loved it when Bill, after putting Chris Wallace in his place, leaned back and crossed his legs, clearly the sign of a man, a president in control. Then when Chris began to ask another question, Bill uncrossed his legs and screamed,
“I fucked your mother, too! She was a whore on the ship we took to Oxford. When she’d blown me I tossed her off to that little guy – he was my Secretary of Labor – and told him, get rid of this bitch, she bites.”
Or maybe that was just a part of some wierd dream I had?
Arguably the subtext suggests that not only did Clinton make Wallace his bitch, he extended the privilege to all of Wallace’s immediate family, so you’re not off by much.
Bush had seven years and eight months if had stood upon Clinton’s shoulders. Bush chose not to stand on Clinton’s shoulders by ignoring much of what Richard Clarke had to say.
I also noted he didn’t denounce spousal abuse, spam email, child pornography, reality TV, imcompentent doctors nor serial killing. I think you may be up to something.