ForumGarden

TRANSCRIPT

VIDEO





A very interesting interview. Too bad Clinton had to start putting his political spin on it toward the end, but I guess that was the real purpose of agreeing to it in the first place.

Watching this video made me wistful. For a time when we had an actual GROWNUP in the White House. I saw this video initially on Think Progress and I particularly enjoyed watching the Big Dog bitch slap Chris Wallace like the sniveling little twit that he is.

As for as giving things a bit of a political spin, nobody could ever accuse Fux Pseudo News for doing that themselves, ehhhhhh?? Ever time I need a really goodkle I turn on Fux News and watch the O'Really Report. Nothing like Fair and Balanced News.

In the end, I was mostly convinced that Chris Wallace will never be the man his father was. He's pretty good at reading a teleprompter I guess.

bigdumbswede wrote: Ever time I need a really goodkle I turn on Fox News and watch the O'Really Report. Nothing like Fair and Balanced News.


My husband thinks I'm crazy because I *refuse* to watch Faux News. If it's on after a ball game, I immediately switch the channel.

Why would I want to give them the ratings? :guitarist

I agree, Cher. Frankly, the hooplah over Clinton's interview gave them more publicity than they deserve. I miss Clinton's Presidency. (The man got a blow job in the White House...get over it! What was he supposed to do? Take her to the "No Tell Motel?" :wah: ) He was a fine President and I miss him.

Come to think of it...Clinton screwed one intern...Bush's screwing an entire country!

(Note to self: stand back.):wah:

Lulu2 wrote: Come to think of it...Clinton screwed one intern...Bush's screwing an entire country!

(Note to self: stand back.):wah:


:yh_clap Lulu2 :yh_clap

(Thanks...you got my back?) :wah:

Lulu2 wrote: (Thanks...you got my back?) :wah:


You betcha :guitarist

i don't watch fox news, but i have seen video of this. what i saw was clinton's 'tell'. bill hardly ever gets mad. in fact, the only other time i recall seeing him that angry was when he was waggling his finger saying "i did not have sex with that woman".



seems that when he lies, he gets angry.



i was never a huge fan of bill clinton. he road the coattails of an economic bubble the likes of which has only happened a few times in history, and so got to take credit for reducing the deficit when in fact he had little to do with it. i'd have not had a problem with the lewinski affair had he not lied about it, both directly and with a straight face to the public, and to a grand jury. he was, without doubt, one of the most gifted orators of the 20th century, second only to kennedy in my opinion.



and no, he did not do enough to fight terrorism during his tenure. but that's the gift of hindsight. neither did bush I or bush II.



why he would get angry about it and call it a big right wing hit job is baffling. it's as if he considers himself royalty. he gets angry about what amounted to a few references in the ABC drama - The Path to 9/11 - that point out deficiencies due to bureacratic incompetence and rivalry during his tenure, then essentially admits that it was true.



the whole brouhaha could have been avoided had he been the characteristic bill - and avoided the whole chastizement, finger waggling (uh oh!) and anger, and simply said - as he eventually said - "no, i didn't do enough - nobody did enough", then moved on to talking about his global initiative.

He didn't go on Fox by accident. He didn't get the attack he expected so he created it. He's trying to pump some life into the lethargic Dems and make some points for his wife.



I watch Fox, like I watch all the networks. People that don't watch it generally hate it for all kinds of rumors they've heard. All the really rabid rightists (say that 3 times) have been hired by the more liberal cable channels, so people can point at the frothing idiot and say "See? That's a typical Republican."



I don't see a cat hair's difference between the left or the right, in terms of speed of spin or type of tactics.

bigdumbswede wrote: Watching this video made me wistful. For a time when we had an actual GROWNUP in the White House.


You think Clinton acts like a grownup? He's the biggest frat boy doofus to ever sit in the Oval Office - yes, that includes the current one. I'm sorry to say that Clinton was anything but presidential in that interview; he acted like a spoiled little brat stomping his feet saying, "I didn't do it, he did it." It's also disheartening that Carter and Clinton have abandoned the long held courtesy of former presidents not criticizing or commenting sitting presidents. Ford refused to criticize Clinton during the impeachment process - a respect and courtesy Clinton denies those who follow him.

I read the transcript and I think that its interesting, in that it was an actual frank exchange, which is refreshing in the modern political climate (here and in the States) where politicians are afraid of basically saying anything, as it instantly becomes sensationalized and turned into a media event. I suppose Clinton is now in a position where he can say pretty much what he likes, though I'm sure he still is mindful of his wife's political career. It will be interesting to see what Tony Blair starts saying once he is no longer the British Prime Minister.

Lulu2 wrote: (The man got a blow job in the White House...get over it! What was he supposed to do? Take her to the "No Tell Motel?" :wah: )


First of all, everyone is over Bill Clinton's presidency except Bill Clinton. It kills him not to be top dog.

