Clinton to the Rescue!
John McCain’s attempt to postpone Friday’s debate has been met with near-universal derision as a cynical political ploy, but not from Bill Clinton who once again shows an admirable willingness to put partisanship aside:
I presume he did that in good faith since I know he wanted — I remember he asked for more debates to go all around the country and so I don’t think we ought to overly parse that.
Recall that John McCain has been pretty rude to George W. Bush throughout his campaign, busy angrily denying that there’s any similarity between the two GOP leaders and their policy agenda. Nevertheless, Bush is sufficiently committed to conservatism that as best I can tell he’s been unfailingly helpful to McCain’s efforts. Not sometimes helpful but always helpful.
51 Responses to “Clinton to the Rescue!”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
September 25th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
How do I say this politely?
Oh yes.
Bill Clinton can blow me.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:22 pm
Just like the media would interview any “PUMA” (no matter how lunatic) they could find in the whole country to try and promote the ridiculous idea that the majority of Hillary supporters would vote for McCain, Yglesias is selectively quoting Bill to try and tell us he secretely wants to see McBush get elected.
Matt, how many posts did you devote to the numerous occasions where Bill Clinton did express his full support for Obama, including his great speech at the DNC? Just curious.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:23 pm
“Recall that John McCain has been pretty rude to George W. Bush throughout his campaign”
Recall that McCain has been incredibly solicitous of ClintonWorld while Obama has been pretty rude. Stuff like that is obviously going to have impacts on tone.
But what can you do? Folks like Matthew and Andrew Sullivan and Marty Peretz are more interested in defeating the Clintons than in defeating McCain. Team Chicago is responsive to their base.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Why oh why: But why does Bill only sometimes act helpful to Obama? Whatever he “really” wants to see happen, anyone who gives a damn about progressive causes should be being helpful all the fucking time.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
I dunno Petey, Chris Rock sounds like the voice of reason (and funny) in this instance.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:32 pm
The extent of Obama’s “rudeness” was winning the primary, which seems to be unforgivable to some fanatics. Obama’s actions toward Hillary Clinton have been significantly more gracious than her actions toward him. While Obama supporters have often gone over the line, he has not.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
If Clinton really wanted Obama to win, he would be on the campaign trail bashing Bush and McCain as the architects of the policies that destroyed any progress we made in the 90’s. Instead, he takes opportunities to praise McCain, give him a forum to look and sound presidential and tells reporters that he will not tear down John McCain? Why the hell not? You won’t find George Bush saying anything nice about Barack Obama.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Myglesias, today is the Clinton Global Initiative, the main thing Bill has been doing since 2001. The last thing he wants to do is talk about political issues during this conference, after he did invite both McCain and Obama to speak on behalf of his cause. Yet that is all the media care about.
I don’t see Carter or Bush Sr screaming that the candidate of the other party is a traitor and completely unfit for office either.
If Clinton doesn’t actually campaign forcefully for Obama before Election Day then you will have a point; if not I hope you will apologize. Either way, today of all days is not the time for Clinton to engage in partisan attacks instead of talking about global poverty, diseases etc…
September 25th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
At this point, can’t someone muzzle Bill? Every time he says something about the election he goes out of his way to give an answer that only reinforces the idea that he’d rather see McCain win so Hillary can run again in 2012. I’d rather have him just be quiet than continue to voice his “support” for Obama in this fashion.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Matt Matt Matt, if you really cared about advancing progressive causes, you’d be more solicitous towards Team Chappaqua.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
To Matt Yglesias: I agree, Clinton should prioritize progressive causes. And I believe his foundation does support fairly progressive causes – HIV, malaria, climate change, etc Where I would disagree with you is your apparent strong opinion that these causes are best served only by an Obama administration, and not by playing both candidates so that whomever wins supports the foundation’s work. To me it’s not as clear what the better strategy is.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Clinton is hurt. I’m not a psychologist, but he expected and felt entitled to see Hillary in the White House, then he expected and felt entitled to an identity as a White man in the United States who had a uniquely positive relationship with the Black community. He’s from segregation-era Arkansas, he could have gone the other way and it is psychologically important to him that he’s been right and his identity reflects this.
Obama winning the primary took two big things from him and he’s hurt.
