This to me is like saying you need to gnaw through the fetid, decaying parts of the carcass to get to the rancid liver.
The whole idea of a program on “baby boomers” designed to explore nonexistent connections between people on the basis of a phony categorization centering on randomly chosen dates of birth is annoyingly dull to begin with, and having Clinton on there rehashing ancient stupidity would be enough to test anyone’s gag reflex.
The less I see of him the easier it is to let him slide into comfortable nonentity and to reflect that the '90s weren’t all that toxic. Seeing and hearing him is a nostalgia buzz-kill.
Well, to be fair, the program itself touched upon the fact that baby-boomers are not monolithic as a generation. And as you might imagine, with much of the focus being on hippies and Woodstock and so forth, and how baby-boomers these days just want more and more and bigger and bigger with little thought to giving back (where’s that jerk-off smilie :rolleyes:, plenty of boomers give plenty, either through taxes or charity or both), it was not a program I particularly enjoyed. And I didn’t know Clinton was coming up. I must have been in another room when they said he was coming up next, if they even did.
Wait - I wasn’t in the US yet, so I sort of missed this, but did anyone actually think Clinton was being serious when he said he “didn’t inhale”? What the fuck is the point of smoking pot and not inhaling?
Elections aren’t about whether we should elect a lying douche. They are a question of which lying douche we should elect. That is what makes this type of one-sided analysis so worthless. It is like saying the Yankees suck because all their hitters get out more than half the time. Compared to the Royals they are still pretty good.
It was widely understood to be a lie that he was telling so people would know he was honest enough to admit he’d tried weed, but not a crazy drug addict. I didn’t think anybody took it seriously either. Bill Clinton must be the first person to present a misleading image on MTV.
Clinton once said (I think maybe on that MTV interview he did), that he had tried to inhale, but basically started choking because of his asthma. I think most people choke the first time they try to smoke pot. I did. Inhaling doesn’t come that easily, you kind of have to learn it.
I liked Obama’s anwser to the same question: “I inhaled frequently. That was the point.”
As to the OP, this is one of the lamest pittings I’ve ever seen. Probably comparable to one of my own lamest efforts when I once pitted Bush for falling off a Segway.
No, I’m suggesting you’re pulling over Clinton while many other politicians are whizzing by at much higher speeds, some while honking their horns. I’m not excusing Clinton; I’m accusing you of a far worse case of selective blindness than the one you accuse us of. Hell, look at your characterization of what Gingrich did: he “once went five miles an hour over the limit”, as if it were one minor infringement rather than a long history of lying and hypocrisy - having an affair while running on a slogan of “Let Our Family Represent Your Family” then divorcing his cancer-stricken wife, and later having an affair while leading the campaign against Clinton’s infidelity. What has Clinton done that has been so heinous?
And where was the “liberal media” outrage? Surely if the media were as biased as you claim, we’d have been hearing all about Gingrich’s little peccadilloes at the time too. Which, funnily enough, we didn’t.
No, this is all about you. Again. I get that you don’t like Clinton. Really I do. As I’ve said, there are many things about him I don’t like either. But could you stop pretending that there is some sort of moral high ground based on political ideology?
That’s what made it so stupid. It was not only an obvious lie but a stupid one. It’s like with every [known] lie that he makes, he’s insulting our intelligence for thinking that we’ll buy it. It smacks of an arrogance that says most of us are dummies and the few who know better aren’t enough to matter.
What galls me is not so much the lie or even WHAT he lied about. A little white lie, no big deal. That he actually smoked pot a few times? Don’t give a rats ass.
What bothers me is that he is STILL lying about it. Yeah, I need to get grip. So does Bill Clinton.
And, the bigger issue IMO, is from day one I got the impression he likely lied in the way he did so as to have his cake and eat it too so to speak.
He could be “cool” because wink wink nudge nudge he tried it. But he could also be “moral” because he didnt actually “inhale”. Its like the worst of both worlds in IMO. Either man the fuck up and say you puffed a few times and you regret it (or not) or it was no big deal that you did. Or you didnt try the damn stuff. Its also insulting IMO that he expects people to buy that story. I guess its POSSIBLE it happened exactly like he said. If it was Jimmy Carter saying this I’d probably actually believe him. Clinton, not so much.
Yeah, other pols do this kinda crap all the time, but to me this the poster child example of it.
And something really bothers me when people lie about little stuff. Big stuff that will get you in trouble? Makes sense. Little assed shit? Indicates to me some mental/moral deficiencies lurking there.
I wholeheartedly agree. I knew it was lame going in. I almost said as much in my OP but finally decided “Eh, why give the bastards ammo? Let 'em figure it out for themselves.”
You’re this hot and bothered over a guy, who hasn’t held office in over a decade, changing his story on whether he inhaled, when he tried smoking pot in college - in another country, over 4 decades ago?
Just when I think you could not come off looking more foolish or irrelevant, you push the bar a little higher.
How proud the left must be to have you on their side! You’re making the teabaggers and their hilariously misspelled protest signs look like geniuses!
