"Methinks the lady doth protest too much." ~ from "Macbeth" by William Shakespeare
When I first saw the interview of former President Bill Clinton, the first thing I thought was, "Here he goes again, trying to salvage his legacy."
Then I gave it some more thought and it struck me how much like a child he was behaving. Children tend to refuse to take responsibility for their actions, too. And then they blame everyone but themselves, sometimes even constructing elaborate conspiracies. I was reminded of Bill Cosby's comedy routine, "Russell, my brother, who I slept with."
I don't remember the routine word for word, but in his routine, he discussed how he and his brother would jump on the bed at night instead of going to sleep, hoping in vain that they wouldn't get caught by their father, who promised to produce "The Belt" if they didn't settle down.
In this particular routine, they broke the bed, and just as they feared, their father came in and demanded to know who broke the bed. The kids made up a mysterious man, who came in through the window, and jumped on the bed till it broke and then ran out, laughing.
Yep. Sounds like 'ole Bill. Someone else is to blame.
Always.
I don't want to leave this subject without giving Mr Clinton his due.
I don't see what else he could have said in response to Mr. Wallace's question. Clearly, he couldn't sit there and tell the world that he didn't do everything he could to get bin Laden. Even if he had to lie.
I just think, as a former President, one who should be unflappable, he showed surprising lack of control, which is the problem he had as President, as well, in my humble opinion.
It has always been my contention that the Lewinsky scandal showed him to have an amazing lack of self control, which, in my opinion, made him suspect as an effective Commander in Chief.
Think about it.
How can we expect the most powerful man in the world, a man who has the power to push a button and end the world, to be able to refrain from pushing that button in a fit of rage, if he can't even control his own base sexual urges?
And now, we have seen his lack of control again. Anyway, that's my opinion.
I don't blame him for defending himself. Any of us would do the same.
And it really was a pretty stupid question. Did Mr. Wallace expect him to say he didn't do all he could to find bin Laden?
Still, although it was a stupid question, it was a simple question, and one that should have not engendered such an impassioned response.
Perhaps Mr. Clinton protests too much?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
25 comments:
I'd like to give credit to the president, but not only did he not have the moral integrity to keep it in his pants, he similarly didn't have the moral integrity to tell the truth about it-- lying under oath to a federal grand jury. You're absolutely right, it was expected that he'd make excuses to Wallace's simple question, and the fact that he concocted several 'conspiracy theories' as counter-attacks only served to further illustrate his complete and utter lack of moral integrity.
I lost my respect for that man long before Monica Lewinsky. For the office he held? Certainly not. But for the man... I've met better men begging for pocket change.
Mark--Great minds think alike ;-)!!
"The lady doth protest too much, methinks" is from Hamlet. Act III, Scene ii.
Good to see you back, Mark!
I ditto Miss Chatterbox's remark -- Great minds think alike.
I gave my post on the Clinton meltdown the exact same title.
If Clinton had instead responded by saying, "Chris, gee that's a stupid question, what do you expect me to say?" and laughed at it and gone on, he wouldn't be under so much scrutiny for that interview now. But then that has always been his problem. He's not rational. He's reactionary and emotional.
Oh, to the contrary, Ms. Green, I think that he planned on getting riled up all along. In fact, I've heard in the last few days that the Democrats are planning to use this whole episode as a sort of rallying cry. Of course, it's a rallying cry, to whine and call names instead of offering any real solutions. They think that this will help them win elections, which just goes to show how far they have progressed with their delusions.
Yes, if he doesn't have self control in the little things, then he won't have in it in the big things either...
Reminds me of the Cyndi Lauper song...
We are seeing his true colors shining through...
Blessings
Clinton went right at Wallace's throat. I don't really care for either one, but I thought it was funny how Clinton acted.
Why wouldn't Clinton get angry? If someone were repeating lies about you, on national television, would you get angry?
And Bruiser? Your point, please? By gleefully pointing out that some Republicans can be degenerates too, you seem to be surprised that not only Democrats can be sick perverts.
Is that what you are saying?
I might point out here, that whenever a Republican commits a transgression, he immediately resigns, which is what Foley did. Democrats stay in office and proceed to blame everyone else for their crimes.
Does the name Chappaquiddick ring a bell?
Hey Mark, you're making too much sense.
People like Tom Delay and Bob Packwood are no longer in the GOP. But the Dems will keep Kennedy, Clinton, and even an old former KKK member like Byrd around forever.
You're kidding, Mark. Right?
whenever a Republican commits a transgression, he immediately resigns, which is what Foley did.
The instant messages are from at least as far back as 2003. The House leadership has known about this for a year!
Foley is only resigning now because this has become public. Not because he feels remorse for what he did, and not because the Republic House Leaders did anything about what they've known for a year.
