USA Today Publishes Innuendo About Bill Clinton’s Sex Life On A1
USA Today Publishes Innuendo About Bill Clinton’s Sex Life On A1
The Washington press corps is obsessed with speculation and innuendo about Bill Clinton’s sex life. The vexing question is how do “reporters” figure out how to publish this gossip on the front page of the paper. Today, USA Today’s Jill Lawrence comes up with a solution — take a poll:
In the new poll, taken last weekend, 42% said Bill Clinton has “learned his lessons” from past scandals. But 51% said he is “the same person he always was.”…Three-quarters said the state of the Clintons’ marriage shouldn’t matter to voters — but six in 10 predicted it will.
Now, Lawrence has an excuse to print quotes from random people musing about Clinton and sex. After all, they took the poll:
Democrat John Imsland, 56, a construction worker who lives near Lake Superior in Minnesota and participated in the USA TODAY/Gallup Poll, says Bill Clinton has “grown up and matured some” since his White House days. Imsland says the past won’t affect his vote but “another skeleton wouldn’t help” Hillary.
Independent voter John Montgomery, 74, a retired printer in Jeffersonville, Ind., says he doesn’t think Bill Clinton has changed. “It matters to me. I wouldn’t vote for his wife,” says Montgomery, another poll participant.
Last May, the New York Times’ Pat Healy printed a front page story about the state of the Clinton’s marriage, noting that “tabloid gossip sticks to him like iron filings to a magnet.” Months later, talking heads like Chris Matthews continue to obsesses about the article. MSNBC has already started reporting on the USA Today poll:
Who will be next?
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
So, if it were proven that Laura Bush was a working prostitute prior to the November 2000 election, none of you would have thought that relevant?
March 29th, 2007 at 11:42 amY – after all – who cares how many people they’d get killed or how many billions/trillions they’d piss down a hole or pass out to their corporate cohorts – what really matters is some tabloid jibber-jabber
what a bunch of sick monkeys americans have become – all you’ve got to do is listen to the trolls’ blather to know we’re at the end of our days of dominance in the world.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:43 amWhat’s the fastest way to a man’s heart?
Through his chest with a sharp knife.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:43 amWHO’S WORKING AS A PROSTITUTE AGAIN?
March 29th, 2007 at 11:43 amWhat do you see when the Pillsbury Dough Boy bends over?
Doughnuts
March 29th, 2007 at 11:44 amRooody Gee makes Bill Clinton look like a lightweight.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:45 amWhen is the “Librul media” going to character assasinate Rooody Gee?
You’d think a man who has sex with his cousin and brought his hoe into his home for sex when his entire family was present (wife had to get a restraining order to keep the hoe out), would be low hanging fruit.
Jake…always off topic, always with the insane questions, always “It’s all about me and what I think!”
March 29th, 2007 at 11:46 amWhat is a Republican to do except for attack the Clintons? They sure can’t run on their record, and they sure can’t run on their true agenda. Grass roots for the party, which was never strong, has faded to where it’s mostly astroturf (think Jake, Patrick, Michael and their ilk).
March 29th, 2007 at 11:46 amCrump’s Brother:
In my hypothetical, you found out before the 2000 election that Laura Bush was a prostitute still turning tricks (instead of her driving accident, for instance). That would not have been relevant to (then) Governor Bush, or more importantly, Al Gore’s campaign?
March 29th, 2007 at 11:47 amIf anyone (NOT on the “Ignore List”) wants to discuss the topic, let me know.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:48 ambunch of hens these sex obsessed weirdos
March 29th, 2007 at 11:48 amWhat is this Republican fascination with Clinton’s dick?
March 29th, 2007 at 11:49 amIn the grand scheme of things, what the conservative-biased media should be addressing is this: ‘what is more immoral, who Bill Clinton is bonking under his desk, or how many American kids come home in a box each month, having died for a lie in Iraqnam?”
Of course the media will swarm on Bill getting a knob job, but it would still be interesting to see the reaction of we the people if that story ever surfaced.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:50 am#12. They all wish it was theirs
March 29th, 2007 at 11:51 amUh oh. A Bill Clinton thread. Forecast for a strong troll front with lots of BS.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:51 amRepublicans are so sexually repressed. They are taught that sex for any reason other than procreation is wrong and should have consequences. They don’t like ‘libruls’ because ‘libruls’ tend to support policies that make sex safer and less damaging, which pisses off the Republicans who believe that sexual activity should be punished and ‘libruls’ are removing those punishments.
Of course, it all comes down to fear. They fear everything they don’t understand, which is most everything.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:52 amNeedless to say, I would agree with the Independent voter quoted in the story — John Montgomery, 74, a retired printer in Jeffersonville, Ind., says he doesn’t think Bill Clinton has changed. “It matters to me. I wouldn’t vote for his wife.†Last thing we need in the White House is the First Gigolo.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:52 amDoes the monkey on George’s back explain his leadership or the lack there-of? Is Bush’s drug addiction the reason for his incompetence?
These are relevent questions (admittedly for seven and three years ago); The candidates’ sex life (no matter what party) or their spouses is not.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:54 amDang, these folks just can’t get enough of ole Bill’s schlong.
I say he plaster casts that thing and has some coffee mugs made
with the mold. He could then send them out as little “get well soon” gifts
to all those who seem to entertain this peculiar obsession.
That way the could suck on his d*ck all day long, instead of just
fantasizing about it.
gad!
March 29th, 2007 at 11:55 amSorry, Bill Clinton hasn’t changed. I don’t trust him even though I like him as a person. We don’t need another disgraceful incident in the Whitehouse.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:57 amCool, so when will we see the one asking if Newt Gingrich learned his lesson? What about Giuliani?
March 29th, 2007 at 11:57 amSince Bill is going to be ‘The First Gentleman’….USA today thinks it is a fair game.
It is now became obvious to USA that the story of Nicole Smith and ‘who is the daddy’ is running out of steam….USA found more sizzling story about Bill Clinton history.
