Bill Says Media Bias Has Forced Hill To Go Negative
By Justin Gardner | Related entries in 2008 Election, Hillary, New HampshireHmm, this seems particularly weak…
Bill Clinton voiced his abiding anger at the media’s coverage of him and his wife in Durham, N.H., today, and suggested that media bias will force Clinton to go negative on Barack Obama.He also expressed his frustration that his wife is perceived by voters as divisive through, he said, no fault of her own.
Also, I’m not buying this…
“And the fact of the matter is, independent voters think you’re polarizing if someone else attacks you, even if that someone is Rush Limbaugh, even if you’ve been totally exonerated of every single charge ever leveled against you, which Hillary was — and some people forgot to tell you about that,” he said, jabbing again at the press.
Sorry, Hillary is polarizing because a lot of people just don’t like her. You can’t blame all of that on partisan pundits. She decided to take a very active, public role in his presidency and it just didn’t get handled well by her or anybody else in his administration. And while I do understand what he’s saying, and I do think the Clintons suffered a lot of unfair attacks, she hasn’t been able to rise above people’s perceptions and lay claim to the mantle that Bill thinks she deserves.
So he can blame the media all he wants, but the media didn’t run her campaign in Iowa. She kept on attacking Barack through surrogates and it backfired on her. That’s why she has to go negative now…because she went negative in the first place. And Barack is now using her own ammo against her, especially the kindergarten attack.
Time to come up with some new material Bill. Bringing up the 90s won’t help your wife.
This entry was posted on Friday, January 4th, 2008 and is filed under 2008 Election, Hillary, New Hampshire. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
January 4th, 2008 at 11:38 pm
F ‘em. The Clintons had their chance, time to move on.
January 5th, 2008 at 12:23 am
[...] weigh in; courtesy of MemeOrandum: Donkelphant; Liberal Values; skippy the bush kangaroo; Democrat Taylor [...]
January 5th, 2008 at 12:37 am
Hillary EXONERATED? This guy’s used to lying his way through every single CRISIS that Clinton Inc runs into.
She’s never been exonerated about the cattle futures windfalls, since there was never full disclosure.
She’s never been exonerated about having her so-called health care task force operate in secret in direct violation of the laws. In fact, that was confirmed.
She’s never been exonerated about any of the Castle Grande lies and overbillings - or how the missing Rose Law billing records just happened to show up near her office, conveniently, right after the statute of limitations expired.
She’s never been exonerated for her role in the Whitewater development…but hey, that was only a simple resort scam designed to fleece seniors.
She’s never been exonerated about her role in the disgraceful Travel Office scandal, where nonpartisan career government employees all lost their jobs to make room for her friends, nor for trying to cover it up with a fraudulent IRS audit and criminal charges against Billy Dale - charges which took a jury only minutes to laugh out of court.
How about the FBI files on her political opponents, which were illegally obtained by her chosen aide, Craig Livingstone? How much of that information did she copy? How much does she still have and plan to use? Exonerated? I don’t think so.
As I recall, one of the deputy independent counsels during Whitewater even prepared a draft indictment of her for perjury, which Janet Reno quashed. That’s not exoneration either. Not in this universe.
January 5th, 2008 at 2:41 am
And while I do understand what he’s saying, and I do think the Clintons suffered a lot of unfair attacks, she hasn’t been able to rise above people’s perceptions and lay claim to the mantle that Bill thinks she deserves.
Isn’t this what the Clinton’s always do? Blame?
I happen to think that the left have taken the blame torch and leveled all myriad of conspiratorial preposterous BLAME at Bush, way more fervent than the wacko Clinton haters.
In retrospect of this campaign, wouldn’t Hill be doing a LOT better if her husband would have not chased skirt (duh) but NOT lied with his finger waging on national TV? “No Comment” would have down dreams for the future campaigns, but Bill never can keep his tongue or his pecker out of trouble.