The Bill Clinton Interview
As I previously predicted the Bill Clinton interview, this past weekend on FoxNews Sunday, has created quite a story. Watch it here.
Of course, as can be expected, this interview is being spun in a variety of ways by the media; but through all the spin – on both the left and the right – the most important facts are being lost. Was Clinton too angry? No, but who cares if he was. Did Chris Wallace violate their agreement about what subjects they were supposed to discuss in the interview? No, half the interview was supposed to be open to any subject. Who was more responsible for 9/11, Bush or Clinton? Probably Bush, but this is an argument that neither side can win because it’s not really fair to blame either of them. The blame falls on those who perpetrated the acts, with the cause behind their hatred being decades of American foreign policy in the Middle East – for which Clinton or Bush can only be blamed as much as almost every high ranking American politician over the last 50+ years. To focus too much on any of the above is to distract one from what should be the most important point to be taken from this interview.
Here’s what’s important: Clinton pointed out in no uncertain terms the bias of FoxNews and the recent smear campaign against him, and this can not be refuted because the facts are all on Clinton’s side. The question that needs to be answered is the one Bill Clinton repeatedly posed to Chris Wallace: Did you ask anyone in the Bush administration these questions? The answer is no. Period.
However, once again the Democrats are doing their best to snatch defeat (or a tie) from the hands of victory. They should be all over this angle of the story. They should be rallying to Clinton’s side in this and exposing the free pass that FoxNews, and most of the media, has given to the Bush Administration. Chris Wallace, nor anyone at FoxNews, has ever asked any of the top people in The Bush Administration these types of tough questions about what they failed to do prior to 9/11 in trying to stop al Qaeda.
If they play this right the Democrats can’t lose this fight because their opponents can not produce a tape of Bush, Cheney, Rice, or Rumsfeld being grilled like this with repeated questions about why they didn’t do more to stop al Qaeda prior to 9/11. If such a tape does exist then I’m wrong and so would be any Democrat who took this stance, but no such tapes exist. If they did don’t you think FoxNews and their defenders would be playing them to prove they were being fair to Clinton and that he just overreacted?
So, why don’t these tapes exist? How is that possible? Why were these questions posed to Bill Clinton and not to anyone who was actually in The White House on 9/11? That is the fight the Democrats should be making because they won’t lose that fight. This is where they should be turning the tide and exposing “the right-wing media”, and making this phrase a part of the American lexicon the way Republicans have done with “the liberal media”.
Clinton did his part in defending himself and calling out Chris Wallace on the smear campaign he was involved in. If he was angry it’s because he had every right to be. No Democrat should get sucked into the debate about whether or not Clinton was too angry because that’s how the Republicans want to frame the debate. All they need to do is challenge anyone critical of Clinton’s performance to produce an example of a Bush Administration official being grilled in the same manner. Clinton challenged Chris Wallace face-to-face on this point. That challenge should be followed up on. Chris Wallace said he has asked these types of questions to Bush administration officials. That is a lie that he should not be allowed to get away with. Where is the tape of Chris Wallace, or any other FoxNews interviewer, asking these tough questions to anyone else? If they focus on that question, and on the overall smear campaign, then the Democrats will win. So far they haven’t, and they’re letting a golden opportunity slip away.
Of course, as can be expected, this interview is being spun in a variety of ways by the media; but through all the spin – on both the left and the right – the most important facts are being lost. Was Clinton too angry? No, but who cares if he was. Did Chris Wallace violate their agreement about what subjects they were supposed to discuss in the interview? No, half the interview was supposed to be open to any subject. Who was more responsible for 9/11, Bush or Clinton? Probably Bush, but this is an argument that neither side can win because it’s not really fair to blame either of them. The blame falls on those who perpetrated the acts, with the cause behind their hatred being decades of American foreign policy in the Middle East – for which Clinton or Bush can only be blamed as much as almost every high ranking American politician over the last 50+ years. To focus too much on any of the above is to distract one from what should be the most important point to be taken from this interview.
Here’s what’s important: Clinton pointed out in no uncertain terms the bias of FoxNews and the recent smear campaign against him, and this can not be refuted because the facts are all on Clinton’s side. The question that needs to be answered is the one Bill Clinton repeatedly posed to Chris Wallace: Did you ask anyone in the Bush administration these questions? The answer is no. Period.
However, once again the Democrats are doing their best to snatch defeat (or a tie) from the hands of victory. They should be all over this angle of the story. They should be rallying to Clinton’s side in this and exposing the free pass that FoxNews, and most of the media, has given to the Bush Administration. Chris Wallace, nor anyone at FoxNews, has ever asked any of the top people in The Bush Administration these types of tough questions about what they failed to do prior to 9/11 in trying to stop al Qaeda.
If they play this right the Democrats can’t lose this fight because their opponents can not produce a tape of Bush, Cheney, Rice, or Rumsfeld being grilled like this with repeated questions about why they didn’t do more to stop al Qaeda prior to 9/11. If such a tape does exist then I’m wrong and so would be any Democrat who took this stance, but no such tapes exist. If they did don’t you think FoxNews and their defenders would be playing them to prove they were being fair to Clinton and that he just overreacted?
So, why don’t these tapes exist? How is that possible? Why were these questions posed to Bill Clinton and not to anyone who was actually in The White House on 9/11? That is the fight the Democrats should be making because they won’t lose that fight. This is where they should be turning the tide and exposing “the right-wing media”, and making this phrase a part of the American lexicon the way Republicans have done with “the liberal media”.
Clinton did his part in defending himself and calling out Chris Wallace on the smear campaign he was involved in. If he was angry it’s because he had every right to be. No Democrat should get sucked into the debate about whether or not Clinton was too angry because that’s how the Republicans want to frame the debate. All they need to do is challenge anyone critical of Clinton’s performance to produce an example of a Bush Administration official being grilled in the same manner. Clinton challenged Chris Wallace face-to-face on this point. That challenge should be followed up on. Chris Wallace said he has asked these types of questions to Bush administration officials. That is a lie that he should not be allowed to get away with. Where is the tape of Chris Wallace, or any other FoxNews interviewer, asking these tough questions to anyone else? If they focus on that question, and on the overall smear campaign, then the Democrats will win. So far they haven’t, and they’re letting a golden opportunity slip away.
posted by The Animal | 12:40 PM
1 Comments:
And don't forget that Clinton wasn't the one causing Lewinsky to be a distraction. That was the Republicans who went on a witch hunt over a blow-job. If Clinton did take his eye off Bin Laden it's because he was being impeached for no reason whatsoever.
Post a Comment
<< Home