There is no comparison between Obama/Clinton and McCain/Bush. No comparison at all. Bush has gotten all he ever wanted from McCain and more.
I’m giving both Clintons passes for 2008. It is a very hard year for them and their behavior in the very difficult emotional landscape they find themselves in distorts who they really are.
But after Ohio, Team Obama put out a spreadsheet that showed the numbers that said Obama can run out the clock now. At that point, I stopped worrying that Obama wasn’t been aggressive enough or this enough or that enough.
I have a feeling, even though there is no spreadsheet, that Team Obama’s internal numbers are saying that barring a major blow, Obama can run out the clock now. So not only am I not upset that Team Obama isn’t hitting McCain harder on ducking the debate, but it is even harder for me to generate anger at the Clintons.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
I guess Hillary can kiss that Supreme Court appointment good-bye.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
I went and watched the video of Clinton. He didn’t seem to be saying much of anything, rather lackluster on the whole. Initially, it seemed he was take a pointed jab at McCain by reminding the audience that McCain was the one who wanted more debates. But then he seemed to vaguely suggest that postponing the debate would be OK, so I’m not sure quite what he was getting at. I don’t think he did much to help or hurt anybody, it was all too rambling and vague.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:48 pm
Bill Clinton is such a douche bag.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Why oh why: unfortunately this fits into a wider pattern.
Arnold Evans: I find your post a little absurd. So WJC has an ego the size of a planet; and we are supposed to accommodate and encourage it?
MY: on the mark as usual.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:53 pm
Fair point, DJ. But the Obama campaign needs not just unqualified endorsements of their message but unambiguous denunciations of McCain’s.
September 25th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
To be fair, I remember a lot of Hillary supporters wondering why the hell Bill wasn’t out on the campaign trail, and then when he got out there big time, they kind of change their mind.
Again, if his heart & soul isn’t in it, you’re better off not begging and pushing him into it, because, look, people like that end up revealing how they feel — and Bill can’t stand Obama.
September 25th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Bill Clinton is such a douche bag.
Yeah, but he got lots of tail, so he doesn’t care.
September 25th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
Chris:
It seems to me like Obama is winning anyway. If you feel more anxious about that than I do, you’re sure to feel differently about Clinton’s behaviour than I do.
But if it was important for Team Obama to be extracting maximum political gains from this situation, there are things it could be doing that it is not. There are very harsh things the surrogates could be saying, or even Obama could be saying, continously, that I’m not hearing. If Team Obama doesn’t feel the need to press Bill Clinton definitely does not have to press the issue.
September 25th, 2008 at 1:15 pm
It appears that Bill is at least as effective a surragate for Obama as he was for Hillary. We should encourage him to stump for McCain; he’d sink him in a day.
September 25th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
Bill Clinton has been the best president in my lifetime. He endorsed Obama, he has given speeches for Obama, He has raised money for Obama, even though he really doesn’t like Obama. WTF? Does party loyalty really mean always praising someone in your party and always villifying someone in another? I guess that’s why I’m an independent.
September 25th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
I disagree with this Clinton bashing. The guy became a partisan hack when his wife was running for president. Now he’s gone back somewhat to being a former president. It’s better the way he is now. I don’t think it’s reasonable that the former Democratic president should be expected to march in lockstep on every bit of spin that Obama supporters want to get rolling. The way Bill Clinton should support Obama is different than the way liberal bloggers feel they should support Obama.
McCain’s actions are at the very least strange. But since they’re not materially hurting anyone but McCain himself, Obama supporters are left to impugn his motives, which they really don’t know anything about. And we’re slamming Clinton for being a bit more charitable?
September 25th, 2008 at 1:22 pm
Bill Clinton should be hanged by the neck until dead as a war criminal. After a fair trial and conviction of course.
September 25th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
Grrr, I had composed a pithy and insightful comment, but omitted my name and mail, so I lost my entire comment. Thanks Wordpress! In the immortal words of Bill O’Reilly, fuckin’ thing SUCKS!
Anyways, Thomas, do you *really* think progressive causes are better served by advancing the CGI than by having control of the presidency? Why would there even be a trade-off? Why can’t Clinton support the CGI *and* the Obama candidacy?
