Baseball Crank
Covering the Front and Back Pages of the Newspaper
September 25, 2006
POLITICS: One Further Random Thought About Bill Clinton's Fox-Bashing Tirade

Does this mean that the much trumpeted rapproachment between Hillary and Rupert Murdoch is now inoperative?

Posted by Baseball Crank at 12:29 PM | Politics 2008 | Comments (19) | TrackBack (0)

What it means is that history is going to remember Bill for what he really was, a little man, with no real agenda, who could not keep his zipper up.

Posted by: maddirishman at September 25, 2006 2:32 PM

How was it a tirade? Clinton stood up to the news anchor, something few politicians do. He fought back with his side of the story and made sure that the viewer understood that Wallace was pushing to same old crap that the Republicans have been promoting for years. I'm no fan of Clinton, but I'd like to see more of this.

As for MadIrishman's critique of Clinton's sex life, sure, Clinton has a sex addiction and a pecker problem. So does half of Washington and Albany (from what I've seen). You can tell a true partisan by the fact that every time Clinton's name is mentioned, he mentiones Clinton's sex problem. Do liberals do that for Newt Gingrich? Constant reference to Clinton's sex problems highlights how low our political discourse has become.

Posted by: steve at September 25, 2006 4:13 PM

The bottom line is if the CEO of GM had been caught having a affair with an intern, he would have been fired on the spot. Instead of standing up for what is right, the DIMs circled the wagons and stood by their man. Bill's sex addiction is not his most pressing problem. The bottom line, again, is he is a pathalogical liar.

Steve, you may choose to believe that Bill was just standing up for himself, but that only holds water if he is telling the truth. The fact is his tirade was filled with self-serving lies. One that comes quickly to mind is the claim that Richard Clarke was demoted. Fact is Clarke requested a transfer to a new unit. Just one of the many things that escaped Bill.

Posted by: maddirishman at September 25, 2006 10:15 PM

This is great for Clintons, both Bill and Hillary. Reporters are well down the scale of respected professions. Amongst their peers, Fox reporters rank even lower. Obviously, Clinton, a genius at this stuff, set up Wallace and kicked his ass. Bashing a Fox reporter cannot be harmful for a politician. If the 2008 election is a contest between a candidate managed by Bill Clinton (Hillary?) and one managed by Karl Rove (who?) it will be fun to watch these two masters go against each other. I root for the Clintons.

Posted by: jim linnane at September 26, 2006 4:33 AM

Jim Linnane has an interesting point. The left wing of the Democratic party has been disillusioned with Hillary for her efforts to court the center. Bill's anti-Fox tirade may help stir up the left to Hillary's benefit.

Posted by: WD at September 26, 2006 9:32 AM

Irish, a President, any president, is not subject to hiring and firing rules. What he did with Monica was reprehensible and predatory. Period. No excuses, and he deserves to be remembered as loose zippered as Harding and Kennedy. However, anyone who wants to pick a fight with Clinton on TV and try to debate points risks looking foolish. Who in their right minds would want to debate William J. Clinton--he's thus far the most adept TV debater this planet has probably produced.

I think Bill's agenda was really to assist in creating a global economy. While anyone can claim he did nothign during the Asian and Mexican meltdowns, in truth, he did seem to have a handle on when to do something, and when not to. Eisenhower was like that in may ways as well. Sometimes you do best when you know to do nothing.

Posted by: Daryl Rosenblatt at September 26, 2006 9:53 AM

It is hilarious the spin Fox and the right-wing is trying to put on this. Clinton destoyed Wallace, absolutely ripped him apart. Y'all can think they are lies but it would be amazing if you knew what one is since you cannot seem to tell any of the ones that the Banana Republicans throw out there all the time. Clinton went on a network that had an outright agenda against him for his entire time if office and out smarted and out-factualized (OK, that is probably a made up word) the little man that they had to try and stick it to him.

Posted by: jim at September 26, 2006 10:34 AM

Clinton went on a network that had an outright agenda against him for his entire time if office

FOX didn't even exist until Clinton's first term was almost over - the network was launched October 6, 1996.