Your sanctimonious "Republics are so morally superior" bullshit is, um, bullshit.
Oh, and Clinton was under complete control.
I am sorry, Jim. I mis-spoke. I meant to say, whenever a Republican gets caught, he immediately resigns.
Democrats won't even admit they did anything wrong, much less make things right by doing the proper thing.
Once again, has Ted Kennedy ever so much as apologized for murdering Mary Jo? Has Clinton ever so much as apologized for lying to the Grand jury? What about Barney Franks homo lover and roomate running a gay prostitution ring out of their apartment? Has he yet apologized for that?
No, they haven't. In fact, Franks and Kennedy and several others are still in office!
Agreed, the Republicans aren't all guiltless, but at least they have the moral integrity to apologize and resign when they get caught.
Those Democrats lack of integrity is amazingly unfathomable. And any Democrat apologist that defends their reprehensible behavior is simiarlarly lacking in moral integrity.
Do you defend them, Jim?
I don't condone their behavior. Never have. However, I will offer the truth against gratuitous bashing.
Mark, to this day there isn't one iota of evidence to even suggest that Ted Kennedy murdered Kopecny. None. Was he guilty of a lesser crime? Negligent homicide, involuntary manslaughter? Don't know. There has never been a suggestion by a non-partisan official that a murder charge was appropriate.
Has he apologized for being involved in her death? I'm sure he has, and I'll bet you have absolutely no evidence to prove that he hasn't.
Clinton? Wrong again. From CNN, February 1999:
Now that the Senate has fulfilled its constitutional responsibility ... I want to say again [emphasis added] to the American people how profoundly sorry I am for what I said and did to trigger these events and the great burden they have imposed on the Congress and the America people," Clinton said in the White House Rose Garden.
Barney Frank? His story differs from that of his roommate. Franks claimed he didn't know about the prostitution ring and kicked him out as soon as he found that out. The roommate disputes that, but there is no other evidence to support the roommate. Frank was reprimanded by the Senate for fixing 33 of his roommate's parking tickets (ooooooooo). From Wikipedia.
You got nothing.
The dems have been standing on shaky ground all along and as crumples beneath them they still offer nothing to save themselves, the GOP cleans house and moves on, they play victim. No wonder they are sinking fast in recent polls. They fail miserably at National Security and other important issues. We need more like Mike Spence and Tom Coburn than we do Kennedy and Pelosi.
I guess Bill never heard David Gregory or Helen Thomas question the President at a presser much less the Whitehouse press man, Tony Snow, who has been fantastic at swatting the flies down.
Bruiser, you are an idiot.
You would condemn the whole party because of what one Congressman did?
If we did that because of what leaders of the Democrats have done and are still doing, there would be no Democrat party.
Where is the Democrats moral integrity? Barney Franks is still in Congress, President Clinton is still popular, Jerry Stubbs got a standing ovation from his peers, and he didn't just write dirty e-mails, he actually had sex with a male page!
And on and on and on.
Why don't you go away? Come back when you can come up with an original thought instead of repeating the same tripe you read on the daily Kos and Moveon.org.
I am not justifying any perverted behacvior. I think Mr. Foley is reprehensible and should be put in jail, if he is guilty of what it appears he is guilty of, and it certainly looks as if he is.
But because one Republican member of Congress is a pervert, it doesn't mean all Republican members of Congress are perverts and you very well know that.
In fact, as I mentioned already, there are many more perverts who are Democrats than there are Republicans, including your erstwhiole hero, B. J. Clinton.
Now go back to moveon.org and find another weak and non-applicable argument.
Idiot.
Wanna compare? Here's one list:
http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/
Republican_Sex_Scandals
Or do you want to expand it to the list that are currently in legal trouble?
http://www.perrspectives.com/blog/archives/000255.htm
Or the conviction rate from the last two complete presidencies (32 criminal convictions in the Reagan administration and only 1 in the Clinton)?
I don’t know what the issue is or why it has to get personal and aggressive.
Clinton may be flawed as a man but he was a great politician and a great President; who created a flourishing economy with millions of extra jobs and raised the living standards of ordinary Americans. Additionally, under Clinton, America was liked and respected by the rest of the world.
dreadnought--
You sound like a genuine, postmodern leftist.
Being liked is more important than anything to you people -- even to the point where you guys will rally behind monsters like Saddam Hussein.
"even to the point where you guys will rally behind monsters like Saddam Hussein."
ummm...just a factual point of reference: It was Team Reagan that supported "monsters like Saddam" in the 1980s - back when he was actually doing most of his killing, THAT'S when Reagan supported him.
Jason H. Bowden – No you are quite incorrect. I am of the ‘old’ left who believes that fascism in all its guises, be that ‘traditional European’, Ba’athist, Islamic etc, must be defeated.
Post a Comment