• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Slick Willie "out of control"

Texan

Well-known member
Bill Clinton Fights Back Against Brutal Vanity Fair Article
by FOXNews.com
Sunday, June 1, 2008


The Office of President Bill Clinton responded with fury Sunday to a Vanity Fair article that attacks the former president and suggests he is out of control personally and consumed by “cavernous narcissism.”

The article, which hits newsstands next week, was distributed to the media and online in advance of its publication. The author, Todd Purdum, has covered Clinton for 16 years. He is married to former Clinton Press Secretary Dee Dee Myers.
“A tawdry, anonymous quote-filled attack piece, published in this month’s Vanity Fair magazine regarding former President Bill Clinton repeats many past attacks on him, ignores much prior positive coverage, includes numerous errors, and ultimately breaks no new ground. It is, in short, journalism of personal destruction at its worst,” reads a statement from the office of the president.

“Though (Purdum) researched the piece for several months, his first contact with President Clinton’s office was several weeks before he closed the story. Most revealing is one simple fact: President Clinton has helped save the lives of 1,300,000 people in his post-presidency, and Vanity Fair couldn’t find time to talk to even one of them for comment,” the statement continues, along with several pages of argument refuting the article’s main points.

Purdum suggests that in the years since Clinton left the White House $12 million in debt, he has been caught up in a world of rich friends, adoring fans and borrowed jets. The article quotes one former aide calling Clinton’s current associates like billionaire Ron Burkle and movie producer Stephen Bing “radioactive.”

The aide says Clinton’s associates are compounding worries that the 61-year-old former president is running with a fast crowd

One source close to Clinton even suggested he has never been the same since quadruple bypass surgery in 2004.

“There’s an anger in him that I find surprising. There seems to be an abiding anger in him, and not just the summer thunderstorms of old. He has been called into question repeatedly by top staff,” a former aide to both Bill and Hillary Clinton told Purdum.

More devastating is Purdum’s claim that about 18 months ago, a former Clinton aide tried an intervention with the former president because he was hearing so many complaints about inappropriate behavior. According to the article, the aide believed “Clinton was apparently seeing a lot of women on the road.”

Purdum wrote that the aide was rebuffed by advisers close to Clinton, never got to speak directly with him, and the attempted intervention was not well received by either Clinton.

The article also includes questions about the millions Bill Clinton has made since leaving office and notes the troubles for Hillary Clinton’s campaign attributed to him.



http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/06/01/bill-clinton-fights-back-against-brutal-vanity-fair-article/

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/07/clinton200807
 

Faster horses

Well-known member
She had a choice...distance herself from him, or keep him close--which she did. And it looks like it is coming back to bite her.

Since she showed no intelligence in that situation, why would anyone
think she could successfully run the country?
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Faster horses said:
She had a choice...distance herself from him, or keep him close--which she did. And it looks like it is coming back to bite her.

Since she showed no intelligence in that situation, why would anyone
think she could successfully run the country?

Couldn't control him in the past, how can anyone expect her to control him now?
If she cannot run a simple task like keeping him in line how the he!! does she expect to run the U.S.A.??
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
Faster horses said:
She had a choice...distance herself from him, or keep him close--which she did. And it looks like it is coming back to bite her.

Since she showed no intelligence in that situation, why would anyone
think she could successfully run the country?

She kept him because she thought he would be an asset in her quest for power. She'd throw him under the bus, or anybody else for that matter, if she thought it would get her anything. She's one of the most wretched, vile people I know of.
 

Mrs.Greg

Well-known member
hopalong said:
Faster horses said:
She had a choice...distance herself from him, or keep him close--which she did. And it looks like it is coming back to bite her.

Since she showed no intelligence in that situation, why would anyone
think she could successfully run the country?

Couldn't control him in the past, how can anyone expect her to control him now?
If she cannot run a simple task like keeping him in line how the he!! does she expect to run the U.S.A.??
Not directly picking on you hopalong,just felt addressing your post will make my point easier.I think when one enters marriage they enter it for better or worse,one works through the "worse" as well as they can. Hillarys admirable because,like ALL the rest of us,nobodys perfect and there are no perfect marriages. Nowhere in our vows is the word CONTROL.

You guys attack a woman because she fought hard for a marriage thats not always been perfect yet put a guy{McCain} on a pedistal that wouldn't honour his vows. Little bit hypocritical don't you all think.
:???:

BTW,its well know I'm NOT a fan of Hillary just thought theres way too much critism for a woman whos fought hard for her marriage
 

kolanuraven

Well-known member
Sandhusker said:
She's one of the most wretched, vile people I know of.


You know Hillary personally.....WOW....didn't know you ran with the ' tall dogs' there Husker!!!


