Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
NYT: The Clintons Own Washington DC
Throughout the year, the NYT has given hints oflow cash flow. There have been layoffs, and even (unfortunately) mention that the paper partnered with General Electric owned NBC for political coverage. Obvious by the way the paper poodle-humps Tim Russert's shin on a daily basis.Based on the caliber of thinking in their political coverage section, it is easy to see where Grey Lady is pinching her pennies. (And maybe making a few by throwing HRC under the bus?)Today's "Political Memo" starts like a diary out of Daily Kos. It seems the democratic party is about to have a "Changing of the Guard.""After 16 years, the Clinton era maybe coming to an end . . . "But with Obama, "a new set of people running the show."So that Clinton hack, Howard Dean will go!
Adam Nagourney backs his premise with astute quotes from political mavins McGovern, Kennedy, and Gary Hart, such as Ted's"But elections are about the future, not the past. It's a new era. This is a new spirit that's out there."Yeah, Reverend Wright publicly jeering the speaking manner of Ted's assassinated brother - one of the strongest advocate of civil rights.
The Clinton's OWN Washington DC. They drive it around like a big shiny Cadillac. Some of us thought that they had been hounded and made black sheep and the butt of jokes, which is what real accomplishment seems to get you in Washington.
Only those of us struggling families, who suddenly found we were miraculously making in the 6 digits when Bill Clinton was president, are in wonderment that he is so scorned.
The only siting of Clinton I remember up until now, was Bill stumping for John Kerry at the democratic convention. And Kerry complaining bitterly that he didn't campaign more for him. Apparently obvious that Bill underwent surgery for triple bypass soon after the convention.
Kerry was on MSNBC spewing bile and venom about Hillary Clinton 2 nights ago. The same way he did in his former running-mate John Edwards, in a NYT interview.
Comments (14)
Is that a photo of Barack flipping the bird? Oh my goodness! Oh my paws and whiskers! He's just s~o~o~o mean....
May 8, 2008 7:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's actually just touching his face, but this is an "infamous moment" in Hillaryland.
May 8, 2008 7:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
:) I know... "s~o~o~o mean" was my attempt at "high school musical" speech.
May 8, 2008 7:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
The thing is, everyone watched the same speech, but it only looks like he "flipped off" Hillary Clinton at one angle.
Ironically, with the angle FOX taped the speech you can clearly see he's reading and just touching his face, with his whole hand, not just his "middle finger".
I mean for gods sake, even Bill O'Reilly thinks it was nothing. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhAti5R6_wI
May 8, 2008 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
The true test, in my opinion, of a Hillary partisan is someone who can see Obama hurling insults at Hillary in every speech. Even ones he doesn't mention her in.
The truest and firmest Hillary supporters can find 2, 3, sometimes even FIVE insults per speech! The HillaryIs44.org people are so good at this they think Obama actually ran a fundamentally negative campaign! It's amazing and depressing at the same time.
May 8, 2008 7:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Breathe into a paper bag and count to ten slowly.
May 8, 2008 7:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's why all those Obama supporters seated behind
Obama laughed their asses off when he
just "touched his cheek"
Maybe they were laughing because he thought he was touching his ass cheek?
He doesn't seem very coordinarted.
Oh that right, he's Ghandi.
Talking Points Memo is sure attracting the lowest
common denominator these days.
May 8, 2008 8:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
If the Clinton's are so important and powerful why don't they pay the American Taxpayers back for the impeachment trial which cost millions upon millions.
May 8, 2008 8:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
So let me see if I get this straight. You suddenly found yourself making six figures during he 90s and it was because of Bill? So your hard work had nothing to do with it? Unless he hired you I would say this was your feat not his.
And I think the scorn being directed at Bill has little to do with his presidency, except maybe the failure to see the 94 elections coming. I think it has more to do with his behavior in this campaign.
I think also many folks remember the good stuff, like myself, but also remember the 8 year soap opera that was his presidency. Also, if you are honest with yourself some of it was his and Hillary's own doing. And as much as I blame the Supremes for Gore loosing, he deserves a bit of the blame. His sexual misadventures in the White House attached Gore to the Clinton fatigue and the vehement Religious Right back lash and Republican lock stop vote for idiot Bush II.
And from my point of view Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton is more than I can handle. It's time to move on, at least for me.
I know you see Hillary and see the opportunity for the first woman president, and I am sure you believe the experience , ready on day one reasoning. Good.
All I feel oh,oh here we go again another 4 to 8 years of trials and travails.
May 8, 2008 9:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Onion, January 14, 2001:
Bush: 'Our Long National Nightmare Of Peace And Prosperity Is Finally Over'
Yeah, woot, what a relief it was to get rid of that horrible soap opera, we got people who wore jackets and ties in the White House at all moments, and a whole lot more serious stuff, no silly soap opera stuff, nosiree....
May 8, 2008 10:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh brother. Get a grip. I said I was fully aware of the good. However I also remember the not so great. And where did I write what a relief. However I did say I give Bill some blame for Gore losing. If he was a good at controlling his libido as he was a politician things might be very different today.
And I will certainly be the first to admit
the superiority to our present administration cannot even be calculated. However, electing another Clinton does not guarantee a greater improvement than electing Obama. Hell the office could stay empty for 8 years and things would improve. The only thing that doesn't improve our lot much - McCain.
May 8, 2008 10:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I assume you haven't watched Clinton's amazing
performance during the debates, or read her
accomplishments to understand that she is one of
the hardest working senators in Washington.
Her children's care safety bill just passed the senate, and
the media hasn't said a word.
You think it "just happened" that Bill balanced our budget
for the first time in over a century?
You think it "just happened" that the middle class enjoyed
unprecedented prosperity during the Clinton years?
You think it "just happened" that there was no war, and
the few skirmishes we had were ended quickly with next
to no loss of life?
I guess you think it "just happens" that some doctors have
a strong history of saving patients and others have a strong
history of killing them.
And experience and quality mean nothing.
I guess that's the reason a neophyte with no record, from
a real bad side of Chicago, with buddies of dubioius
character is about to be the democratic nominee.
Because just about anybody can do this stuff.
yep.
May 9, 2008 1:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
This whole "Obama giving Hillary the finger" thing reminds me of the "Paul is Dead" thing with the Beatles.
One person hears something at the end of a song that sounds ominous and the next thing you know, people are crawling out of the woodwork claiming that the fact Paul McCartney is walking barefoot on Abbey Road, has a hand behind his head on the cover of Sgt. Pepper, a revolver pointing at him on the cover of Revolver, and I don't know how many other "clues" to point to point to the fact that John, George and Ringo covered up the fact that Paul McCartney died in the 60's and there was some huge conspiracy that even George Martin helped cover up.
Meanwhile, Paul is still around, alive and breathing, and making billions. Some of which he has to give to ex-wife.
I just don't get it.
May 8, 2008 10:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
is that your mother?
she's probably wondering why you
have time to hang around on a blog
all day, instead of working like most
of us.
May 8, 2008 11:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment