Bill Clinton on the Political Landscape

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Former President Clinton was on "Meet the Press" this morning, and David Gregory asked about the "vast, right-wing conspiracy" and whether it still exists, pursuing President Obama. "Oh, you bet. Sure it is," Clinton said. "It's not as strong as it was because America has changed demographically. But it's as virulent as it was."

He added, "You know, it's like when they accused me of murder, and all that stuff they did. But it's not really good for the Republicans and the country, what's going on now. I mean, they may be hurting President Obama. They can take his numbers down. They can run his opposition up. But, fundamentally, he and his team have a positive agenda for America. Their agenda seems to be wanting him to fail. And that's not a prescription for a good America."

Sounds right to me. The "VRWC" talk was, to my mind, mocked unnecessarily. The phrase, when Hillary Clinton used it, always struck me as unambiguously true -- there was a network of conservative Republicans that invested time, energy, and resources into destroying the Clinton presidency. Similarly, there are scores of Republicans who wake up every morning with the same goal: undermining the Obama White House and its allies.

As for the midterm elections, Gregory asked Clinton whether he worries about a repeat of 1994. "There's no way they can make it that bad -- for several reasons," the former president replied. "Number one, the country is more diverse and more interested in positive action. Number two, they've seen this movie before, because they had eight years under President Bush when the Republicans finally had the whole government, and they know the results were bad. And number three, the Democrats haven't taken on the gun lobby like I did, and they took 15 of our members out.... [W]hatever happens, it'll be manageable for the president."

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

[Nagishkaw 510]

[Pooky 3,857]

Why do all conspiracies have to be "vast"?

Why can't we have a little conspiracy? Is it because a "little" conspiracy doesn't ignite the imagination, whereas "vast" brings to mind oceans and other such "big" stuff?

Or is it just because people in the "vast" conspiracies tend to be overweight?

Answers on a postcard, please.

[scandal 951]

there was a network of conservative Republicans that invested time, energy, and resources into destroying the Clinton presidency. Similarly, there are scores of Republicans who wake up every morning with the same goal: undermining the Obama White House and its allies.

Um. Like, no duh. And that's what the political strategists are SUPPOSED to do.

Just like Democrat political strategists spent every waking moment for eight years doing what they were supposed to do - looking for every wedge issue they could to undermine the Bush/Cheney administration.

It's called democracy. If you don't like it, try North Korea.

And I say this as a Democrat who likes the current Administration. I simply don't confuse combative hard-ball politics with a lack of patriotism. Or treason. Regardless of which side is doing it.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

there was a network of conservative Republicans that invested time, energy, and resources into destroying the Clinton presidency. Similarly, there are scores of Republicans who wake up every morning with the same goal: undermining the Obama White House and its allies.

Um. Like, no duh. And that's what the political strategists are SUPPOSED to do.

Just like Democrat political strategists spent every waking moment for eight years doing what they were supposed to do - looking for every wedge issue they could to undermine the Bush/Cheney administration.

It's called democracy. If you don't like it, try North Korea.

And I say this as a Democrat who likes the current Administration. I simply don't confuse combative hard-ball politics with a lack of patriotism. Or treason. Regardless of which side is doing it.

I don't think he was just stating the obvious. The issue is how far are they willing to go to do so? How many 'Gate' controversies did Bush go through? How many independent counsels investigated Bush? To say that it's all ####### for tat is disingenuous, Ron. Bush certainly had his critics but I don't recall any Democratic strategists who tried to pin every little thing on Dubya - like WH sleep overs for example. How many times was Laura Bush scrutinized for her the cost of her clothes or how much she spent on eating out? Seriously, Ron - you've got to be blind not too see how the Right Wing goes after every little thing the President or his wife does. It's petty nonsense...whoever does it and whatever their political persuasion is. The Birther talk has still not subsided. People are still spreading lies that Obama is a Muslim. When will it stop? It won't until enough Republican leaders denounce it for what it is. Their silence is an endorsement.

[zqt3344 21]

Bill Clinton Rocks on! He makes Ovomit look like a joke, hell even Bush looks better than Ovomit!

Former President Clinton was on "Meet the Press" this morning, and David Gregory asked about the "vast, right-wing conspiracy" and whether it still exists, pursuing President Obama. "Oh, you bet. Sure it is," Clinton said. "It's not as strong as it was because America has changed demographically. But it's as virulent as it was."

He added, "You know, it's like when they accused me of murder, and all that stuff they did. But it's not really good for the Republicans and the country, what's going on now. I mean, they may be hurting President Obama. They can take his numbers down. They can run his opposition up. But, fundamentally, he and his team have a positive agenda for America. Their agenda seems to be wanting him to fail. And that's not a prescription for a good America."

Sounds right to me. The "VRWC" talk was, to my mind, mocked unnecessarily. The phrase, when Hillary Clinton used it, always struck me as unambiguously true -- there was a network of conservative Republicans that invested time, energy, and resources into destroying the Clinton presidency. Similarly, there are scores of Republicans who wake up every morning with the same goal: undermining the Obama White House and its allies.

As for the midterm elections, Gregory asked Clinton whether he worries about a repeat of 1994. "There's no way they can make it that bad -- for several reasons," the former president replied. "Number one, the country is more diverse and more interested in positive action. Number two, they've seen this movie before, because they had eight years under President Bush when the Republicans finally had the whole government, and they know the results were bad. And number three, the Democrats haven't taken on the gun lobby like I did, and they took 15 of our members out.... [W]hatever happens, it'll be manageable for the president."

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

I like this version of the story better:

Bill Clinton: 'Vast right-wing conspiracy' as 'virulent' as ever

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The "vast right-wing conspiracy" that attacked him during his presidency has been weakened, but continues to operate against President Obama, former President Clinton said Sunday.

On NBC's "Meet the Press," Clinton was asked about the term his wife Hillary Clinton, now secretary of state, famously coined. "Is it still there?" host David Gregory asked.

"Oh, you bet. Sure it is. It's not as strong as it was, because America's changed demographically, but it's as virulent as it was," the former president replied.

"I mean, they're saying things about him [Obama] -- you know, it's like when they accused me of murder and all that stuff they did," Clinton said, in an apparent reference to conspiracy theories surrounding the suicide of White House deputy counsel Vince Foster.

"It's not really good for the Republicans and the country, what's going on now," Clinton said. "I mean, they may be hurting President Obama. They can take his numbers down, they can run his opposition up. But fundamentally, he and his team have a positive agenda for America."

The nation needs "a credible debate about what's the right balance between continuing to expand the economy through stimulus and beginning to move back to fiscal balance," Clinton said. "We need a credible debate about what's the best way to get to universal [health care] coverage."

Clinton was asked whether he is concerned that the 2010 midterm elections could resemble those of 1994, when Republicans took control of the House and Senate two years into his first term.

"There's no way" that could happen, Clinton said, adding that "the country is more diverse and more interested in positive action." Also, he said, Republicans had control of Congress for several years under President George W. Bush, "and they know the results were bad."

And, he said, "the Democrats haven't taken on the gun lobby like I did."

"Whatever happens, it'll be manageable for our president," Clinton

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/27/cli...racy/index.html

[Peikko 1,575]

Not yet anyway