Impressive!!!!


:roll: :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mrs.Greg said:
hopalong said:
Faster horses said:
She had a choice...distance herself from him, or keep him close--which she did. And it looks like it is coming back to bite her.

Since she showed no intelligence in that situation, why would anyone
think she could successfully run the country?

Couldn't control him in the past, how can anyone expect her to control him now?
If she cannot run a simple task like keeping him in line how the he!! does she expect to run the U.S.A.??
Not directly picking on you hopalong,just felt addressing your post will make my point easier.I think when one enters marriage they enter it for better or worse,one works through the "worse" as well as they can. Hillarys admirable because,like ALL the rest of us,nobodys perfect and there are no perfect marriages. Nowhere in our vows is the word CONTROL.

You guys attack a woman because she fought hard for a marriage thats not always been perfect yet put a guy{McCain} on a pedistal that wouldn't honour his vows. Little bit hypocritical don't you all think.
:???:

BTW,its well know I'm NOT a fan of Hillary just thought theres way too much critism for a woman whos fought hard for her marriage


My image is that both are still in the same place for one reason- political power and more bucks in their pockets....

Thats the reason I reject both McCain and Hitlery- tooooooooo many years of ties in D.C....... Obama - not bringing in as many lobbyist/corporate/D.C. ties-who has also received the majority of his contributions from individuals-would probably be better than both- but a third party candidate would be best......Someone like Ron Paul- who got the major amount of contributions from military people because he doesn't support nation building and colonization for the Corporate elites to profitteer....
 

Sandhusker

Well-known member
kolanuraven said:
Sandhusker said:
She's one of the most wretched, vile people I know of.


You know Hillary personally.....WOW....didn't know you ran with the ' tall dogs' there Husker!!!


Impressive!!!!


:roll: :roll:

Read what I wrote; I wrote "I know of" not "I know". And I certainly would not consider her a "tall dog". Dog, yes, but not a tall or a good one.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Mrs.Greg said:
hopalong said:
Faster horses said:
She had a choice...distance herself from him, or keep him close--which she did. And it looks like it is coming back to bite her.

Since she showed no intelligence in that situation, why would anyone
think she could successfully run the country?

Couldn't control him in the past, how can anyone expect her to control him now?
If she cannot run a simple task like keeping him in line how the he!! does she expect to run the U.S.A.??
Not directly picking on you hopalong,just felt addressing your post will make my point easier.I think when one enters marriage they enter it for better or worse,one works through the "worse" as well as they can. Hillarys admirable because,like ALL the rest of us,nobodys perfect and there are no perfect marriages. Nowhere in our vows is the word CONTROL.

You guys attack a woman because she fought hard for a marriage thats not always been perfect yet put a guy{McCain} on a pedistal that wouldn't honour his vows. Little bit hypocritical don't you all think.
:???:

BTW,its well know I'm NOT a fan of Hillary just thought theres way too much critism for a woman whos fought hard for her marriage


Guess it is hard for anyone to know what is in the woman's chest (not sure if she has a heart :lol: ) But she just does not come across as a woman that fought hard for her marriage. I may be wrong and she may be deeply in love with Bill, but that is not the impression I have gotten from their pretty transparent marriage.

The impression I get is it was not a hard fight, just a little pissed that he got caught and ruined his legacy and her future.

But like I said I do not know whats in her heart, but just do not see any evidence of her fighting for her marriage, just a fight for her political career. I think their marriage has been one of convenience for some time now.

As for McCain I have yet to see one person on this message board ever put him on a pedestal (accept maybe when talking about his military service). Not sure if I have even heard one person on here say they like him as a Presidential hopeful? I know OT use to like him but then flip flopped on that, but other than OT I have never heard anyone put him on a pedestal.
 

Mrs.Greg

Well-known member
aplusmnt said:
Mrs.Greg said:
hopalong said:
Couldn't control him in the past, how can anyone expect her to control him now?
If she cannot run a simple task like keeping him in line how the he!! does she expect to run the U.S.A.??
Not directly picking on you hopalong,just felt addressing your post will make my point easier.I think when one enters marriage they enter it for better or worse,one works through the "worse" as well as they can. Hillarys admirable because,like ALL the rest of us,nobodys perfect and there are no perfect marriages. Nowhere in our vows is the word CONTROL.

You guys attack a woman because she fought hard for a marriage thats not always been perfect yet put a guy{McCain} on a pedistal that wouldn't honour his vows. Little bit hypocritical don't you all think.
:???:

BTW,its well know I'm NOT a fan of Hillary just thought theres way too much critism for a woman whos fought hard for her marriage


Guess it is hard for anyone to know what is in the woman's chest (not sure if she has a heart :lol: ) But she just does not come across as a woman that fought hard for her marriage. I may be wrong and she may be deeply in love with Bill, but that is not the impression I have gotten from their pretty transparent marriage.