While our soldiers are killed and so are the Iraqis daily…USA wants us to believe that this is a big issue for now worthy the first page…while war is hidden somewhere in the paper…!!
March 29th, 2007 at 11:59 amBob:
You think if Saddam Hussain had learning about Monica rather than Matt Drudge, that would have been fine from a national security / blackmail perspective? I also asked you a question over on the Iraq Senate vote thread FYI.
March 29th, 2007 at 11:59 amit is our god damn given right to know what the hello the clenis is doing at all times. it is more important than 600 thousand dead in a the gopwar
america is a retarded third world country that has no visible priorities at all
March 29th, 2007 at 11:59 amWell said, Maryanne.
P.S. to Jeremyderifield — perhaps you missed Speaker Gingrich on Dobson’s show recently? As for Giuliani, I think that’s a very good question ; )
March 29th, 2007 at 12:00 pmJake…please let me know if I’m on your “IGNORE” list. If not, could you please add me? Thanks!
March 29th, 2007 at 12:01 pmSorry, Bill Clinton hasn’t changed. I don’t trust him even though I like him as a person. We don’t need another disgraceful incident in the Whitehouse.
Comment by Maryanne — March 29, 2007 @ 11:57 am
Maryanne, are you under the impression that Bill Clinton is running for president?
Sheesh, bring up the Clintons and the idiots come out of the woodwork.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:02 pm#1 Did Jake just push-poll us?
March 29th, 2007 at 12:04 pmMaryanne, Jake just paid you a compliment, prima facie evidence that what you wrote is ridiculous.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:04 pmthe obsession with bill clinton’s dick, i am convinced, is the only time these reporters get even close to sexual satisfaction. oh, to relive those glory days of sniffing out a cum-stained gap dress.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:04 pmAs usual, TP puts on the “victims’ hairshirt” (yuck – itchhhh!). I guess if Bill had been a bit more discreet, NOBODY would be talking about “the state of their marriage“.
(Hhhmmm – I do seem to recall Al Gore NOT wanting Bill on the campaign trail. Do you think Al didn’t want the association? Maybe he was protecting Tippers’ virtue.
Most people I know could care less who Bill’s “spending time with”. Remember, this was the couple who sold the American people the concept of “two for the price of one” in the Oval Office. Enough of the whining….
March 29th, 2007 at 12:04 pmAnother question. If it was alleged that George W. Bush and Laura Bush were sleeping in separate bedrooms, and that George was spending lots of time with Condi, you liberals don’t think we should spend $100 million investigating that?
And a followup: If the Bush twins were sleeping around with every rich fratboy in the multiple towns they frequent, you liberals don’t think that should be the subject of massive investigative reporting and frontpage treatment and leading questions posed to “men on the street”?
That’s what I thought. Hypocrites.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:04 pmFrankly, Maryanne, I find it a whole hell of a lot MORE embarrassing when our president starts an ILLEGAL war and engenders worldwide hatred doing it.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:05 pmJake: “So, if it were proven that Laura Bush was a working prostitute prior to the November 2000 election, none of you would have thought that relevant?”
Well, it HAS been proven that a gay male whore under an assumed name visited the Bush Whitehouse at least 15 times at night when there were no press activities and with no record of checking out and got to sit in the press breifing over 200 times with no credentials as a journalist. Did any Bush cultists think that was relevant?
March 29th, 2007 at 12:07 pmJake…always off topic, always with the insane questions, always “It’s all about me and what I think!!”
March 29th, 2007 at 12:07 pmtarazan:
Did you think Laura Bush’s vehicular manslaughter when she was a teen “relevant”?
oldtree:
Except for your curse word, I agree with your entire post.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:07 pmAs always, I think the significance of this thread will be missed in Jake this, Jake that or another kind of troll bashing.
The core of this issue, I think, is that campaigns have become a circus, a cheap gossip with sexual details so we can all judge and fest on the private lives of candidates or any politicians or in who is the best dressed. In that sense, if Stalin would have had a perfect decent marriage, the greatest IQ in Russia and a great tailor, it wouldnt matter if he kills millions of russians. And this is in part our fault.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:09 pmAnyone want to speculate on what the press reaction would have been if it were found that a gay male whore under an assumed name was visiting the Clinton whitehouse? Why isn’t USA Today interested. The data is right there in Secret Service and FBI records as reported by the Washington Post. What exactly was gay male whore Jeff Guckert doing there? Who was he visiting? Inquiring minds want to know and I think that the more conservatives want to speculate on Clinton’s private life, the more we should demand an investigation into unauthorized access to the Whitehouse for a gay male whore.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:10 pm#20 We already HAVE a disgraceful incident in the White House. Have you ever heard of a former Andover cheerleader currently living there? A lying bastard who illegally invaded a sovereign nation (after blowing off a National Intelligence Estimate that a Saudi Arabian guy wanted to attack the nation – and did)? That disgraceful incident in the White House has cost us more than 3200 American kids lives, more than 600,000 Iraqi’s lives, and all for the bargain basement price of a little more than 2 Billion dollars a week.
Thank you but I’ll take Bill Clinton getting a blowjob under the oval office desk instead of the current disgraceful incident in the White House any time.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:10 pm#32 Bringing up Condi is a good point. Imagine if a female Cabinet officer had spent many weekends with the Clintons at Camp David and elsewhere, and had slipped up and referred to Clinton as “my husband” in a press conference, would the media have run with that? You bet they would. Rumors of separate bedrooms and three-ways would have spawned a media frenzy. But they almost nothing about it when it is Condi and the Bushes.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:10 pmPower attracts and a lot of that attraction plays out in sexual dynamics. This is a fact of human nature and a fact of Western culture. In some eras, this is accepted as a given, and no one makes much of it. In a fairly Puritanical America, we try to hide this and Republicans in particular are freaked out by it. It’s not that Republicans don’t cheat on their wives, hell they do it with great glee, it’s just that they think it should be done sub rosa.
