Filed under: Bill Clinton, campaign, election, elections, politics, Sarah Palin | Tags: Bill Clinton, elections, Sarah Palin
Former President Bill Clinton seems to have taken a real shine to Sarah Palin of late. His most recent praise came yesterday as he spoke of Palin’s appeal to the average American:
“I come from Arkansas, I get why she’s hot out there, why she’s doing well,” said Clinton, who supports the Democratic ticket headed by Barack Obama.
Ok there is obviously going to be some speculation over what he meant by “hot”. Taken in it’s context I’m pretty certain he just meant “popular”… but knowing Bill’s amorous past we always have to wonder what is really brewing in that head of his. He likes to plant seeds. And it’s not a stretch to surmise that somewhere in the recesses of his deluded mind lies a hope that he will one day have a chance at with Sarah. Or maybe not. Either way It’s hard to resist having a little fun with it.
Ulterior motives aside, lets analyze the comments that followed.
Speaking to reporters before his Clinton Global Initiative meeting, the former president described Palin’s appeal by adding, “People look at her, and they say, ‘All those kids. Something that happens in everybody’s family. I’m glad she loves her daughter and she’s not ashamed of her. Glad that girl’s going around with her boyfriend. Glad they’re going to get married.”‘
I’m going to say something that I’ve seldom said about Bill Clinton… he is RIGHT ON THE MONEY here. Regardless of his intentions, I agree with his sentiments. Check out the following statement:
“I get this,” Clinton said. “My view is … why say, ever, anything bad about a person? Why don’t we like them and celebrate them and be happy for her elevation to the ticket? And just say that she was a good choice for him and we disagree with them?”
Folks, the man is [cough, sputter] exactly right. Never has the inability to separate the person from the politics been more pronounced than with the left’s treatment of Sarah Palin. Leftists are stubbornly refusing to see anything of merit in the woman. They know in their heart of hearts that she has certain qualities they would kill for in a candidate — but the fact that she is a conservative is simply unforgivable to them. Especially when their candidate had this election aced. So not only is she criticized… she is loathed.
Their vitriol has manifested itself in childish ways. Lib pundits and celebrities have uttered crass and tasteless things about her and her family recently… really scaping the gutter in some cases. And in recent news, a liberal hacker — allegedly the son of a Tennessee Democratic congressman — has taken great glee in plastering Palin’s personal emails all over the web. This is juvenile behavior. The venom is really flowing over there on the left.
But what about me you might ask? Don’t I criticize and tease Barack Obama? Sure. It’s a political blog. Sarcasm and humor are part of the package. But it’s one thing to call a candidate ‘The Messiah’ and quite another to suggest that his opponent’s daughter will get “the electric chair for being a little slut” (as Russell Brand so tactfully quipped about Bristol Palin). It’s one thing to make light of Obama’s “57 states” gaffe and quite another to openly fantasize about his opponent’s running mate being gang-raped (credit the ever classy Sandra Bernhardt with that one). On the political humor scale, I’m a Leno… not a Howard Stern.
Now, here’s a seldom treaded path that I might suggest to some of you libs… it’s called ‘the high road’. When Hillary Clinton ran we were told that regardless of our political views, we should applaud the great strides she has made for womankind. Why not view Sarah Palin in the same light? Why not say “I disagree strongly with her views and will do everything in my power to defeat her party in this election… but I do think she’s a likable person and am impressed by what this woman has achieved for her gender.” And while you’re at it, admit that you liked the lipstick joke. Is that so hard?
Face it, it would be a tremendous step forward for women if we had a female vice president. The glass ceiling doesn’t get much higher than that. Does she have to be a Democrat before that will have any meaning for you liberals? Do you realize how shallow that is?
And while I’m on the subect what about feminists themselves? Many of them have gone on record blasting Sarah recently. They are not only doing a disservice to their cause, they are revealing to the world that liberalism is the real engine that drives modern feminism… not equal rights for women. Pretty ‘non-progressive’ if you ask me.
I’m not suggesting that Sarah never be criticised by any means. Color her any way you want… just keep your crayons inside the lines please. Politics aside she’s actually a pretty impressive woman.
Filed under: barack obama, Bill Clinton, campaign, Democratic National Convention, DNC, election, elections, hillary clinton, obama, politics | Tags: barack obama, Bill Clinton, Democratic National Convention, DNC, hillary clinton
Charming Billy is at it again. This time former president Clinton was speaking to foreign dignitaries in Denver when he presented this oh-so-subtle hypothetical.
