There’s a lot more information coming out on the Chris Wallace/Bill Clinton interview:
Bill Kristol writing at The Weekly Standard offers three possible explanations why Bill Clinton lost his temper. Kristol ends his piece with “Bill Clinton is a smart (and calculating) politician.”
Rick Moran at the Right Wing Nut House analyzes Clinton v. Fox News fallout.
As blogswarms go, the Clinton interview on Fox News Sunday rates about a 7 on the 10 point Rathergate Meter, easily the biggest blog brouhaha of the year. There may have been larger stories. But for sheer emotionalism, it’s hard to beat Clinton and his dredging up the old conspiracy theories about the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy out to get him. It cheers the left and riles the right like no other issue in American politics. In many ways, the unhinged opposition to the Bush Presidency is a direct result of the twin earthquakes of Clinton’s impeachment followed almost immediately by the 2000 election debacle, both events seen by the left in the context of evil conservatives attempting power plays at the expense of the Democrats.
Newsbusters reminds us of when Bill Clinton went after the late Peter Jennings in a similar fashion in a November 2004 interview.
Bill Clinton’s diatribe against FNC’s Chris Wallace, who dared to question the ex-President about his failed efforts to capture or kill Osama bin Laden, reminded some of the last time Clinton exhibited such vitriol. Back on November 18, 2004, in the midst of a quite positive ABC News prime-time special, “Bill Clinton: A Place in History,” about the dedication of the Clinton presidential library, Bill Clinton angrily wagged his finger at Peter Jennings, accusing ABC of conspiring with Ken Starr to “repeat every little sleazy thing he leaked” during the investigation into Clinton’s perjury and obstruction of justice.
Shrinkwrapped says Bill Clinton missed a great opportunity to be an elderstatesman.
Bill Clinton could have gone on Fox News Sunday with Chris Wallace and taken a Statesmanlike, above the fray, position. Clinton, for reasons best known to him, though in no way a surprise, chose a different tack, and clearly missed an excellent opportunity.
Imagine the reaction if he had said that he had, in fact, not done enough to stop bin Laden; that all of us in government at the time underestimated the dangers and did not feel the country was yet able to muster the necessary will to confront the growing menace. He would now be lauded as a great ex-President, using his tremendous political skills, intellectual abilities, and position to elevate our political discourse and rescue the Democratic party from the grips of BDS.
The Anchoress has a great post in which she analyzes Bill Clinton the man.
Check out Noel Sheppard’s piece at The American Thinker. He very effectively destroys Clinton’s “hysterical revisions.”
Republicans claimed that Clinton was obsessed with bin Laden? He did too much to try to capture the infamous terrorist leader?
Do the facts support such assertions, or is this the typical Clinton modus operandi: when questioned about your own mistakes, bring up Republicans, neocons, and conservatives – the liberal equivalent of lions and tigers and bears…oh my – and how it’s all some kind of a conspiracy the complexities of which only Oliver Stone fully grasps.
Historically this line of attack has worked quite well with an adoring interviewer that buys such drivel hook, line, and sinker. However, what Mr. Clinton and his ilk seem to forget regularly is a recent invention known as the Internet. It is indeed odd the former president is unaware of this, inasmuch as his vice president created it.
Regardless, this tool – with the assistance of search engines and services such as LexisNexis – allows folks to go back in the past to accurately identify the truth. Sadly, as has often been the case with the rantings of the Clintons, their grasp of the past is as hazy as their understanding of what the word “is” means. At least that is the charitable interpretation.
Allahpundit has video of Judge Napolitano fact-checking more of Clinton’s statements.
Glenn Reynolds notes that Bill Clinton has again successfully turned everyone’s attention to him.