Because Clinton got caught doing what DC politicians do, the Republicans (and “Independent Republicans”) get the vapors and obsess about Clinton’s Dick. They don’t obsess about Newt’s dick, because, well, ick.
And the trolls raise strawmen about the Bushes, as though anyone gave a rip about their love life, and assume that everyone else shares their weird obsession with politicians’ sex lives.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:14 pm(what i’d really like to do is invite v.v. to roll up a copy of USA today and ram the entire thing into her anus)
March 29th, 2007 at 12:14 pm32 – those Bush girls have sucked every frat-house d*ck on the eastern seaboard, high on alcohol and pills the whole time.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:16 pmDear Ben Dover :
The reason why our U.S. soldiers are dying for the cause of democratic freedoms is principally because Clinton was more worried about “bonking” under his desk than defending our country against numerous deadly attacks, here and abroad.
Perhaps if Bill did his job rather than worry abut getting blowjobs, we wouldn’t be in this mess in the first place.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:16 pmUSA Today and National Enquirer are one and the same.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:16 pmThe Repubs are just jealous. Our guy likes….women. Their guys like boys.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:18 pmI would rather see Clinton in the White House than another completely incompetent and immoral president like we’ve got in Bush.
Of course, the Republicans candidates don’t hold any sort of “moral high ground,” with multiple divorces and serving divorce papers on your wife while she’s in the hospital with cancer. Looks like the Republicans will have no one to vote for.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:21 pmGood point, JT.
P.S. to ken — for the record, USA Today is published by Gannett and National Enquirer by AMI — are you saying the NY Times would NOT break the story if Laura Bush CURRENTLY was a high-priced hooker?
March 29th, 2007 at 12:22 pmBut…but…I’m a registered Indepedent. And I’m 75. And I’m not a piad troll.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:22 pmPerhaps if Bill did his job rather than worry abut getting blowjobs, we wouldn’t be in this mess in the first place.
Comment by JT — March 29, 2007 @ 12:16 pm
Troll? COD sufferer? What’s the difference, anyway.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:22 pmLaura Bush was a prostitute? Wow, I know she killed her boyfriend in high school, but this is news to me.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:22 pmDoktor Texas:
Same question I just asked ken please.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:22 pmFunny, I thought newspapers reported facts. What about Clinton’s work for charity — does USA Today bother to report on that?
March 29th, 2007 at 12:22 pm#23 WHAT?
…Hussain had learning about Monica rather than Matt Drudge, that would have been fine from a national security / blackmail perspective?
Can you restate that at least using the same verb tense?
Also, didn’t see other, I’ll look
March 29th, 2007 at 12:23 pmIs this news worthy first page by a major newspaper?!! WHILE WE ARE AT WAR…
March 29th, 2007 at 12:24 pmAfter years of obsession by ‘Right Wing’ media with this story…still a paper like USA today didn’t get a reasonable satisfation out of Lewinski’s dress and Bill’s sexual tool story that they have to bring it back big time after almost 10 years.
The reason why our U.S. soldiers are dying for the cause of democratic freedoms is principally because Clinton was more worried about “bonking†under his desk than defending our country against numerous deadly attacks, here and abroad.
Comment by JT
Im confused. Wasnt 9/11/2001 during GWBush admin?
March 29th, 2007 at 12:24 pmAmazing amount of attention that ReichWingNuts and ChristoFascists have given to one man’s p*nis.
Are they jealous or something? Maybe they don’t like Bill’s example? Afterall, the major GOP sex scandals have involved supposedly “christian” men spending time with other men or underage boys. So perhaps the better front page head line should read “When will the GOP come out of the closet?”
March 29th, 2007 at 12:25 pmUSA Today has a man-love for Bubba. Rehashing the same nauseatiing story of Clinton’s sex life. Either USA Today is competing against National Enquirer and the Globe or USA Today is simply want Clinton other than the cigar. We have more important issues in this country than trying to probe Clinton’s sex life.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:25 pmLet’s see. The president WAS a cheerleader at Yale. He was mentioned more than once by students in Yale’s gay rights organization. He was sent by his parents to a “gay curing” christian camp. He didn’t get married until just before he had to to run for office. He does seem to pat his wife on the back in a very “platonic” manner. There’s a former campaign worker in Nevada who claims she saw Bush performing a homosexual act on a friend in the early 80’s….
And, a gay male whore under an assumed name visited the Bush Whitehouse over 200 times. Hey, I’m just sayin…..
You want to speculate about the Clintons’ sex life? OK, let’s rock! But be ready for some speculation about Jeff Guckert and his strange relationship with the Bush whitehouse.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:26 pm#44 Very good point. If Clinton hadn’t been spending his whole presidency getting blowjobs, there might have been the intelligence apparatus in place to warn the next President, who happened to be Bush, that a terrorist attack targeting the US might be imminent (ideally giving him something like a month to respond, raise alert levels, etc.). And if Clinton hadn’t spent his whole presidency not sleeping with Hillary, he would have prevented Saddam Hussein and his country Iraq from developing invisible weapons of mass destruction and training invisible Al Qaeda agents, which would then be used to not attack the US but trick us into invading Iraq, hence getting bogged down there in an interminable quagmire at huge cost to our nation.
It’s clearly all Clinton’s fault.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:26 pm44. Was Clinton getting bonked by Monica on August 6, 2001, when Bush blew off the NIE titled “Bin Laden Determined to Attack inside the United States” and then told his CIA briefer “there, you’ve covered your ass”??
I seem to remember George Bush reading a book titled “My Pet Goat” on September 11 rather than responding to an attack on the nation he was supposed to protect. In fact, his answer to protecting the nation that day was to fly to Nebraska and hide in a cornfield until Dick Cheney said it was ok to come back to DC.
Bill Clinton was not in office in February 2003 when Colin Powell lied in front of the United Nations General Assembly about non-existent weapons of mass destruction. And, Bill Clinton was not in office in May 2003 when a former National Guard pilot who went AWOL from his guard unit in Texas, landed on the deck of a ship in San Diego harbor and declared that the “mission” in Iraqnam had been “accomplished.”
