Discussion for article #247679
What kind of analysis is this? Bill Clinton slams Obama’s legacy? Are there any of Bill’s words in his speech or this piece to back this up? In light of Hillary’s steadfast defense of the Obama legacy, where does anything in this article make any sense?
Typical Bernie: jump on a few words out of context and ignore the major point being made: the Republicans in Congress have been blocking President Obama whenever they can to the detriment of these United States.
I’ve got to give the Big Dog the benefit of the doubt, but surely he could have been more articulate than that.
This is not good. In a primary where his candidate is hugging the Obama legacy, he should not have put himself anywhere near any statements that advisors need to clarify. Context and truth are secondary when dealing with the press (who let’s be honest were waiting to pounce on him for another “fairy tale” moment, fulfilling the pre-fab narrative “Bill screws up Hilary’s campaign”). And lets not forget a whole day of the last republican convention was devoted to the out of context distortion of “You didn’t build that.” These moments can live on for months. A single moment Hilary has to put “context” on anything someone else said is a moment lost.
one of the things that really irritated me in 2008 was a lot of Bill’s inarticulate and at times ill advised comments supporting Hillary in her first attempt for the nomination… for a smart intelligent politician he has a distressing habit of putting his foot in his mouth…
I’ll support Hillary if Bernie isn’t nominated but it would be really nice if Bill would be a little less vocal at this point in time…
He reminds me of the drunk uncle at the wedding reception who embarrasses everyone and who you want to stay away from. He can’t help himself from undermining his wife. He did it in 2008 too. It is part of his pathology.
[quote=“ignoreland, post:4, topic:35375, full:true”]
I’ve got to give the Big Dog the benefit of the doubt, but surely he could have been more articulate than that.
[/quote]I strongly suspect the choice of words is intentional, and designed to be ambiguous so he can back away from them at any point. If he’d been upset only with the Republican Congress, he would have limited it to the past six years, which is how long they will have controlled the House by the end of the year.
The reaction by Bernie infuriates me to no end. Despicable. He is acting like a pure GOPer on this. Disgusting.
Depends how you classify Sen. Joe Lieberman and other Blue Dogs.
Bernie is not interested in mending any fences.
While I don’t believe Bill was referring to President Obama or his efforts–I believe he was referring to the unrelenting obstruction by the Republicans–he seemed a bit off his game considering his legendary oratory, even not well. He was hoarse and appeared weak. I hope he is taking care of himself.
Bill is off his game. Probably a late party last night.
When those predisposed to baseless attacks-- do attack?
Whyizzit anyone who follows politics seems surprised?
Look. It’s a soundbite. Not a death-knell.
If WJC has to explain it over-and-over-and-over to the MSM?
I, for one, will see the chance to do so as a positive–
expressing more than just this once, publicly–
why Congress has been absolutely awful.
jw1
[quote=“DSWX, post:10, topic:35375, full:true”]
The reaction by Bernie infuriates me to no end. Despicable. He is acting like a pure GOPer on this. Disgusting.
[/quote]The statement by Bill infuriates me to no end. Despicable. He is acting like a pure GOPer on this. Disgusting.
Really, the name-calling and tribalism you’re doing is petty. Bill is a spokesman for a candidate (hell, he’s a proxy, we’re talking about his wife) making a deliberately ambiguous statement to win votes. Bernie is taking a valid interpretation of that statement—and it is one of the intended interpretations, pitched at the blue-collar Democrats—and using it to win votes. And Clinton’s toxic fans do a tribal freak out towards Sanders doing this.
This is an election, and both sides are trying to win, though not the same prize. Neither seem to be breaking any rules. Grow up.
The clip is from the RNC - note the elephant logo in the lower right.
Clinton needs to be more explicit to avoid confusion, but we can always count on the GOP to twist words and play games.
He used to be, but his “Use By” date on his label expired several years ago.
I though similarly in 08.
Bill Clinton parsed the meaning of the word “is”. As such I refuse to believe that anything he says is an accident.
this is why I’ve been done with Bill Clinton since his infamous comment after the South Carolina primary in 08.
He has on numerous occasions praised Obama’s accomplishments in spite of the tremendous obstruction by Republicans. This is lazy reckless journalism.