Second, I'll tell you what he was supposed to do. He was supposed to say that he is a married man, old enough to be her father, and President of the United States. Instead, he pawed every woman who came within reach. It amazes me that feminists defend him.

Third, his problem was lying to the American public, lying to a grand jury, tampering with witnesses to get them to change their testimony. He was disbarred - and not for getting a blowjob. It's simply dishonest to continue this charade that he was impeached for a sex act. It removes credibility and integrity from those who conitnue to make that claim.

You know, I didn't like Bill Clinton. I thought his treatment of his wife and women in general was shameless if not criminal. I didn't care for his foreign policy, I thought he lacked integrity, he would sell his momma out for a campaign contribution, but with Congresses help he managed not to screw up the economy. I don't blame him for 9/11 but he definitely could have done more against terrorism but he was afraid to get his hands dirty; he was afraid of anything that might leave a stain (no pun intended) on his presidency. But I'll tell you this. I never gave credence to all the conspiracy theories regarding a hit on Vince Foster, or him being involved in cocaine trafficking, or The Clinton Chronicles. Few conservatives really bought into that. My main hope in 2008 is that the country get a respite from presidents named Bush or Clinton.

Isn't the whole Lewinsky thing just boring now?

I'm really enjoying this interview. Thanks for the link Acc.

Right now I'm particularily enjoying this phrase: "And it's a big load of hooey."

Noun: hooey hooee

Usage: N. Amer

1. Senseless talk

- stuff, stuff and nonsense, poppycock

Derived forms: hooeys

Type of: bunk, hokum, meaninglessness, nonsense, nonsensicality

Until now I had no idea one could have hooeys in plural

That's all fine and good, but I guarantee if it was Bush that committed perjury about a sex act, you guys would be singing a different tune. Sen. Bob Packwood was run out of office for sex acts. But keep singing the song that it was about a BJ. And the question never would have been asked if he hadn't harrassed and groped so many women. Lord Jeffery Archer went to prison for the same thing. You're right Koan, it is old....I just can't rap my mind around the fact that so many people brush off the fact that a sitting President committed perjury and obstructed justice. Who cares what it was about? But you're right, it's old news. Unfortunately, the fact that the man still acts like a spoiled child is all too current.

I defend Clinton after this interview because his presidency didn't frighten me. I worry about this president's legacy. The massive federal deficit greatly concerns me. The quagmire in Iraq sickens me. Nothing about the Bush administration sets my mind at ease. If Bill Clinton had taken us to war in Iraq over WMD that never materialized, Congress would have asked for his head on a platter. But this president is untouchable.

I worry about the future of America. I am alone in my fear that this country is edging closer and closer to something that resembles a neo-fascist regime? When this administration decides to wiretap private phones without warrants--who will be watching the watchers? Why tinker with the Geneva Convention in order to sanction torture and abuse of other human beings? What the hell has happened to this country, anyhow?? When the Iranian students tortured our Embassy people we were horrified, why is suddenly okay if this govt. does it? I recall a time when only communist regimes listened to phone calls of private citizens. (Of course, except when Nixon had John Lennon's phone tapped and threatened to have him deported.) That's why we abhorred communism and fought a cold war against it? I worry that when fascism comes to America, it'll be wrapped in the US flag and carrying the cross.

Do I miss Clinton? Yep. Sure do.

Adam Zapple wrote: You think Clinton acts like a grownup? He's the biggest frat boy doofus to ever sit in the Oval Office - yes, that includes the current one. I'm sorry to say that Clinton was anything but presidential in that interview; he acted like a spoiled little brat stomping his feet saying, "I didn't do it, he did it." It's also disheartening that Carter and Clinton have abandoned the long held courtesy of former presidents not criticizing or commenting sitting presidents. Ford refused to criticize Clinton during the impeachment process - a respect and courtesy Clinton denies those who follow him.


up until very, very recently - matter of fact, this interview may well have been the first time - clinton didn't criticize bush. he had for the last five years or so always been diplomatic, never making any allusions, or implying anything. always supportive of 'the president's decisions'.



i suspect this bit of theater was just that. the democrats are tasting a bit of blood for the upcoming midterms - it's going to be an important test for the democratic party. public sentiment is widely against the war in iraq, and that taints every republican by association. if the dems can't wrest a majority in the house or senate, it's going to be pretty ugly.



frankly, i wish they would get a one or two seat majority. i really hate it when congress and the president are the same party. nothing but mischief ensues. a government at loggerheads is a government that can't get much done - the very best kind of government.