Think back to when Bill Clinton was in office and how he was received as a king by people no matter where in the world he went. Contrast that with how riots broke out in every country the Chimp visited last month in Latin America.
Who’s daughter was a Rhodes Scholar and who’s daughter was blowing a 25 year old unemployed Argentine kid after the United States Embassy in Buenos Aires asked her to leave the country because of her behavior?
Who has brought more dishonor to the United States? Bill Clinton’s blow job or George Bush’s beligerent bullying of the world community.
Given these facts, I vote for Bill Clinton getting all the blowjobs his little heart desires.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:29 pmThe focus is on Clinton again because Bush has been a national embarassment and an abysmal failure.
Re: Clinton’s Sex Life: WHO CARES!!!
March 29th, 2007 at 12:29 pmThis reference is a “hillary smear” by the Reichwingnuts – plain & simple and not very innovative, to say the least.
I suspect that they’re keeping Hillary’s real skeletons in the closet to save for when or if she becomes Hillary, The Candidate.
One thing the Rethugs are accurate about is that they’re totally transparent….yep…transparently moronic!
March 29th, 2007 at 12:31 pmJT: “Perhaps if Bill did his job rather than worry abut getting blowjobs, we wouldn’t be in this mess in the first place.”
Hmmm. Perhaps if repubs in congress had been more interested in helping Clinton fight terrorism than busting him for sexual affairs, the attack on 9-11 might not have happened.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:31 pmPerhaps if Bill did his job rather than worry abut getting blowjobs, we wouldn’t be in this mess in the first place. Comment by JT
What a ridiculous statement!! Bush ignores pre-9/11 warnings about an imminent attack, then sends us to war against a country that posed no threat to the United States and you blame Clinton? What color is the sky in your world?
March 29th, 2007 at 12:34 pm#62 Bush blew off the NIE to enable 911 to occur – that’s becoming clear from the mounting testimony and conflicting accounts of the “official story”. Good thing it hasn’t slipped past Dennis Kucinich! That investigation will be one for the “record” with all of the individuals who are singing on The New Pearl Harbor!
Also Bush ignored the NIE for the same reason Gonzo deflected the conversation when he was running for Governor and away from his DUI – If this became known at that time, Bush’s ties to AQ and Osama’s brother would have become known to the populace – and this is something he wanted to remain hidden from view. Osama’s brother was Bush’s partner in Arbusto Energy – his first failure. And then he was involved with Bush in dumping Bush’s Harken Energy Stock….of course, this is the same guy who is the #5 “money guy” for AQ….another embarassing Bush connection.
Bush’s House of Lies and Misdemeanors will reflect the truth about how his fingerprints are on every wrongdoing, every misstep, every mis-judgment, and every bit of chicanery.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:35 pmAbsolutely not
Absolutely not
Look in the mirror before you call someone a hypocrit.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:36 pmThey should dig into more up-to-date material–like George W. Bush’s escapades as a gay cheerleader.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:36 pmIn case the Troll would rather have another president: Clinton’s presidency is “past history” so get your collective heads out of your slimey derriers and get with the program.
EVERYTHING THAT’S GONE WRONG IN THE PAST 6 YEARS HAPPENED ON DUMBYA’S WATCH!
March 29th, 2007 at 12:36 pmSorry, Bob — I didn’t mean “learning” — if Saddam had found out about Monica and used that to blackmail him, can you at least see the potential for a problem there?
March 29th, 2007 at 12:36 pmRepublican Warren Harding’s wife had to be physically restrained by his Secret Service detail from flinging open a Whitehouse closet door to show Harding getting it on with his Secretary. Democrats in the 50’s were well aware that Ike had carried on a decades-long affair with his personal secretary. FDR died in the company of his mistress. We all know about JFK. George HW Bush carried on an affair with his personal aide, Jennifer Connoly for many years. I could go on and on, but somehow, today’s conservatives are just proud as punch that they were able to impeach Clinton for lying about sexual affairs. It’s just sick and whenever they push the subject, I bring up Jeff Gannon, the gay male whore with a phony name who visited Bush’s whitehouse over 200 times.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:38 pmInstead of discussing ancient history which has absolutely no relevance to the high crimes & misdemeanors of THIS administration, why not begin with talking about all of the crooked, lying, pedophilia-enabling Republicans who were the “do nothing congress”….I say we take names and bring investigations forward for each one of them who “aided and abetted” the crimes against this country by this administration by their congressional abdication of responsibilities.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:38 pmLaura Bush was a prostitute?
March 29th, 2007 at 12:39 pmWas this before or after she killed her boyfriend?
A gay male whore has visited the Bush whitehouse over 200 times, but the Bush cultist was deeply troubled that Monica could have blackmailed Clinton. It would be hilarious if the cultist wasn’t such a sick pig.
I suggest that every time a democrat hears more b.s. about Clinton’s sex life, he fire off an email to his Dem rep asking that they investigate the unauthorized Whitehouse access for a gay male whore.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:41 pmHey Bluedog…..yes, I’ve been reading about Jeff Gannon and how many nocturnal visits he made to the WH! Astounding! Maybe that’s why Bush classified the “visitor lists” recently? More CYA?? We need to get to the bottom of both HookerGate and GayGate in the WH, don’t we?
March 29th, 2007 at 12:42 pmThis is as hypocritical as it gets.
Discussing and attacking the media’s fixation on a previous president’s libido. The only reason it is a “story†is because it has potential ramifications on the presidential aspirations of a candidate that this site clandestinely, albeit relatively well known, is pushing.
Yet Gulliani’s marital circus is fair game and Newt’s atrocious acts of infidelity and treatment of his spouses (should the plural be “spice�) are relevant by virtue of this site’s double-standard. Sounds about as “fair and balanced†as FOX News, really.
Many will automatically provide the retort “But that’s because they run on a ‘family values’ ticket!†In response to that I would ask that you google the following phrase, “It takes a village…â€
Meanwhile, our national acts of murder, oppression, and terrorism continue unabated.
