So how does one watch the Bill Clinton interview with Chris Wallace and not view it as a man stepping on a worm?
(or, if one reads the village idiot Brian Pickrell’s Iowa Voice, how can one spell out a verdict before watching it?)
A former president, somebody who only had modest indications that bin Laden was a serious threat to America, yet took him seriously, versus a Republican shill, somebody who is a disgrace to his legendary journalist father, who claims to be asking in honest faith, after George Bush has gone five years without catching Osama bin Laden, a completely loaded question, masking it behind “we got emails” while being clearly ready and willing to defend the implications.
“Mr. President, why didn’t you do more to get bin Laden?”
There is the scenario. Clinton fires back with a barrage of facts an lucid explanations of events as they were. The worm can only squirm and repeat himself like a third grader/GOP activist. Clinton then turns the tables and points out the obvious realities of FOX news. The worm denies and professes honor, but it goes no deeper because he has none.
Nowhere is a single thing Clinton said rebutted. Clinton says bin Laden wasn’t a factor in Somalia, the worm says “But wasn’t he in ’96, ’98, ’00?” as if his idea possessed logical flow from the previous statement. It has none. The worm is trying to step on the man, and failing that merely tries to stain his shoe.
And that’s what it boils down to in the big picture. Rightwingers only need one catchphrase to get by, because they’re willing and somehow able to repeat it endlessly. Clinton dropped the hard facts on Wallace’s head, Wallace had no retort or substance to offer. The rightwingers will have no substance to offer. The facts are plain. Bush has had five years to get bin Laden since September 11, 2001. Never mind the crucial months before when he was blowing bin Laden off. After 9/11, Bush had the entire nation behind him to pursue bin Laden singlemindedly.
He did not do that. We do not have bin Laden.
Yet…Bush’s dogs feel justified in pointing the finger at Clinton. The president who was pursuing bin Laden when nobody cared. Who only had a few minor attacks to justify it.
Clinton revealed what happens when a liar gets pinned down by the truth. Wallace was obliterated, having no option but to lie through his teeth. “I’m just asking a legitimate question!” Clinton demonstrated plainly that Wallace was doing no such thing. Wallace was a worm.
So what’s the catchphrase?
LOOK AT CLINTON HE’S ANGRY! HE’S A CRAZED BLOODSUCKING MONSTER! POOR CHRIS WALLACE! CRAZY CLINTON LOST HIS MARBLES!
Never mind Bush’s increasingly unhinged public appearances, berating the librul media for daring to point out inconvenient truths. Hypocrisy and strawberry jelly go on a rightwinger’s toast in the morning.
Clinton was decidedly hinged, in fact, because while he got a bit repetitive, he still managed to coherently debunk and demolish Wallace’s every word and the entire rightwinger cabal of liars and excuse-makers. And what rightwinger can be annoyed by repetition?
No, folks, it’s a simple choice: the teacher or the third graders. You have a man laying down an honest history on one side, and you have monkeys chanting “Made you mad!” on the other.
This country simply must stop being swayed so carelessly.
Bravo, Bill Clinton. I’ve my share of disputes with you, but in many ways you are still the best thing this country saw since Roosevelt. And against vermin like Wallace, you appear all the finer.