He said: “Suppose you’re a voter, and you’ve got candidate X and candidate Y. Candidate X agrees with you on everything, but you don’t think that candidate can deliver on anything at all. Candidate Y you agree with on about half the issues, but he can deliver. Which candidate are you going to vote for?”
Then, perhaps mindful of how his off-the-cuff remarks might be taken, Clinton added after a pause: “This has nothing to do with what’s going on now.”
The comments are unlikely to be taken as an innocent mistake by those Democrats who continue to be angry with the former president for, they say, not supporting the Illinois senator wholeheartedly, if not implicitly undercutting him.
The controversial comments came just hours before Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), the former first lady and principal rival to Obama, was due to speak from the convention podium.
Mmmph. That foot can’t taste very good Mr. Bill. Of course there is much trepidation in DNC circles over what Mr. Clinton will say tomorrow night as he speaks at the convention. But I’m more curious about Hillary’s speech tonight — especially if her sophomoric hubby can be seen in the background. Watch closely when she mentions party unity. Will he roll his eyes and sneer derisively? Or better yet will he turn around and moon the crowd in grand PUMA fashion? The possibilities are endless, folks. Get your TIVO ready, this should be a fun night…
Filed under: barack obama, Bill Clinton, campaign, democratic, election, elections, hillary clinton, obama, politics | Tags: barack obama, Bill Clinton, campaign, elections, hillary clinton, politics
No need for a lot of commentary on this one. Just a little Monday morning fun with our favorite ex clown-in-chief:
As Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were kissing and making up last Friday, Bill Clinton might have had other ideas, according to a report in The (London) Telegraph.
The paper reports that even as the former president and the current presumptive Democratic nominee prepare to meet to make their own amends, Bill Clinton reportedly told close friends Obama can “kiss my ass” to get his support.
The man gets so much more entertaining as he gets older… kind of like that eccentric uncle who places his dentures on the table as he sits down for a Thanksgiving meal.
Filed under: Bill Clinton, Doug Band, election, elections, hillary clinton, politics | Tags: Bill Clinton, Doug Band, enemy list, hillary clinton
Doug Band is an interesting fellow with an interesting job. Possessing a keen memory of people, places and things, Doug works for Bill Clinton as a record keeper of sorts. Just think of him as one of Santa’s little helpers — only this Santa is vindictive, petty and slow to forgive. Doug is basically the little elf who has been charged with checking off that list of who’s been naughty and who’s been nice to the Clintons — who will get a sack of coal under their tree and who will get a shiny new bike.
Band keeps close track of the past allies and beneficiaries of the Clintons who supported Obama’s campaign, three Clinton associates and campaign officials said. Indeed, he is widely known as a member of the Clinton inner circle whose memory is particularly acute on the matter of who has been there for the couple — and who has not.
“The Clintons get hundreds of requests for favors every week,” said Terry McAuliffe, the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign. “Clearly, the people you’re going to do stuff for in the future are the people who have been there for you.”
McAuliffe, who knows of Band’s diligent scorekeeping, emphasized that “revenge is not what the Clintons are about.” The accounting is more about being practical, he said, adding, “You have to keep track of this.“
See, it’s not about revenge, silly. Just think of it more as… Clinton Karma…
Full story here:
Filed under: Bill Clinton, campaign, cartoon, elections, hillary clinton, jerry holbert, political cartoon, politics | Tags: Bill Clinton, campaign, cartoon, elections, fat lady, hillary clinton, jerry holbert, politics
Enjoying a bee-yoo-tee-ful sunny Saturday and I hope you fine folks are as well. Here’s a little Hillary-ous topical humor from cartoonist Jerry Holbert:
Filed under: Bill Clinton, campaign, elections, James Clyburn, politics, primary, racism, Rob Andrews | Tags: campaign, elections, hillary clinton, James Clyburn, racism, Rob Andrews
A Democratic superdelegate is apparently telling tales out of school:
A Democratic superdelegate from New Jersey said this week he is worried that unifying the party behind Barack Obama may be difficult because the Clinton camp “has engaged in some very divisive tactics and rhetoric it should not have.”