How “progressive†of us indeed.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:43 pm#74 I guess that was after the vehicular homicide of her ex-boyfriend. I’ve heard of “washing that man right out of your hair” but this takes it a bit too far. Was that charge expunged too?
March 29th, 2007 at 12:44 pmIf anyone really wants to get into the background and twisted psyche of this president, read Justin A Frank’s “Bush On The Couch”….It will give you goosebumps – guaranteed!
March 29th, 2007 at 12:45 pmJT Clinton got the Idiots that bombed the WTC in 1993. they are in prison. So what is your point. Old Bushies put us into a illegal war for OIL and 3000 of our men and women are dead. Where is Bin Linden? What Clinton did was how many years ago? Like about 10 years ago. Clinton is not in office Old Bushies is.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:46 pmGet over it all ready.
#77 Clinton has achieved “rock star status” with the people, that’s clear. However, Newtie-toot-toot and Cheater Guliaini are “candidates” so let’s get all of their dirt out there for everyone to see; after all, you make your bed, you sleep in it. Heard that Guliani’s own son can’t stand him and has plenty to say about what kind of human being his father is??
March 29th, 2007 at 12:47 pmBob — here are the two pending questions to you:
1) if Saddam had found out about Monica and used that to blackmail him, can you at least see the potential for a problem there?
2) if Congress passed a spending bill that included a provision that all people with the name “Bob†are sent to Gitmo, would a veto be O.K. then?
March 29th, 2007 at 12:47 pmFamily Values??? FamilyValues?? Newt is a drug addict who dealt in illegal prescriptions….and Guliani is a whoremaster extraordinaire….and they have the balls to mention “Family Values”….such hypocrisy.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:48 pmveritas:
That was my hypothetical posed above to show them they WOULD indeed think it was relevant if it were Republicans they could use it against — just see all the comments about Newt and Rudy ; )
March 29th, 2007 at 12:48 pmI understand now what this is soooo d***ed important to ReichWingNutTerrorists. It took me awhile. But one of the trolls just spilled the beans (as it were).
Emperor Bush HAD to invade Iraq, because if Saddam had found out about Jeff Gannon’s love affair with the Boy Who Would Be King, then, then, then… uh… oh ya, he could have used that information against George to “Blackmail” him!
Geez.
/sarcasm
March 29th, 2007 at 12:53 pmExactly, Veritas. If Jeff Gannon had been visiting the Clinton Whitehouse, repubs and the press would have gone into a feeding frenzy. The case of the gay male whore visiting the Bush whitehouse is the most glaring example of the strange double-standard in our corporate press. They always explained that the reason they were so obsessed with Clinton was because it was sexy and “sex sells.” So, what exactly is the excuse for not being interested in a gay male whore visiting Bush? Wouldn’t a “liberal media conspiracy” be all over that action?
March 29th, 2007 at 12:53 pmI agree with Jake. There is definitely a potential problem with blackmail for the Bush Whitehouse since records show that a gay male whore visited there without checking out at night many times. You’re right, Jake! A situation like that could affect national security. Dems in congress should initiate investigations into the gay male whore at the Bush Whitehouse immediately. Our nation’s security depends on it.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:57 pm#81-veritas,
You’re preaching to the choir regarding the slime balls Gingrich and Guliani. I am certain they are both pond scum and I wouldn’t vote for them if they ran against Charlie Manson.
But to act like the pro-war Hillary is a saint is unrealistic and deceitful. And the fact that her husband is a philanderer is not mere speculation, but established fact. Is it relevant? That’s really for the people to decide don’t you think? But claiming the subject to be out of bounds is pure hypocrisy.
If being “progressive†is to take the high-road only when it is convenient or works to a political advantage then I do not wish to be “progressiveâ€.
March 29th, 2007 at 12:58 pmTuber: “But to act like the pro-war Hillary is a saint is unrealistic and deceitful.”
Let’s see. She has pledged that if we are still there when she takes office, she will end it immediately. She has said over and over that if she knew then what she knows know, authorization wouldn’t have even come to a vote. She has repeatedly said invading Iraq was a mistake and we should have concentrated on Afganistan. She votes for the bills authorizing redeployment.
She’s not my favorite candidate, but please don’t act like Bill’s sex life is relevant but Hillary’s many public pronouncements on the war are not. Calling her “pro-war” is about as intellectually dishonest as calling her a “radical feminist” or a “satanist.”
March 29th, 2007 at 1:05 pmBut to act like the pro-war Hillary is a saint is unrealistic and deceitful. And the fact that her husband is a philanderer is not mere speculation, but established fact. Is it relevant? That’s really for the people to decide don’t you think? But claiming the subject to be out of bounds is pure hypocrisy.
Comment by Tuber
“Saint?” No one suggests that Hillary is a saint but Bill isn’t the Clinton running for office. How his “philandering” matters even if he was is a mystery to me. There’s a nice list up in the comments about the “philandering” of recent American presidents. Please draw the correlation between their personal sexual behavior and their success in the Oval Office.
GWB at least appears to be a monogamous man. Does this have any relationship at all to his success as President?
Whether Bill continues to have affairs is about as relevant to Hillary’s success or failure as a President as is Bill’s shoe size.
March 29th, 2007 at 1:13 pm#89-Bluedog49,
I’m not trying to pick a fight with you but ask that you ponder this:
Ms. Clinton, according to you, says that if she “knew then what she knows now, there would not have even been a vote.” Great excuse, I guess, for someone who would have come out of a cave just before casting the vote. But it really doesn’t hold much water for someone who had access to all the top secret information imaginable prior to her vote. And let’s not forget that she spent EIGHT YEARS in the whitehouse prior to her becoming a senator.
Gosh, I knew it was all bullsh*t back then and I’m just a little peon who isn’t afraid to think and who, through the grace of a public education, has the ability to read.
So, Ms. Clinton was pro-war before she found out that it was not a popular position. Then she changed the text on her banner but continued to vote for the funding.
