"The Clintons are back."

[Tony]

http://www.creators.com/opinion_show.cfm?columnsName=ses ...full article


Sidney Blumenthal -- much-hated former Clinton aide, ethically challenged former journalist -- $850,000 advance in hand, has a new book out on May 20, attacking everyone who ever attacked him or the Clintons, rehearsing once again the old right-wing conspiracy, every attack on them, answered. The right wing conspiracy revived, answered, again.

Hillary's book is next.

Could someone please tell these people to shut up?



What do you democrats think about this?

[Gem]

Well, I'm not purely democrat, but it's political. Probably politicly motivated.

Frankly I don't care much because to me she's just one more fish in the ocean who cries conspiracy.

If you want REAL conspiracy you should read some of JK's old threads.

Gem

[jj]

Originally posted by Gem
Well, I'm not purely democrat, but it's political. Probably politicly motivated.

Frankly I don't care much because to me she's just one more fish in the ocean who cries conspiracy.

If you want REAL conspiracy you should read some of JK's old threads.

Gem


If you want REAL conspiracy, let's talk about a 6 year investigation of real-estate fraud that could finally, eventually, prove that the president got a blow job, but only after extorting testamony from witnesses.

Now that's a real, true to life conspiracy.

Let's compare it to a house majority leader using the "Homeland Security" agency to directly and explicitly aid his political party, or the president misleading us about a DUI charge, or the VP getting his company in to fix all the oil wells and take the money from Iraq. Yes, let's.

The same side is responsible for all, too.

Oops. Don't facts suck when they're on the other side? :D

[daredelvis]

Originally posted by jj

If you want REAL conspiracy, let's talk about a 6 year investigation of real-estate fraud that could finally, eventually, prove that the president got a blow job, but only after extorting testamony from witnesses.

'snip'

Oops. Don't facts suck when they're on the other side? :D

Bravo! I think jj sums it up well.

What you could learn about me for a cool 50 bucks and a six pack. :rolleyes:

Clinton must be clean as whistle to undergo a 50 million dollar six year investigation.

Daredelvis

[crackmonkey]

I'm sure the topic of CLinton and various investigations has been beaten to death here... but there was no nexus between Paula Jones' rape charges against Clinton and Whitewater.
He was guilty as sin in both instances, of course...

[Brooklyn Dodger]

As Susan Estrich points out, the Democrats will go nowhere until the Clintons go away. And the Clintons, and Sid are doing the Republicans favors every time they defend the Clintons again.

http://www.creators.com/opinion_show.cfm?columnsName=ses

Not that Mr. Carville helped matters, when on Meet the Press he confirmed that Bill Clinton's biggest priority was sex:

http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2003/5/13/05718

The Democrats won't make any headway on their own so long as the Clintons are occupying center stage.

[Cain]

Though the book is no longer in my immediate possession, Eric Alterman recounted how proportion of corruption to media in each administration:

Reagan had 32 convictions for Iran Contra and HUD scandels.

Bush had 5.

Clinton had... zero.

By ethical standards normal to most human beings, all of these administrations were corrupt. But the way the right-wing attack machine goes into gear we get the impression that Clinton was worse than Grant.

I just got out of a book store an hour ago, and I saw all the typical Clinton-is-evil screeds. You know, the nonsense that dwells on blowjobs rather than war crimes.

Now there are people on the right telling Blumenthal to "shut up"? It's comical.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Cain
Though the book is no longer in my immediate possession, Eric Alterman recounted how proportion of corruption to media in each administration:

Reagan had 32 convictions for Iran Contra and HUD scandels.

Bush had 5.

Clinton had... zero.



what do you mean when you say "proportion of corruption to media in each administration"?

What court was responsable for the convictions?

[Brooklyn Dodger]

Originally posted by Cain
Though the book is no longer in my immediate possession, Eric Alterman recounted how proportion of corruption to media in each administration:

Reagan had 32 convictions for Iran Contra and HUD scandels.

Bush had 5.

Clinton had... zero.

By ethical standards normal to most human beings, all of these administrations were corrupt. But the way the right-wing attack machine goes into gear we get the impression that Clinton was worse than Grant.

I just got out of a book store an hour ago, and I saw all the typical Clinton-is-evil screeds. You know, the nonsense that dwells on blowjobs rather than war crimes.

Now there are people on the right telling Blumenthal to "shut up"? It's comical.

Susan Estrich is on the right? She ran the Michael Dukakis campaign.

[corplinx]

Big deal, nobody except the most blinded clinton apologists will read the book. You read such a book to confirm your slanted world view. Obviously this book won't have the timelessness something like "the war room" documentary has. For anyone who hasn't watched it, it shows the Clinton's and their team busting their asses to get elected. Its a great show of determination and strategy and can be appreciated by anyone despite their poltical leanings.

[Brooklyn Dodger]

Originally posted by corplinx
Big deal, nobody except the most blinded clinton apologists will read the book. You read such a book to confirm your slanted world view. Obviously this book won't have the timelessness something like "the war room" documentary has. For anyone who hasn't watched it, it shows the Clinton's and their team busting their asses to get elected. Its a great show of determination and strategy and can be appreciated by anyone despite their poltical leanings.

Sure, but as Estrich says, so long as they are around, they command attention. And while they do that they can't allow other Democrats to advance. As a Republican, I applaud and hope they continue of course.

[dmarker]

Originally posted by crackmonkey
I'm sure the topic of CLinton and various investigations has been beaten to death here... but there was no nexus between Paula Jones' rape charges against Clinton and Whitewater.
He was guilty as sin in both instances, of course...


The exact charges against Clinton on Paula Jones is that he dropped his pants and asked for a bj, no physical contact was made. After she turned him down, she was promoted twice. Rape was never in the picture.

As for Whitewater, 48 million dollars and six years and they couldn't find anything! Frankly, 40 million could have gone into something useful like Arabic lessons for the CIA, NSA, and FBI. Or to the INS so they could track down people who were staying in this country illegally. Or to any number of places where the money could have been better spent. Notice that I left 8 million for the investigation.

The President is not above the law, but if you can't find something with unlimited funds and no Constitutional restraints, maybe it's just not there.

[Cain]

Originally posted by Brooklyn Dodger


Susan Estrich is on the right? She ran the Michael Dukakis campaign.

I didn't read the byline, but the observation is still accurate: the _New York Times'_ Janet Maslin gave it a negative review. Though I didn't read it, the New York Observer carried a review by Andrew Sullivan. It will only be a few days before the right-wing echo chamber begins denouncing the book as evil political propaganda (never mind the umpteen dozen against Clinton).

[Brooklyn Dodger]

Originally posted by Cain


I didn't read the byline, but the observation is still accurate: the _New York Times'_ Janet Maslin gave it a negative review. Though I didn't read it, the New York Observer carried a review by Andrew Sullivan. It will only be a few days before the right-wing echo chamber begins denouncing the book as evil political propaganda (never mind the umpteen dozen against Clinton).

My initial post has links to the Estrich column and to the Carville quote that he said on Meet the Press.