U.S. Rep. Rob Andrews, who supported Hillary Clinton throughout the primary season, disclosed he received a phone call shortly before the April 22 Pennsylvania primary from a top member of Clinton’s organization and that the caller explicitly discussed a strategy of winning over Jewish voters by exploiting tensions between Jews and African-Americans.
“There have been signals coming out of the Clinton campaign that have racial overtones that indeed disturb me,” Andrews said at his campaign headquarters in Cherry Hill Tuesday night after he lost his bid for the Democratic U.S. Senate nomination.
“Frankly, I had a private conversation with a high-ranking person in the campaign … that used a racial line of argument that I found very disconcerting. It was extremely disconcerting given the rank of this person. It was very disturbing.”
Andrews said the phone call came after he angered the Clinton camp by making some positive comments about Obama. He would not disclose the caller’s name because of the private nature of the conversation.
Bullies that they are, the Clinton camp angrily fired back by rubbing salt in the wounds of Andrews’ recent loss:
“Comments like these, coming so soon after Congressman Andrews’ crushing defeat, are sad and divisive,” said Clinton’s chief national spokesman, Phil Singer.
Notice they didn’t deny the allegations… could there possibly be a recording of the call floating around somewhere?
But the obvious question is why would Andrews say something like this if it weren’t true? What could he possibly stand to gain by manufacturing such a story? Sure he had just lost an election but so what? Andrews did in fact point out that he waited until AFTER his loss to make his comments because he “didn’t want people to think I was trying to win over Obama supporters in the primary.” So any ulterior motive is essentially out the window.
A similar but more interesting question is why would Andrews say something like this if it WERE true? A few short years ago you just didn’t DO this to the Clintons. Every Democratic congressman knew it was the kiss of death to speak above their breath about the Sopranolike goings on behind the scenes with this pair.
But with Obama becoming the new media darling and Billary losing their grip on the Democratic Party leadership we are starting to see a shift in the tide. We have already heard such complaints from James Clyburn and now Rob Andrews has chimed in. How many more? I predict that we can expect a bevy of these kinds of stories to start coming out soon — the Clintons have managed to piss a lot of people off during this campaign.
But the most interesting question of all… who made the call? Was it a he and did he perhaps have an Arkansas accent? Andrews did make it a specific point to emphasize the “rank” of this person. There are a handful of people could have been of course. But it’s still an intriguing if not entertaining thought to toss about.
In any event its so good to see the Clintons finally being revealed for the exploitive thugs they are and have always been. THIS is the Bill and Hill I have always known.
Full story here:
Filed under: Bill Clinton, politics, The Comeback Id, Todd Purdum, Vanity Fair | Tags: Bill Clinton, Comeback Id, Todd Purdum, Vanity Fair
Bill Clinton has gone into one of his notorious purple fits in response to a recent Vanity Fair story which documents his excesses since leaving the White House. This man REALLY doesn’t like anyone messing with his image folks. The 2,476 word memo released by Clinton’s staff attempts to pick apart an article written by Todd Purdum titled The Comeback Id.
According to FOXNews:
Purdum suggests that in the years since Clinton left the White House $12 million in debt, he has been caught up in a world of rich friends, adoring fans and borrowed jets. The article quotes one former aide calling Clinton’s current associates like billionaire Ron Burkle and movie producer Stephen Bing “radioactive.”
The aide says Clinton’s associates are compounding worries that the 61-year-old former president is running with a fast crowd.
Purdum also describes the ex-president as a man who has become consumed by “cavernous narcissism” since leaving office. Since when did that ever NOT describe Bill Clinton?
I won’t go into the details of Clinton’s wordy rebuttal. However, one rather ambitious claim did catch my eye:
“Though (Purdum) researched the piece for several months, his first contact with President Clinton’s office was several weeks before he closed the story. Most revealing is one simple fact: President Clinton has helped save the lives of 1,300,000 people in his post-presidency, and Vanity Fair couldn’t find time to talk to even one of them for comment,” the statement continues, along with several pages of argument refuting the article’s main points.
Bill Clinton has saved the lives of 1,300,000 people? Wow! I’m a little perturbed myself that Vanity Fair dropped the ball on that one. In fact, I’d like to give some of those 1.3 mil a chance to speak out. If you are reading this and you’re one of the grateful souls who was rescued from the jaws of death by Bill Clinton, feel free to chime in. We would love to hear your testimony.
They must be a little shy (bless their hearts).
Full story here: