Clinton Takes On Fox News

Clinton Takes On Fox News.

Bill opened both barrels on Fox’s Chris Wallace & it was great watching! Of course the right-wing media is having a field day with it because they are spinning it saying Clinton lost his cool & went crazy. On the contrary, Clinton kept it together but was forceful with Wallace & won’t let him do his little right-wing lie & spin tactics. Wallace tried to play innocent but his original question about Somalia, that got Clinton going, was a complete setup.

Roger Cressey (no relation), who worked with Richard Clarke, was on msnbc and dispelled the notion that Clinton lost some chance to get Bin Laden. The fact is that Clinton almost got Bin Laden & came as closer than Bush in getting bin Laden.

The right-wingers will continue to re-write history but hopefully people will smarten up & realize that they are being lied to.

The calm, cool and totally professional IFP Clinton meets the press:

Actually I watched it again today & there was a point where Clinton did lose his cool (towards the end) & should have moved on but didn’t. However, he was great up to that point.

Clinton is just fed up with the vast right-wing conspiracy (like I am), which FOX exemplifies, and it all came pooring out.

Fox is selling this as Clinton losing his cool. He merely criticized in a direct way that folks don’t expect from politicians. We ought not debate how he said what he said (certainly people are not so thin skinned as all that) but rather what he said. And what he said sounded pretty much correct to me.

Any specifics you disagree with, ksdb? If you didn’t see the clip, most of it is on crooksandliars.com.

It’s worth noting that Clinton also did an interview with Olberman, and criticised Olberman for the way he conducts dialogue - although not as harshly as he did the Fox crowd. Clinton clearly believes in civil democratic discourse, where evidence rules, not ideology. This is the single greatest difference between Bush and Co. and Clinton. Clinton is committed to democracy, always was. Bush never has been. Or at least, he doesn’t understand how democratic discourse is supposed to be conducted.

Frankly, ksdb, and not incidentally, I don’t expect you to either agree with that, or understand it. :)

Chris Wallace Has Never Asked A Bush Administration Official About The USS Cole.

Chris Wallace Never Asked A Bush Administration Official Why They Demoted Richard Clarke.

I just realized that Chris Wallace is Mike’s son. Man - it must be hard knowing that your son went over to the dark side.

The right-wingers have been trying to blame Clinton for 9/11 ever since it happened. They’ve been trying to re-write the history of Clinton’s admin also. They’ve also smeared Richard Clarke & tried to discredit him (actually the admin tried to do that). If you do read Clarke’s book, you’ll see that he doesn’t mess around and mince words. I hope he gets to server again someday - he’s an American hero.

Sorry, my friends. This is one site I will not get pulled into political issues - unless it’s about those crazy Canadians. “Blame Canada! Blame Canada!” LOL

You go Tommy! It’s all BS anyway…

d

Quote (tommyj55 @ Sep. 25 2006,09:26)
Sorry, my friends. This is one site I will not get pulled into political issues - unless it’s about those crazy Canadians. “Blame Canada! Blame Canada!” LOL

You must be refering to National Review’s David Frum. Canadian American Ahole.

KF

<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
Frankly, ksdb, and not incidentally, I don’t expect you to either agree with that, or understand it.


I’m sure ksdb is capable of understanding the point; it just suits his agenda not to.

There he goes agin, getting all irrelevant! :(

“Take the trash out Joe” I says

"Define what you mean by trash" he says

"That black bag there that smells like a hosses ass!" I says

"Which equine are you referring to?" he says "and where are your referential determinants and the validation of your comparisons?"

That’s the point I whacks him up along side his head! :D

Oh, I’m just ribbing ksdb, Mrs K. :) You’re kind of mean to him.

Quote (TomS @ Sep. 25 2006,18:43)
Fox is selling this as Clinton losing his cool. He merely criticized in a direct way that folks don’t expect from politicians. it. :)

Pretty much. If all politicians said what they really thought, we might actually get something done. Instead every politician has 20 image makers behind them telling them what to say. You don’t vote for a politician… you vote for his image consultants. Clinton doesn’t care anymore. Ain’t like he’s going to ruin his chances in an election. On Sunday mornings with no cable I have a few choices… Real Estate shows, informercials, Robert Schuler, or Fox News. I watched this interview when it happened and really, Clinton was pretty straight talking through the whole thing. Kind of refreshing really as every other Meet the Press show has politicos regurgitating a script their minions approved for them.


CLinton and GHW have bigger fish to fry at this point.

<!–QuoteBegin>

Quote
If all politicians said what they really thought, we might actually get something done.


You sir are CORRECT! It’s a shame we have become such a “petty” society where image is everything. These guys have to schmooze and compromise to get the power and/or money to get elected. If they happen to get elected, THEY are compromised right from the start. It SUX IMO! But what cha’ gonna do? ???

D

Yup. Look at Howard Dean… One stupid sound clip killed his campaign… a sound clip of nothing that would really indicate his ability to lead other than he gets wound up about things and has some passion. Like him or not, it wa sa superficial thing that killed his chances. Personally, I want a leader who speaks his mind and can get in someone’s face for his people.

Quote (TomS @ Sep. 25 2006,18:43)
Fox is selling this as Clinton losing his cool. He merely criticized in a direct way that folks don’t expect from politicians. We ought not debate how he said what he said (certainly people are not so thin skinned as all that) but rather what he said. And what he said sounded pretty much correct to me.