The impression I get is it was not a hard fight, just a little p****d that he got caught and ruined his legacy and her future.

But like I said I do not know whats in her heart, but just do not see any evidence of her fighting for her marriage, just a fight for her political career. I think their marriage has been one of convenience for some time now.
Like you I can't honestly say whats in her heart but I believe keeping Bill just for convenience and political reasons would be a wrong decision she probably could have got more the Sympathy vote had she got rid of the "cheating hubby" Personally,I think its hard enough to live with a person you love to death,let alone trying to keep up a front with a partner that you can't stand. She loves him and has fought hard for her marriage....IMHO.and I respect her for that{shudder}
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mrs.Greg said:
aplusmnt said:
Mrs.Greg said:
Not directly picking on you hopalong,just felt addressing your post will make my point easier.I think when one enters marriage they enter it for better or worse,one works through the "worse" as well as they can. Hillarys admirable because,like ALL the rest of us,nobodys perfect and there are no perfect marriages. Nowhere in our vows is the word CONTROL.

You guys attack a woman because she fought hard for a marriage thats not always been perfect yet put a guy{McCain} on a pedistal that wouldn't honour his vows. Little bit hypocritical don't you all think.
:???:

BTW,its well know I'm NOT a fan of Hillary just thought theres way too much critism for a woman whos fought hard for her marriage


Guess it is hard for anyone to know what is in the woman's chest (not sure if she has a heart :lol: ) But she just does not come across as a woman that fought hard for her marriage. I may be wrong and she may be deeply in love with Bill, but that is not the impression I have gotten from their pretty transparent marriage.

The impression I get is it was not a hard fight, just a little p****d that he got caught and ruined his legacy and her future.

But like I said I do not know whats in her heart, but just do not see any evidence of her fighting for her marriage, just a fight for her political career. I think their marriage has been one of convenience for some time now.
Like you I can't honestly say whats in her heart but I believe keeping Bill just for convenience and political reasons would be a wrong decision she probably could have got more the Sympathy vote had she got rid of the "cheating hubby" Personally,I think its hard enough to live with a person you love to death,let alone trying to keep up a front with a partner that you can't stand. She loves him and has fought hard for her marriage....IMHO.and I respect her for that{shudder}


ATT111.jpg


If she got rid of Bill- who else could she get :???:
Even ol jigs has a place where principle goes above price :wink: :lol: :lol: :p
 

jigs

Well-known member
thanks.......I think.


are there any marriages in politics that are not just "window dressing" ? I think every one of them are so worried about being re elected that they weigh every move and calculate the political ramifications before acting. I think the marriage is just another move up the political ladder for most of them.

take a good honest man and put him in DC. he will either become a crook or leave. (Sandhusker, insert your Tom Osborne comment here)
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
More devastating is Purdum’s claim that about 18 months ago, a former Clinton aide tried an intervention with the former president because he was hearing so many complaints about inappropriate behavior. According to the article, the aide believed “Clinton was apparently seeing a lot of women on the road.”


CNN is reporting this today- and interviewing Purdum- who says it came from very reliable sources in Clintons camp and that they were worried about all the stories of his womanizing and philandering while out campaigning for Hillary.....

You can't teach an old dog new tricks....Now I know why Old Bill doesn't want this campaign to end-- He's like a kid in a candy store- don't know what to grab next...... :wink: :lol:
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Mrs.Greg said:
Like you I can't honestly say whats in her heart but I believe keeping Bill just for convenience and political reasons would be a wrong decision she probably could have got more the Sympathy vote had she got rid of the "cheating hubby" Personally,I think its hard enough to live with a person you love to death,let alone trying to keep up a front with a partner that you can't stand. She loves him and has fought hard for her marriage....IMHO.and I respect her for that{shudder}

You got to realize up until now when everyone is turning on her and Bill for Obama, Bill was the poster child for the Democratic party. They all believe he could do no wrong, even lying and cheating did not change their opinions of him. So Hillary had to believe that Bill and the Clinton machine intact would increase her chances of being elected into congress and one day President than if she divorced him and cut her ties and divided their connections between the two.