That’s the reality. If acknowledging such and calling it what it is makes me “intellectually dishonest†in your eyes, then “intellectually dishonest†I shall be.
March 29th, 2007 at 1:21 pm“She has pledged that if we are still there when she takes office, she will end it immediately.”
Actually, BluDog, that is not exactly what she has said:
Clinton Says Some G.I.’s in Iraq Would Remain
New York Times
WASHINGTON, March 14 — Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton foresees a “remaining military as well as political mission†in Iraq, and says that if elected president, she would keep a reduced military force there to fight Al Qaeda, deter Iranian aggression, protect the Kurds and possibly support the Iraqi military.â€
In outlining how she would handle Iraq as commander in chief, Mrs. Clinton articulated a more nuanced position than the one she has provided at her campaign events, where she has backed the goal of ”bringing the troops home.”
She said in the interview that there were ”remaining vital national security interests in Iraq” that would require a continuing deployment of American troops.
The United States’ security would be undermined if parts of Iraq turned into a failed state ”that serves as a petri dish for insurgents and Al Qaeda,” she said. ”It is right in the heart of the oil region,” she said. ”It is directly in opposition to our interests, to the interests of regimes, to Israel’s interests.”
March 29th, 2007 at 1:21 pmOh, to attempt meaningful and thoughtful debate with uninformed apologists (Juan C., Ben Dover, Blue Dog, #66, and others…):
Read this well-researched timeline:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4677978
All of these attacks occured during the Clinton presidency. To insinuate otherwise either means you didn’t read the Congressional report on the 9/11 attacks or that your heads were stuck in the sand while Clinton’s mind was working on creative new solutions for the use of cigars…
I challenge you to respond with substantive comments rather than immature, emotional responses.
March 29th, 2007 at 1:23 pmBack on topic: regardless of which party the President is from, a source to blackmail him (or her in this case) should be a concern to any American. That applies whether it is Bush now, or Hillary later. Since I don’t think Hillary’s vote for the AUMF was a mistake, I can’t hold that against her obviously.
March 29th, 2007 at 1:24 pmExley:
They don’t care about facts (or blackmail threats, either, it would seem).
March 29th, 2007 at 1:25 pmAmericans are obcessed with the lurid , sex , homophobia ,sex with children, sex by the famous most ofall , we are a sick society , who continously needs entertaiment . When are we gone take responsability for the elections of Chimp and start paying taxes to meet our responsabily for this stupid war.
March 29th, 2007 at 1:25 pmJake,
I’m not sure if I understand your question. Is it do Republicans prefer young man flesh over females or is the question concerning Laura Bush as a murderer or a prostitute? I’m pretty sure she’s not a hooker. I know she’s a manslaughterer. As far as the Republican Man Boy Love Association I think the evidence is overwhelming that…well you get the picture.
March 29th, 2007 at 1:27 pmDoktor Texas:
Which word(s) don’t you understand from “Would the NY Times break the story if Laura Bush CURRENTLY was a high-priced hooker?”?
March 29th, 2007 at 1:31 pmI hear the sucking sound of this thread attracting all the neocon posters…
Fight them over here better than fighting them in other threads.
March 29th, 2007 at 1:33 pmTuber: “So, Ms. Clinton was pro-war before she found out that it was not a popular position. Then she changed the text on her banner but continued to vote for the funding.”
I believe the first time she made the statement about not voting for the war authorization was in 2003, when being anti-war was not nearly as possible as it is today. Look, I don’t think she’s a lefty or anything. She’s clearly a centrist. My opinion is that calling her “pro-war” is a distortion of her position. And, if she believes in leaving a small “strike force” in Iraq after pulling out the vast majority of the troops, her position is the same as Barak Obama. How come he doesn’t take any grief for that position but she does?
March 29th, 2007 at 1:34 pm“Exley:
They don’t care about facts (or blackmail threats, either, it would seem).
Comment by Jake — March 29, 2007 @ 1:25 pm”
Evidently, Bush cultists don’t care about possible blackmail threats with respect to the fact that a gay male whore under an assumed name visited the Whitehouse on over 15 occassions at night with no record of checking out. What a strange set of double-standards these Bush cultists have.
March 29th, 2007 at 1:36 pmFor the record, I am concerned about ALL legitimate blackmail threats, and I am on ALL the current threads. If anyone (NOT on the “Ignore List”) has a question about any of that, let me know.
March 29th, 2007 at 1:41 pmI finally understand the great Republican obsession with Clinton’s dick. It took awhile.
Apparently, Clinton’s womanizing was such a secret that terrorists could blackmail him with it. We should all thank God that Gennifer Flowers outed him or we’d currently be living under Sharia law. Clinton would have given away the entire country, and allowed the mullahs to move into the White House, just to keep Hillary from finding out that he liked young women and sometimes did unmentionable things with them.
If that particular theory doesn’t sound to you like it was pulled from the bottom of a squirrel’s nest, complete with old squirrel poo and walnut shells, you have the makings of a fine Republican eejit.
March 29th, 2007 at 1:50 pm#100-Bluedog49,
I do not agree with Mr. Obama’s position in regard to Iraq either. Damn eloquent speaker though.
If I had to pick a senator whose position on Iraq is most representative of mine, I would pick Mr. Feingold. But you don’t hear much from him anymore. Seems after Nov 06 his usefulness to the party has diminished significantly so I wouldn’t expect him to be useful again until 2008.
I guess we’ll just keep raping Iraq until we figure out a way to be able to convince people that we are not raping Iraq while leaving our dick firmly inserted. Horrible imagery, but phucking accurate.
March 29th, 2007 at 1:51 pmWhile I appreciate all the comments bashing Hillary, the Iraqi war was still featured on page 1 of USA Today — Bush’s veto threat and a story about our dwindling supply / support of Predator drone — the UK Iran standoff was featured as well:
http://www.usatoday.com/printedition/news/20070329/index_image.htm
March 29th, 2007 at 1:52 pmClinton should have told everyone back then that his private life is his business only and refused to say anything else to anyone. Unfortunately what he did was get on TV and lie to everyone. So now that will always haunt him and Hillary.