I agree with Matt about the importance of supporting your candidate at every public appearance, or at least doing no harm. A wife beater doesn’t get points for the 99% of the time he doesn’t beat his wife.
September 25th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Jeez, doesn’t everyone here know the Clinton’s are eeevil and have not done as much for the Democratic Party as Matt Y? Or that Bill’s presidency made Demmocrats relevant on the presidential level again?
And god forbid Bill Clinton position himself in a manner in which undecided voters view him as s somewhat fair arbiter of things, in order to make his support appear more geniune and less partisan.
Oh, and he also had the best pro-Obama speech at the convention. What a jerk.
September 25th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
Bill Clinton is kind of a dick.
He allows himself the luxury of picking and choosing on any given day whether he is the statesman Bill Clinton, or just plain folks Bill Clinton, or greatest political fighter alive Bill Clinton and then when you call him on his other personas he gets all kinds of upset. If Obama ever agreed with a McCain criticism of Hillary Clinton during the primary Bill Clinton would have went off on an angry jag with his face red in anger. Now that the stakes are higher and the game not yet over, he’s the peacemaker. Each of the Bill Clinton personas are appealing but you never know which one you are going to get and if you guess wrong the guy turns a massive political machine against you for being disloyal. Like I said above, kind of a dick.
September 25th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
What is so sad for Hil and Bill is that regardless of who wins in 2008, there will be no 2012 for Hil. Obama came out of the blue and by 2012 another, as of now unknown, rising star of the D party will ascend. Schweitzer of Montana? Someone else? The days of the Clinton’s and the DLC’s third way hopefully will be over.
September 25th, 2008 at 1:53 pm
It’s no surprise that Clinton is a tool. We learned that many years ago. What is a bit surprising is that he would kick Obama in the shin so flagrantly at this point in the campaign. He must realize that he’s only generating hard feelings that will not be forgotten, and will not be helpful the next time his wife runs for president. Just can’t help himself it seems — a very angry guy….
September 25th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
I thought he was being sarcastic.
September 25th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Once again puts the theory that the Clintons stand for soemthing to rest.
AS someone said some people want power to do something and others want it to be someone. Clintons are clearly in the second camp and they couldn’t care less what principles thay trample on the way. I hope liberals( sorry progressives) realize this and do something about it if Hillary runs again.
September 25th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Then there’s this quote from Robert Draper’s McCain piece in the latest issue of GQ (Oct. 2008, p. 296):
“On June 22, 2004, Bush took McCain’s buddy Lindsey Graham aside during a White House function and, standing on the Truman Balcony, told Graham that, as the latter would remember it, “he saw John as the guy who would carry on his legacy in Iraq.”
This isn’t merely about Bush helping McCain as a fellow conservative; this is about Bush helping McCain because he thinks McCain is the best guy to “stay the course.” Remember, too, that this Graham-Bush conversation took place BEFORE the 2004 election, before Bush was even assured of a second term in which to cement his legacy.
September 25th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
I actually think it’s part of a clever strategy on the part of Bill to have the Democrats appear to be the voice of reason.
As much as the Republicans hated Clinton, it really sticks in their craw.
September 25th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
fuck Yglesias and all the other assorted Obama tbaggers
Your mancrush has been pushing his post partisan shtick
for 18 months. He is the coward who approached McCain about a joint statement and now is trotting out to the White House for the bipartisan photo op.
September 25th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Hillary is a traitor for staying in the primaries after she could not win, banking on a crippling gaff by Obama, providing a negative media narrative that continues to benefit McSame today. She and Bill care more for themselves then their country or even their political party, they, and the rest of the DLC, are nothing but Crypto-Republicans.
But then I think that Yglesias should be shunned for his support of the war, and yet I’m here.
September 25th, 2008 at 3:17 pm
I think that Yglesias should be shunned for his support of the war
Nobody is more open about his past record or more diligent in cataloging the revisionist accounts of his initial fellow Iraq War supporters than Mr. Yglesias. Having one more blogger against the war in ‘02 would have meant exactly zero but having one blogger keeping the record straight on who did and said what is worth quite a lot. I like Matt because he has a good, reliable memory.
September 25th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
Mr. Yglesias was a junior in college in 2002! Further, nobody really cared what he had to say back then. I think we should forgive his “support” of the war.