Hillary had not choice politically but to stay with Bill, she would have been weaker politically and threw away all the chances she had for a political career.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
aplusmnt said:
Mrs.Greg said:
Like you I can't honestly say whats in her heart but I believe keeping Bill just for convenience and political reasons would be a wrong decision she probably could have got more the Sympathy vote had she got rid of the "cheating hubby" Personally,I think its hard enough to live with a person you love to death,let alone trying to keep up a front with a partner that you can't stand. She loves him and has fought hard for her marriage....IMHO.and I respect her for that{shudder}

You got to realize up until now when everyone is turning on her and Bill for Obama, Bill was the poster child for the Democratic party. They all believe he could do no wrong, even lying and cheating did not change their opinions of him. So Hillary had to believe that Bill and the Clinton machine intact would increase her chances of being elected into congress and one day President than if she divorced him and cut her ties and divided their connections between the two.

Hillary had not choice politically but to stay with Bill, she would have been weaker politically and threw away all the chances she had for a political career.

Daily it looks like the Clinton Machine is dying- and if Obama or a third party candidate win in November, we could end the rule of the Clinton Machine and the Bush Neocon Dynasty all in one year :D
 

hopalong

Well-known member
YEAAAAA!! Old whiner got to use his word of the year!!
Wonder when he will manage to come up with a new one because he sure over uses neocon!! :roll: :roll: :roll:
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
aplusmnt said:
Mrs.Greg said:
Like you I can't honestly say whats in her heart but I believe keeping Bill just for convenience and political reasons would be a wrong decision she probably could have got more the Sympathy vote had she got rid of the "cheating hubby" Personally,I think its hard enough to live with a person you love to death,let alone trying to keep up a front with a partner that you can't stand. She loves him and has fought hard for her marriage....IMHO.and I respect her for that{shudder}

You got to realize up until now when everyone is turning on her and Bill for Obama, Bill was the poster child for the Democratic party. They all believe he could do no wrong, even lying and cheating did not change their opinions of him. So Hillary had to believe that Bill and the Clinton machine intact would increase her chances of being elected into congress and one day President than if she divorced him and cut her ties and divided their connections between the two.

Hillary had not choice politically but to stay with Bill, she would have been weaker politically and threw away all the chances she had for a political career.

Daily it looks like the Clinton Machine is dying- and if Obama or a third party candidate win in November, we could end the rule of the Clinton Machine and the Bush Neocon Dynasty all in one year :D

None of it will die, Obama will loose in record margin, McCain will win and you will cry for at least 4 more years getting to use the Bush word a few thousand more times. And then Hillary will run in 2012 claiming Obama could not beat McCain and she is the only one that could and will.

So Bush, McCain and Hillary will be a big part of your future. :wink: :lol:

Ps. And surely you do not think a third party has any chance? :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
aplusmnt said:
Ps. And surely you do not think a third party has any chance? :roll:

Anymore anything can happen- I didn't think Bush and the big government, big spender Repubs could bankrupt the country in 6 years, either :roll: :wink: ...

What would we get if we get McCain? A Chameleon :???:

Former Democratic Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle said that several years ago John McCain came close to leaving the Republican Party and caucusing with Senate Democrats.
 

aplusmnt

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Anymore anything can happen- I didn't think Bush and the big government, big spender Repubs could bankrupt the country in 6 years, either :roll: :wink: ...

Do you know anything about finances? To say America is Bankrupt shows you truly do not. Having a large debt does not mean you are bankrupt, you become bankrupt when there is no way out of this debt. And as large as the deficit number may seem to you when you look at it in perspective to Americas resources and GNP we could handle this debt if need be.

In my life I have had times I had large debt, and I have had times I had no debt. But the key was always to keep debt under my assets. Say a Rancher owes $500,000 in debt but has a $1,000,0000 in assets he has the means to pay that debt if needed and most likely he will be just fine. America has the assets if needed to handle the debt that we have, sure I would like to see it paid down, but America is not going to be owned by China as you would have us all to believe.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
aplusmnt said:
Oldtimer said:
Anymore anything can happen- I didn't think Bush and the big government, big spender Repubs could bankrupt the country in 6 years, either :roll: :wink: ...

Do you know anything about finances? To say America is Bankrupt shows you truly do not. Having a large debt does not mean you are bankrupt, you become bankrupt when there is no way out of this debt. And as large as the deficit number may seem to you when you look at it in perspective to Americas resources and GNP we could handle this debt if need be.

In my life I have had times I had large debt, and I have had times I had no debt. But the key was always to keep debt under my assets. Say a Rancher owes $500,000 in debt but has a $1,000,0000 in assets he has the means to pay that debt if needed and most likely he will be just fine. America has the assets if needed to handle the debt that we have, sure I would like to see it paid down, but America is not going to be owned by China as you would have us all to believe.

Is that Big Spender Republican Econ 101- Borrow $ Zillions- spend it on foreign nation building- and let your kids and grandkids pay for it :???: :( :(
 
Top