March 29th, 2007 at 1:55 pmOH NOES!!! IT’S TEH CLENIS!!!!
March 29th, 2007 at 1:57 pmJake is so st*pid, he thinks prostitution (a crime) is the same as an affair (not a crime). What a stupid little twerp you are – Jake’off my son! You know all of this political master debating will make you blind!
March 29th, 2007 at 2:09 pmFor the record, I am concerned about ALL legitimate blackmail threats, and I am on ALL the current threads. If anyone (NOT on the “Ignore Listâ€) has a question about any of that, let me know. Comment by Jake — March 29, 2007 @ 1:41 pm
Then why must you *blackmail* us with your st*pidity?
March 29th, 2007 at 2:10 pmThe troll is apparently operating under the belief he’s the Oracle at Delphi. Or one of those fake fortune telling machines at the penny arcade.
“If you have a question for me, insert a penny.”
Repeat as needed. Or not, preferably.
March 29th, 2007 at 2:17 pm“While I appreciate all the comments bashing Hillary…”
Take note, everyone. The Bush cultists appreciate all the Hillary-bashing. Now sit! Speak! Roll over! Good dogs!
March 29th, 2007 at 2:19 pmgummitch, haven’t you heard? The Bush cultist is running things around here. He calls the shots. He decides which issues to address and which posters deserve responses. It’s his world! Funny, isn’t it. Egocentism worthy of a Monty Python sketch. A window into the mind of the delusional authoritarian personality.
March 29th, 2007 at 2:24 pmkudos to bill if these tired azz folks have the time, effort, interest, obsession in their life breakin’ bread and drinkin’ tea over bill between the sheets.—–be flattered to know that for some you(bill) are their life….so make it interesting.
March 29th, 2007 at 2:26 pmSee, USA Today has to make a choice for the headline between Clinton’s past and Sonjaya Malakar…
We have been bombarded for few day by the media about this ’street broom’ hair style contestant and his advancement to finals of the ‘American Idol’.
I have never watched the show…but I heard a lot about it…
But Sanjaya seems to be the darling of the media the last few days.
While we are at war…stories like Sonjaya,Clinton’s past history of ‘dress & Cigar’ is the top headlines of the media.
Still the chase of ‘Who Is The Daddy’ in the case of Nicole Smith is getting a lot of attention…!!
March 29th, 2007 at 2:26 pmJake,
March 29th, 2007 at 2:31 pmO.K. dude I get it and to answer your question: Yes, they would break that story, but it would probably be under the headline “Frmr. Mayor Rudy G. caught with high profile prositute….”
I challenge you to respond with substantive comments rather than immature, emotional responses.
Comment by JT
Here I go. I dont give a f*ck about both Clintons. To me they represent another faction of corporative interests in the privileged elite of US politics. Dems and Reps are one and the same when it comes to foreign policy, which is my (and the rest of the world) concern.
Terrorist threat is the same as the Bolshevik threat, as the Soviet threat, as the Communist threat, as the whatever threat. Your government needs you in a permanent state of fear so you can approve whatever atrocity they come up with in order to make profits. As long as those profits from wars and torture arrived at the amrican middle class, it is very possible that nobody will question the administration performance. However, if american soldiers die and the economy crumbles, people will start asking questions, like in Vietnam. At first, the vast majority of the citizenry approved the intervention in Vietnam. Your government counts on the chauvinistic feelings of the general population. It happens in every country, so dont feel bad. Once, the Vietmihn decided to act, american soldiers began to die. Then you had the population uprising against Vietnam.
Iraq is pretty much the same. Saddam threat was a valid excuse to invade a ruined and starving country. Shock and awe was broadcast like it was a beautiful message of democracy. Baloney. So, the formula is pretty old. Nazis said to the german population that the Bolshevik-Jewish menace was a real threat for the Western civilization (Ancient Greece legacy). We will continue to see these “threats” in the future. Profits are what matter.
March 29th, 2007 at 2:43 pmJuan: “Nazis said to the german population that the Bolshevik-Jewish menace was a real threat for the Western civilization (Ancient Greece legacy).”
Yes, and they even blew up their own government building and blamed it on the terrorists-eerrrrrr, the Bolsheviks as a way to increase their political power in the nation.
March 29th, 2007 at 2:47 pm#77
Tuber with the big smackdown! Motives and politics aside, certain events are public record… so the “but, but, but…” defense doesn’t work. (Which is why testimony under oath is so important)
It doesn’t matter what side of the fence are on, the media sucks. Its been biased one way or the other since the second newspaper went into business.
Its best we all just get used to it and try to separate the crap from the really crappy crap.
Kind of a non-story here, despite any emotional reaction it may inspire in anyone.
March 29th, 2007 at 2:54 pmthis kind of coverage is inevitable. Better that comes out now, instead of after Hillary’s been nominated.
It’s the biggest problem she has. Her wooden personality and vote for the Iraq war are nothing compared to the unexploded Bill bomb, which will probably go off the day after the nomination.
There’s a lot I admire about Hillary, and I think she’s up to the job, but it would be a mistake for the Dems to give her the nod. It’s all going to be about Bill, the MSM, especially cable will have a field day rehashing Monica, et al.
March 29th, 2007 at 3:20 pmUnless she makes Bill a eunich — even then — how are you going to prevent him from going off after the nomination?
March 29th, 2007 at 3:49 pmLaura Bush was a prostitute? I wonder if this had something to do with her killing her boyfriend in high school.
March 29th, 2007 at 4:10 pmI don’t think “he’ll go off” so much as the MSM will never let Monica-gate go.
The only way Hillary can truely distance herself is if she divorces him. I’m not saying she should, that’s way too personal for anyone to weigh in on. But what is Rupert Murdoch and the increasingly right wing MSM going to do with Hillary occupying the same office that her husband and Monica Lewinsky had their affair in? Ditto comedians?