Actually, Bill Clinton has often been critical of Bush on foreign policy, the war in Iraq, response to Katrina, domestic policy, tax cuts, and energy policy to name a few. But I agree with you, I think his appearance on Fox was intended so he could show righteous indignation at the vast right-wing conspirators as we approach election day. It was partially a campaign appearance and partially an ego stroke.

Yeah, I miss Clinton too. Ah, the days of crooked investment schemes, of trumped up criminal charges against career gov't employees in order to get their Hollywood pals the gig, of illegally obtaining the raw FBI files of over 900 political opponents, of stuffing classified documents in trousers and shredding them, of selling secret military technology to China for some campaign yen, of paying hush money to their convicted associates, of offering lucrative jobs to a material witness in a case against him, of IRS probes of his opponents, of molesting female supporters only to destroy them later, of visits from Eleanor Roosevelt, of storm-troopers kidnapping a scared kid in the middle of the night, of "cleaning" the office of a dead WH employee while impeding investigators, of mysteriously appearing suppoened documents, of selling pardons, of runway haircuts, of midnight document shredding parties at the Rose Law Firm, of the LippoGroup, of the Echelon spy program (which never bothered liberals before) ....

Adam Zapple wrote: [...]. It was partially a campaign appearance and partially an ego stroke.

....There's a difference?

flopstock wrote: First off, he's not the first, nor will he be the last to get a BJ from someone young enough to be his daughter. Big deal. Second, he never should have been asked the question, IMO. Who I blow in my spare time has no bearing on my ability to do my job. End of discussion, in my view. If the question should not have been asked, I'm not judging him on his answer. But to say he was not impeached for a sex act, is a load of crap IMO. They knew he could only answer one way. What man would not attempt to protect himself in that situation? She however, has got to have the worst taste in men imaginable..



I think the whole impeachment show was a waste of taxpayer time and money. I would much rather have seen them focused on terrorist plots around the world, national security and just about anything else that really matters.



Now, having said that... you bet I watched. Hell, I've got ollie north testimony on tape from that go round, all those years ago. Very entertaining stuff.



The guy I want to be president, is the guy with the balls to stand up when his party is pulling this crap and says 'Let's knock off the BS and do some of the peoples work'. Haven't seen him yet...We've got to be related somehow.



The one disagreement I have is that someone in a position as important as Pres of the USA can't do anything so secret and embarrassing that he can be blackmailed for it.

FLOPPY "First off, he's not the first, nor will he be the last to get a BJ from someone young enough to be his daughter. Big deal. Second, he never should have been asked the question, IMO. Who I blow in my spare time has no bearing on my ability to do my job. End of discussion, in my view. If the question should not have been asked, I'm not judging him on his answer. But to say he was not impeached for a sex act, is a load of crap IMO. They knew he could only answer one way. What man would not attempt to protect himself in that situation? She however, has got to have the worst taste in men imaginable..

I think the whole impeachment show was a waste of taxpayer time and money. I would much rather have seen them focused on terrorist plots around the world, national security and just about anything else that really matters.

The guy I want to be president, is the guy with the balls to stand up when his party is pulling this crap and says 'Let's knock off the BS and do some of the peoples work'. Haven't seen him yet..."



+++++++++ OH, YES! Clinton screwed an intern! His successor screwed the nation!

Lulu2 wrote:



+++++++++ OH, YES! Clinton screwed an intern! His successor screwed the nation!badumpbump

I imagine FOX panned it as a softball interview and then surprised him with the questions...FNN has become a right wing schill organization anyway..

FNN has become a right wing schill operation? Wasn't it ALWAYS??

Fox is pure entertainment these days. I try not to watch it when I have a mouthful of chips and salsa, lest I laugh aloud and aspirate again.

clinton went into the interview with a chip on his shoulder. wallace's questions were delivered with no forcefulness, no hostility, no scolding or finger pointing. clinton did all the finger pointing, and acted like a spoiled child - emphasis on child - "you've got that little smirk on your face and you think you're so clever" ???? this is a former president talking?



*clinton* manufactured this. right wing hit piece my ass.

Scrat wrote: Exactly. With the tack he demonstrated Hillary will be handled much more delicately in the future. Keep in mind, all of this was arranged before hand.


Scrat, are you saying you think Clinton new in advance he would be asked about his administrations handling of Bin laden?

Scrat wrote: I don't know for sure but I will bet he went in there with a game plan. There is only so many questions someone can ask and in this case they agreed before the interview to 10 questions. 5 about his charity thing and 5 about other things.

It seems to me he expected that question to be asked and was quick enough on his feet to turn it to his advantage. The purpose being to expose the weakness of the argument and hypocrisy of the Gingrich bunch at the time. If you look at it in the future Hillary can use it also so perhaps for her it can be avoided.

That's where I am coming from.


yeah he did jump all over the question didn't he? Kinda like daddy bush embarrassed dan rather..