Posted by: The Crank at September 26, 2006 11:21 AM

Means the same thing (but here let me correct it for you--"For the entire time Clinton was in office while this right wing network was broadcasting the schlock and vitriol that they call news.") Let's continue to pick the nits please. It really adds to the commentary.

Posted by: jim at September 26, 2006 12:23 PM

Yeah Susan Estrich, Alan Colmes, Mara Liasson(?), Juan Williams, Neil Gabler....conservative GOP lackeys all

Posted by: Maryland Conservatarian at September 26, 2006 12:57 PM

You think that Susan Estrich et al balances out the ideologues on Fox? They truly take a back seat on Fox. Let's take a look at whom else Fox uses for commentary:

Oliver North: perjurer and U.S. government document shredder

Mark Furman: racist and perjurer

Bill Bennett: degenerate gambler who sits in judgment of others' moral failings

Gordon Liddy: felon and burgler

Pat Robertson: lunatic, blames gays for 9/11

Dick Morris: toe sucker

Newt Gingrich: womanizer and provocatur (sp?)

Bill O'Reilly: sexual harasser

Sean Hannity: college dropout and GOP robot

Posted by: Steve at September 26, 2006 1:09 PM

Steve - OK, I would not listen to Dick Morris, or any politician he worked for.

Posted by: The Crank at September 26, 2006 1:22 PM

Crank - so we agree on Dick Morris. As they say in the legal profession, "We're very close to settlement, Your Honor!"

Posted by: Steve at September 26, 2006 1:57 PM

Dick Morris's career would also include Trent Lott, Jesse Helms and I believe William Weld and Pete Wilson. Um, I believe in the terminology of GOP Inc. he would be known as a flip-flopper. Put that down next to toe sucker.

You also forgot to mention that O'Reilly is a notorious liar. Not that makes him stand out in any particular way on Fox.

Posted by: jim at September 26, 2006 3:14 PM

"Does this mean that the much trumpeted rapproachment between Hillary and Rupert Murdoch is now inoperative?"

Hardly. Everybody involved served a full helping of red meat.

Posted by: Mr Furious at September 26, 2006 4:58 PM

Hey madirishman, if the American public were offered a straight-up choice, right now "who do you want to be President tomorrow until 2009, Bill Clinton or George W. Bush?" Who do you think would win?

The zipper by a landslide.

Posted by: Mr Furious at September 26, 2006 5:01 PM

That's a large part of what pisses them off so much. If he was a Republican they would have voted him as the official deity of the US.

Posted by: jim at September 26, 2006 6:29 PM

Just read the 9/11 report as quoted by Olbermann tonight:

From the moment of the August 7th PDB, the 9/11 Commission "Found no evidence that any further discussion was made" by the Bush Administration on Bin Laden.

Regarding the USS Cole, intelligence didn't know it was Bin Laden until January 2001 when Bush took office. Clinton was prepared to go in to Afghanistan but had to wait for the CIA.

AT LEAST CLINTON TRIED. Bush was too busy planning the invasion of Iraq and helping Israel plan the invasion of Lebanon to destroy Hezbollah the first 8 months of his term. THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION DID NOT TRY.

Stop watching "The Path to 9/11", Rebublicans, and wake up.

Posted by: ChiroDocLiberalMetsFan at September 27, 2006 1:13 AM

Does this mean that the much trumpeted rapproachment between Hillary and Rupert Murdoch is now inoperative?

If anything I would expect Murdoch to dig deeper. Hillary is unelectable, and he has to know that. The Democrats under Gray Davis in California did something similar to former LA mayor Richard Riordan, knowing he was easily the most recognizeable and electable Republican for state office; they ran a series of ads against him in the primaries, and cleaned up when his lesser-known and far more conservative (IIRC he was from one of the interior counties) opponent ran against him in the gubanatorial (sp?) election.

Posted by: Rob McMillin at September 27, 2006 7:44 AM
Site Meter 250wde_2004WeblogAwards_BestSports.jpg