March 29th, 2007 at 4:19 pmTYPICAL repugnant-repub rightwingnut crank fudge-pachyderm SWIFT-BOAT SMEAR JOB—BLAME BILL CLINTON, EVEN THOUGH HE IS NO LONGER PRESIDENT AND BRING UP HIS SEX LIFE IN AN ATTEMPT TO SHOOT DOWN HILLARY’S CHANCES FOR PRESIDENT IN 2008—-WELL, I GUESS I’LL BE RELEASING THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS OF MONKEY BOY CHIMPya W. Bush and Karl FAT-F*CK Rove IN SOME COMPROMISING POSITIONS WITH Gannon/Guckert DURING THOSE STEAMY NIGHT SESSIONS AT THE white house—-AND I HAVE THE NEGATIVES IN A SAFE PLACE—–DIDN’T KNOW I WAS A BUSY LITTLE BEAVER TAKING THEM INCRIMINATING PHOTOGRAPHS NOW DID YA, CREEPS??????
March 29th, 2007 at 5:17 pmSo, Anastasia, if First “Gentleman” Bill Clinton had an affair with one of the wives of an Iraqi mullah, leading to the death of 100,000 Americans, that would somehow be Robert Murdoch’s fault? Don’t laugh, it happened at Troy.
March 29th, 2007 at 5:20 pmIf you can forgive an alchoholic liar like G.W. Bush and the make him King, un President, you can cut Bill Clinton yards of slack. His youthful addiction to sex is so over. (Open bypass surgery.) His lie was about a personal sexual act.
March 29th, 2007 at 5:40 pmHow has George Bush lied? Too many ways to count.
Bush is a war monger.
Bush depleted the strength of the armed forces.
Bush created the huge deficit so China and Japan OWN us.
Bush put incompetents in the most sensitive and critical positions for 6 years. Maybe three positions are filled with professionals.
Hillary deserves a break from 14 years of neo cons using her for target practice. Listen to her own campaign: not some regurgitated catch phrase of the women haters of America.
It’s my understanding that Hillary’s daughter Chelsea, should it come to pass, would run the East Wing . Bill has a full time job with his foundations and world health commitments. Sorry to make the muckrakers have to swallow more lies in print and on the web.
March 29th, 2007 at 5:52 pmJake,
#25
“P.S. to Jeremyderifield — perhaps you missed Speaker Gingrich on Dobson’s show recently? ”
I’m impressed. He “admitted” he sinned. Gee that makes it all good. Did he admit he handed his cancer ridden wife with divorce papers? How many divorces and extrmarital affairs from the GOP presidential candidates? How many divorces from the Democratic Party’s candidates?
Another question….are you naturally this way or did you have to work at it?
March 29th, 2007 at 6:44 pmNobody has ever proved Bush lied about anything. It’s all allegations by mostly crazy people.
Bill Clinton on the otherhand. Well…
I hope Hillary gives a class or an online tutorial on how to trade cattle futures. Nobody is better at timing the cattle futures market than Hillary.
March 29th, 2007 at 7:20 pmAnastasia, right-wing kooks and their enablers in the corporate media have been ginning up stories about Hillary for years and using every possible opportunity to portray her in as negative a light as possible. Your position is to reward them for their tireless work making Hillary into a creep. I see their tireless efforts as further proof that they’re worried she actually can steamroll this thing and become the first woman President. There are many reasons a person might not want to vote for Hillary. Please don’t let one of them be that you have capitulated to the b.s. about her.
March 29th, 2007 at 7:24 pmmuckdog: “Nobody has ever proved Bush lied about anything.”
Nice demonstration of your standards, muckdog.
March 29th, 2007 at 7:26 pm#89 -“ Let’s see. She has pledged that if we are still there when she takes office, she will end it immediately. “
Comment by Bluedog49
Apparently BluePuP, there are several factions in the enemy camp praying to Allah for a Dem victory in ‘08. (What is the old saying? “Politics makes strange bedfellows…”)
Pssst….I don’t know aboput Hillary being a Satanist (her admiration of radical Saul Alinsky didn’t surprise me either), but she IS a radical feminist. Nowadays, she’s more careful to couch that side of her agenda than during her days of being interviewed by Life Magazine as an undergraduate.
March 29th, 2007 at 7:50 pm#17-=Sounds like an excellent description of Rudy G.
March 29th, 2007 at 7:56 pm#12-It must be like a neverending gobstopper, and they are all just jealous they didn’t get their lick.
#20- there is already a disgraceful incident in the white house. We know it affectionately as “George”
March 29th, 2007 at 8:00 pmValiant V: “but she IS a radical feminist.”
And, that’s a problem because…… what? The idea that women should have equal rights and get paid the same as men do for the same work is NOT a radical idea. It’s common sense.
March 29th, 2007 at 8:21 pmListen, Bill was a great President but he did it to himself and reporters (and the public) has every right to question what he would be like as “first husband.” Frankly, I think these issues are between Hillary and Bill but she nevertheless has to be prepared to discuss them. Poor guy couldn’t (and probably still) can’t keep his zipper up.
March 29th, 2007 at 8:49 pmBesides, Al Gore behaved himself and is far more worthy of being President than Hillary.
March 29th, 2007 at 8:50 pmV.V. = Righty’s Susan Atkins.
March 29th, 2007 at 10:03 pmThe press is going to publish this crap. Sex sells. And Ken Starr made a porn movie out of the Monica Lewinski investigation. The media hasn’t forgotten that.
I want Gore, but if Hillary is the nominee, it won’t be the worst thing. Bill did a wa-a-a-a-ay better job than W. However, I saw a URL on the C&L blog that linked the Clintons with the Bush cabal. That is rather troubling.
March 29th, 2007 at 10:30 pmDid anyone else see South Park last night with the NUKE hidden inside Hillary?
March 30th, 2007 at 1:42 am[...] the media’s obsession with Bill Clinton’s sex life: “Nothing the New York senator says or does will [...]
April 2nd, 2007 at 2:23 pm