You mean the stuff in between the right-wing paranoia whining, such as admitting that he failed??

Quote (TomS @ Sep. 25 2006,18:43)
Any specifics you disagree with, ksdb? If you didn’t see the clip, most of it is on crooksandliars.com.

I disagree with his entire right-wing paranoia tactic. Maybe Bubba’s used to being coddled by other networks. He was asked a fair question, but immediately went into a bizarre defensivie diatribe. He mentions conservatives who accused him of obsessing over OBL. Such as whom?? It’s easy to throw out such comments when there’s no one there to challenge the validity. It’s deflection of the highest degree. The bottom line was the Clinton admitted he failed and didn’t do enough.

Quote (TomS @ Sep. 25 2006,18:43)
It’s worth noting that Clinton also did an interview with Olberman, and criticised Olberman for the way he conducts dialogue - although not as harshly as he did the Fox crowd. Clinton clearly believes in civil democratic discourse, where evidence rules, not ideology.

Which explains why he railed on and on about right-wingers, conservatives and neo-cons, instead of just answering the question.

Quote (TomS @ Sep. 25 2006,18:43)

This is the single greatest difference between Bush and Co. and Clinton. Clinton is committed to democracy, always was. Bush never has been. Or at least, he doesn’t understand how democratic discourse is supposed to be conducted.

What nonsense. This is another one of these baseless canards such as your anti-education nonsense that was thoroughly debunked. This would make sense from MrSoul or DrG, but it’s definitely beneath you.

Quote (TomS @ Sep. 25 2006,18:43)
Frankly, ksdb, and not incidentally, I don’t expect you to either agree with that, or understand it. :)

An illuminating misunderestimation and fine example of democratic discourse. Ridicule the other person’s ability to understand when you can’t make a cogent point.
Quote (Bubbagump @ Sep. 26 2006,09:19)
Quote (TomS @ Sep. 25 2006,18:43)
Fox is selling this as Clinton losing his cool. He merely criticized in a direct way that folks don't expect from politicians. it. :)

Pretty much. If all politicians said what they really thought, we might actually get something done. Instead every politician has 20 image makers behind them telling them what to say. You don't vote for a politician... you vote for his image consultants. Clinton doesn't care anymore. Ain't like he's going to ruin his chances in an election. On Sunday mornings with no cable I have a few choices.... Real Estate shows, informercials, Robert Schuler, or Fox News. I watched this interview when it happened and really, Clinton was pretty straight talking through the whole thing. Kind of refreshing really as every other Meet the Press show has politicos regurgitating a script their minions approved for them.


CLinton and GHW have bigger fish to fry at this point.

Actually, Bubba may end up hurting his wife's campaign chances with this meltdown. There's really no reason for him to be making public appearances at all, yet he's out there much more than most ex-presidents, especially for this soon after his own term.

This is a great demonstration of the difference between Clinton and Bush. The have both made mistakes. Do you think otherwise? Clinton admits it. Bush denies it.

Now Bush denies that our incursion into Iraq has increased terrorism in the world even when the concensus of all the intelligence agencies in the US is that it has. Is the man, and are we, incapable of learning from the past? It was just such selective acceptance of information that misled Bush and his neocon buddies into promoting a premature invasion of Iraq to eliminate nonexistent weapons of mass destruction. Where will this aversion to considering opinions averse to the philosophy of the moment lead? Nowhere good, that much is certain.

T

Quote (tspringer @ Sep. 26 2006,13:38)
This is a great demonstration of the difference between Clinton and Bush. The have both made mistakes. Do you think otherwise? Clinton admits it. Bush denies it.

That would explain this headline from April:

Bush Admits Mistakes in Iraq, Defends Tactics


Quote (tspringer @ Sep. 26 2006,13:38)
Now Bush denies that our incursion into Iraq has increased terrorism in the world even when the concensus of all the intelligence agencies in the US is that it has.

You may be jumping the gun. Bush is declassifying the NIE to let people see what was really written by “all the intelligence agencies.”

Quote (tspringer @ Sep. 26 2006,13:38)
Is the man, and are we, incapable of learning from the past?

Yes, it’s part of the reason we didn’t overcommit troops in Iraq the way we did in Vietnam. That war cost us 19 times as many fatalities, numbers that at the time increased dramatically as soon as we increased our troop levels.

Quote (tspringer @ Sep. 26 2006,13:38)
It was just such selective acceptance of information that misled Bush and his neocon buddies into promoting a premature invasion of Iraq to eliminate nonexistent weapons of mass destruction.

We had no reason to assume or know that the WMD were nonexistant prior to the invasion. We also had no assurance of certainty by allowing indefinite inspections to continue and allowing Saddam to remain in power.

Quote (tspringer @ Sep. 26 2006,13:38)
Where will this aversion to considering opinions averse to the philosophy of the moment lead? Nowhere good, that much is certain.

T

The only thing that is certain is that people who hate Bush will continue to hate Bush and continue to invent reasons to hate him, no matter how inaccurate and misleading those reasons are.

Bush didn’t really admit to any real mistakes. Show me the mistakes that he admits to. You can’t do it.

Also, I love how you quote the WP when it suits you but criticize it in another breath. You can’t have it both ways Joe.

I can’t wait to see the NIE.