The Reaction to Bill Clinton: Retorts and...Socks?

Let me preface this post with a comment: I rant at times. Sometimes for great length. I did not go too long in this post. I started out nice and calm but as I wrote more and more, I began to seethe till finally, I exploded in a torrent of anger and insanity focused on the actions of my government. I do not apologize because I'm exercising my first amendment right to free speech. I honestly don't think its that bad but... whatever.

**********************************************************************

I did say I'd find the links to the video of the interview. They are in fact on YouTube. Its in three parts and can be found at these links: Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3.

Onwards to the reaction to Clinton.

I know my appreciation for CNN knows no bounds. I can't help it. It was ingrained in me as a child because my parents loved the news and it was the only 24 hour news network there was. They invented the damned thing. I also loved that James Earl Jones ident that you never hear anymore. The only other channel we watched as much was the Weather Channel! Well, in the last 24 hours or so (except for some of 360 last night), I've watched the "others". I wanted to see how Fox and not to mention MSNBC, ABC, and CBS would cover the Clinton interview. I know what Coop said about it last night and that was good enough for me as far as CNN was concerned. I loved it on 360 last night when they revealed this regarding Clinton: "Spokesman Tony Snow, a former FOX News commentator quipped, 'He retorts, you decide.'" Excellant! A "Rush" transcript of 360 can be read here. To Anderson Cooper's credit, he reported the news with nothing in the way of opinion and interviewed numerous people from different schools of thought. That's why I love Anderson!

Earlier in the day, I watched Good Morning America. Diane Sawyer had Bill O'Reilly on to discuss the recently broadcast Bill Clinton interview we all love to analyse to death. He was milder than he normally is. I can only guess it was because it wasn't his show, he wasn't in charge and its Dame Diane Sawyer, a real Lady of Journalism. He said that Clinton as well as many in the current administration such as the hated 4: Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld. Not to bring me back to Cooper but it reminded me of the spinning going on a year ago about Katrina. Mary Landrieu said people were frustrated. People aren't frustrated! People are dying!!! Those people are our servicmen and women! Whatever...

I watched Keith Olbermann and his Countdown over on MSNBC. I like Olbermann and I wish he wasn't on MSNBC which I forget about half the time because its on channel 70 and all the other news channels are clustered together in the 30's. "The Dirty Thirties!" ...Anyway. Olbermann devoted quite a large chunk of his show to an editorial. He pointed out that Clinton's "tear" during the interivew on Fox opened up a lot of doors, not to mention windows, doggie doors, escape hatches and bunker seals to run around and scream at the current administration for their ineptitude and inane stupidity. He also claimed that it was a wake-up call to the media as a whole. That they need no longer swig from the bottle of booze known as Stooge. They could now start ripping down the sets that Bush and his administration built. Olbermann went for quite some time on his own "tear" toward Bush and his administration. So much so I almost jumped up and applauded. I didn't but I shed a tear or ten. Its nice to see the press finally get a spine back. His editorial can (and should) be read here.

This morning on MSNBC, they were still going on about this interview but now they were splitting hairs. An anchorwoman on MSNBC was discussing with two men about Clinton showing a little leg. Apparently, his socks were too low and his pants were too high. Couldn't someone tell him "to pull down his pants?" Oh yeah, that was brilliant! I was astounded that they would devote any more time than 10 seconds mentioning Clinton's wardrobe malfunction.

Ok... things are getting absurd. Maybe they were to begin with. Now, there is talk of pre-planning (isn't planning already pre-whatever? That's like pre-early. "I wanted to beat you here so I got here pre-early") on both sides. Did Wallace plan on brow-beating Clinton to deflect criticsm of Murdoch getting cozy with Clinton and his initiatives? Did Clinton plan on ripping Wallace a new asshole on the GOP leaning Fox news? One may believe that both are correct statements. Fox did need to make an effort to offset the potentially troubling coupling. Dems need help for the election in 5-6 weeks. Leaking parts of the National Intelligence Estimate isn't enough. (Which if you don't know about that, lord, help you!)

Was Wallace even smirking? His colleagues all jokingly told him "just don't smirk!" And Clinton's finger wagging... well, the last time he did that was in fact when he told us he didn't have sexual relations with Monica.

Take this how you want to. There's spinning on either side. Case in point: Condaleeza Rice has come out today to talk about Clinton's claims that the Bush administration was asleep at the wheel its first 8 months. "The notion somehow for eight months the Bush administration sat there and didn't do that is just flatly false - and I think the 9/11 commission understood that," she said in interview with many staff members of the New York Post. She also mentioned "we were not left a comprehensive strategy to fight al-Qaida" contradictory to Clinton's assertion that he did. The same article ends with Hillary, always defending her husband, saying "I just think that my husband did a great job in demonstrating that Democrats are not going to take this." And, in fact, it is likely they won't take any of this any more.