September 25th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Told you Clinton wasn’t going to do shit for Obama but undermine him.
Got cussed out repeatedly here for saying so.
Chickens come home to roost, morons.
I haven’t seen but maybe one or two mentions of Hillary Clinton campaigning for Obama on the Google News page since she folded. Which is exactly what I expected. She didn’t sue the DNC to force them to make her the VP candidate as I predicted, but she’s pretty well let Obama hang by himself.
And since Obama is going to lose in November, in 2012, you morons will select her as the candidate – and lose again.
Why don’t you Democrats just jump off a bridge? Or join the Libertarian Party if you like losing so much?
September 25th, 2008 at 6:36 pm
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz……………
September 25th, 2008 at 7:19 pm
HW: “Anyways, Thomas, do you *really* think progressive causes are better served by advancing the CGI than by having control of the presidency?”
If by progressive causes you mean cost of HIV drugs, malaria and climate change – yes. If by progressive causes you mean health care – no.
“Why can’t Clinton support the CGI *and* the Obama candidacy?”
It sounds like that’s what he’s doing. Supporting the CGI means bringing high profile people to the conference and maintaining a working relationship with the possible (40% chance) US president.
September 29th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
Obama’s actions toward Hillary Clinton have been significantly more gracious than her actions toward him.
Oh. My. God. She actually debased herself enough to be his frigging majordomo at the convention, INTRODUCED HIM to his own nomination… what the hell ELSE is she supposed to do? Replace his toilet paper when he takes a dump?
I bet you love that visual, don’t you?
Ever since abolition, women have had to put up with this garbage from the so-called “progressives.” Don’t get me wrong, I WILL NOT VOTE FOR MCCAIN. But we have put up with so much. We’ve been putting up with this crap for over a hundred years. First it was, Your cause is not important enough, who gives a shit if you get the vote? Help free the slaves. Mmkay, we wanted to do that anyhow. Next it was, The only position you’ll have in this revolution is prone. Um… what? Time to start our own revolution. Then it was, Fucking feminazi. We can actually lose liberal friends by suggesting we still live in a rape culture, for example. Flynt is in, Dworkin never was. Oh… now it’s, If you don’t vote for the black guy you are a racist. Hello? We didn’t run the black man against the white woman. The, might I add, upper-class educated lawyer black man against the upper-class educated lawyer white woman. Who’da thunk it? Ceiling Cat Bless America. Who ran them against one another? Y’all did. The machinery of the Party. Not us. We were handed a ballot and told, Here. Vote. Vote for the right one or you’re out.
How about this, here’s a crazy idea. Maybe you shouldn’t have run Cynthia McKinney out of the party. HEY! Both black AND a woman! Then you could have stepped away from the Clintons entirely AND everybody could have gotten their candidate at once! No party division possible!
Well, except maybe between the progressives and the fauxgressives, but given that the real progressives left for the Green Party long ago, I guess there wouldn’t have been much division there either.
Bill Clinton doesn’t owe you anything. You didn’t stand up in defense of his wife when they were making nutcrackers out of her and calling her nasty names. It’s not like the entire progressive community liked him to begin with; even feminists condemned his behavior with Monica Lewinsky, and those condemnations sometimes wound up in print, no less. And let me not EVEN get started about how he’s the best Republican President we’ve seen in a VERY long time. But he doesn’t owe you anything. Just like I don’t owe Obama my vote, just like women don’t owe the Democratic Party our continued allegiance. The Green Party, at least, has feminism in its Ten Key Values. It actually SAYS the F-word right in there. I’ve read the Democratic platform for this year, the part about women’s rights, and they just couldn’t… manage… to choke that word out. Y’all don’t want us, period. Odd to think that puts someone like me on the same side as Bill Clinton when I never voted for him and I think he’s a sleazeball. Very odd.
March 2nd, 2009 at 6:42 am
levitraVery interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 17th, 2009 at 2:48 am
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
tramadol
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:48 am
tramadol
Very interesting site. Hope it will always be alive!
March 22nd, 2009 at 10:54 am
buy viagra online
Great site. Good info
April 3rd, 2009 at 4:45 am
Incredible site!
cheap brand pfizer viagra
April 9th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
Thanks for the review! viagra
April 14th, 2009 at 10:14 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
viagra