Patterico's Pontifications

8/26/2008

Off-the-Cuff Clinton

Filed under: 2008 Election — DRJ @ 2:28 pm



[Guest post by DRJ]

It can get worse than this for the Obama campaign but not by much:

“The former president, speaking in Denver, posed a hypothetical question in which he seemed to suggest that that the Democratic Party was making a mistake in choosing Obama as its presidential nominee.

He said: “Suppose you’re a voter, and you’ve got candidate X and candidate Y. Candidate X agrees with you on everything, but you don’t think that candidate can deliver on anything at all. Candidate Y you agree with on about half the issues, but he can deliver. Which candidate are you going to vote for?”

Then, perhaps mindful of how his off-the-cuff remarks might be taken, Clinton added after a pause: “This has nothing to do with what’s going on now.”

More (much more) from former President Clinton at the link.

— DRJ

21 Responses to “Off-the-Cuff Clinton”

  1. Who would have thunk it, but I’m starting to like ol’ Billy C.

    JVW (d54fc4)

  2. Looks like our 42nd President is trying to throw his own party’s nominee under the proverbial bus! Mr Obama might find it crowded under there. :)

    Not Dana the Photographer (556f76)

  3. That was not a mistake. Why bring up such a hypothethical, in an election year, at the time of your own party’s convention, unless you’re talking about the current election? It’s literally what’s on every high placed Democrat’s mind.

    The Mr. and Mrs. want so bad for him to lose. Oh, this gets bettah every day. *rubs hands, reaches for Cheez-Its*

    no one you know (1f5ddb)

  4. Then, perhaps mindful of how his off-the-cuff remarks might be taken, Clinton added after a pause: “This has nothing to do with what’s going on now.”

    Just too funny.

    Cicero (8db983)

  5. “This has nothing to do with what’s going on now.”

    Has the same ring as: I did not have sex with that woman…

    Perfect Sense (9d1b08)

  6. True confession: I really wanted Hillary to win because Bill Clinton is the most entertaining character in politics these days. Let him get his gusto on, you know the one where he wears victimhood and entitlement like smooth silk (i.e. Hillary deserves the White House!)and let the good times roll. No one comes close to his famous wag-his-finger-in-your-face scold. Cheap entertainment, that’s what this convention is all about.

    p.s. a news commentator just proclaimed the Hillary camp is like an ‘ongoing psychodrama‘ at the convention. Betrayal and estrogen – a nasty combination. Heh.

    Dana, Who Isn't Really a Photographer, just really loves her camera (084de8)

  7. Bill is just pissed at the reality that he didn’t beat the twenty second amendment. And it is likely he never will.

    vnjagvet (d3d48a)

  8. I only wish Bill was saying this stuff in March, because they might have turned the tide if he had been so clever. It was a HUGE hit from a lot of friends that so many turned to Obama.

    cynthia barnes (c81a00)

  9. Has the same ring as: I did not have sex with that woman…

    or “but I did not inhale…”

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  10. “I really wanted Hillary to win because Bill Clinton is the most entertaining character in politics these days.”

    Dana – As long as Obama’s handlers remain successful at keeping him away from the white wimmyn, they should be able to avoid the types of bimbo eruptions Clinton kept producing.

    I preemptively denounce myself before JD has a chance to comment.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  11. Comment by Dana, Who Isn’t Really a Photographer, just really loves her camera — 8/26/2008 @ 5:05 pm

    :)

    Not Dana the Photographer (556f76)

  12. Who is “X” and who is “Y”? Is he talking about sex again?

    love2008 (1b037c)

  13. Bypass surgery often causes micro-stroke brain damage. Looks like that’s the case here. The old Bill Clinton didn’t breathe without calculation.

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  14. Hey, love2008.

    DRJ (7568a2)

  15. As long as Obama’s handlers remain successful at keeping him away from the white wimmyn, they should be able to avoid the types of bimbo eruptions Clinton kept producing.

    daleyrocks, its not the bimbo eruptions per se – its that self-righteous, full blown pout-and-scold he wears when he perceives a a personal attack or injustice. Nobody does indignation better than the Big Dog. Its almost like a gift. Heh.

    Dana (084de8)

  16. #15
    Hi DRJ. Yes, I missed you too.

    love2008 (1b037c)

  17. Dana – He IS a victim, but he can heal this country so it can be great again and people no longer have to victims like he was and have to settle for marrying wives who give up big jobs at law firms to work at jobs in giving professions that only pay $317,000 per year, hardly enough to keep fresh fruit on the table or pay for dance lessons for the kids, or settle for buying only a $1.6 house aided and abetted by a convicted felon buddy who was not really the person he thought he knew, and be lucky enough to earn $4.2 million last year, but needs to work on his bowling game, but really truly Barack and Michelle are just regular hard working Americans like you and me.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  18. I may be way off the wall here, but who do you actually want to see in the White House? Or is this just a game? From the other side of the Atlantic, we begin to see why he might really lose……………..It’s him or John McCain, aka, “no the US military really DID want the push in January, even if Oliver North was there and heard them say the opposite” – which seems to have escaped some people’s attention. But maybe you don’t really care either way – I suppose like in France, in the end, we usually get the President we deserve – God help us all. So much for the Audacity of Hope.

    Candida (2e3a82)

  19. but really truly Barack and Michelle are just regular hard working Americans like you and me.

    And they vacay in an $8 million dollar beach house. Just like the rest of us.

    Vermont Neighbor (a066ed)

  20. #19 9:01 AM Candida

    . . . who do you actually want to see in the White House?

    John McCain. There is much that I do not like about McCain, but he is superior in every important way to the inexperienced Obama. The Illinois Senator’s administration would be a combination of the corrupt politics of the Chicago machine and the failed policies of Jimmy Carter.

    It’s him or John McCain, aka, “no the US military really DID want the push in January, even if Oliver North was there and heard them say the opposite” – which seems to have escaped some people’s attention.

    Do you have a link or cite for Oliver North’s commentary that the US military opposed the surge? The architect of the surge was Gen. David Petraeus.

    Stu707 (6e4ad5)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2780 secs.