But before I declare the Democrats awake and out of torpor, I must briefly mention that many of these people went along with every brazen and emboldened thing Bush could think up to ruin this country. Why? Fear be damned, its politics! The Politics of Fear, in fact, a strategy most usefully employed by lords and kings in the feudal era. That was when "Might makes Right" was the slogan of the day. The Bush administration continues to use fear as a political tool to keep the left doing their bidding, the media reporting what he says they can and the American people as a whole sweating and re-electing. He keeps us scared for his own ends. And we are turning into the country we swore we never would, that we wouldn't be terrorized by terrorists. But we are! We are scared because of our privacy isn't, our rights are infringed, we can't bring liquids on airplanes, there's anthrax in the air and e. coli on our spinach (Ok, the last one isn't related but whatever...). They keep asking if Americans feel safer now and the answer is no!!! How could we be? And how can we feel safer with a government that reveals nothing? Even if al-Quada didn't exist, I'd still be scared becuase my government is frightening!!!

So, our government still runs on the medieval idea of whomever has the ability to kill more must be the best. In a WWE smackdown, sure! But this is Global Politics and we are a democracy. Conflict should never be settled with bombs and bullets but debate and discourse. I'm hoping Bill Clinton opened the flood gates for the Democratic Party. I hope they launch into scathing attacks of not only the failings of the current administration but also the lies, the deception and the stupid strategies employed by nitwits who can't win either war we're in. I hope...

And if I sounded crazed and Clinton looked crazed its because we are. Fox did itself a disservice by advertising the crazed Clinton. Anyone would be crazed at this day and year for all the shit we see happening. I feel as though I'm living in Nazi Germany before the war: I'm watching the beacon on the hill become the cesspool in the sewer. And I just can't take it anymore!!!!!

There are too many things to bitch about. I'm done. There is nothing else to say. Whatever...

"How well do you know your government?" 001

Whilst talking to a certain anonymous person about politics and such, I came to the conclusion that this person knew absolutely nothing about geography, let alone government. They thought Vancouver was the capital of Vermont and China shared a border along the Rio Lobo. In all actuality I should title this "How fucking stupid are you?"

To start off, Vancouver is in Canada. Say it with me: CAN-A-DA. Secondly, its on the West Coast, you know, where the Pacific Ocean is, and has way better weather than Vermont. If you go across said ocean you will find China, an ancient civilization now run by Communists and populated by over a billion, mostly poor, people. The Rio Lobo (which means Wolf River) is not the river that snakes across our southwest creating our southern border. It is the Rio Grande (which is neither a river nor grand) that makes up our border with the economically inferior Mexico.

Now that I got the Geography lesson out of the way, I will proceed to bigger issues at hand: Who is in charge of things? To answer that question, we must define things. A year ago I would have said "Oh, Hurricane relief? Well, that would be no one." Today its much the same. But the President still has fall guys. All presidents do.

The Vice President is a man named Dick. Dick Cheney, an energy man who once ran Halliburton. He served in the Wyoming House of Representatives and was Secretary of Defense under Bush Sr. He was not the first choice for the position then and had to be selected after the Senate rejected Bush's first nomination, John G. Tower. Tower is currently dead. One of the things Cheney did as Secretary of Defence was appoint Colin Powell Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. This would be a boon to both men as the Persian Gulf War I loomed in the following years. The two would benefit from their work during this conflict.

Cheney has had some issues since assuming office in 2001. Namely his continued ownership of Halliburton stocks. Halliburton gained notoriety after gaining many lucrative contracts in the feeding frenzy to rebuild Iraq. There was also a scandal involving the outing of an undercover, clandestine agent for the CIA named Valerie Plame. Her husband, Joseph Wilson, wrote a piece in the New York Times after the invasion of Iraq that was critical of President Bush. Allegedly, the Vice President gave orders to disclose the Valerie Plame's identity. As this act would endanger both Plame and National Security, it was, and still is, a delicate issue. Other controversies stem from 9/11 such as where Cheney was on the fateful day and where was he hidden. Another one is the closed door meetings that Cheney has conducted with several powerful heads of energy firms in hashing out energy policies. Moreover, earlier this year, the VP was the butt of many jokes after mistakenly shooting an associate while hunting quail.

Cheney is married to his high school sweetheart Lynne. They have two daughters, Elizabeth and Mary. Mary gained some fame during the 2004 Presidential race due to her sexual orientation. Cheney, a conservative, does belief the decision to allow same sex marriage should be resolved in individual states and not at the federal level.