AP reports: Bill Clinton says a vast, right-wing conspiracy that once targeted him is now focusing on President Barack Obama. The ex-president made the comment in a television interview when he was asked about one of the signature moments of the Monica Lewinsky affair over a decade ago. Back then, first lady Hillary Rodham Clinton used the term "vast, right-wing conspiracy" to describe how her husband's political enemies were out to destroy his presidency.
Bill Clinton was asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" whether the conspiracy is still there. He replied: "You bet. Sure it is. It's not as strong as it was because America has changed demographically. But it's as virulent as it was." Clinton said that this time around, the focus is on Obama and "their agenda seems to be wanting him to fail."
I think the name of the vast, right-wing conspiracy he's speaking of is Rush! And I think it's just as big as it was back then, about 20 million a week.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
22 comments:
I think people should be a lot more worried about the vast LEFT-wing conspiracy, which is a lot more harmful. Has the vast right-wing conspiracy taken away anybody's rights, destroyed the economy, or spent us into oblivion? No. Only the left wing can do that. Clinton is pathetic. Actually, both of them. They're disgusting.
I would be interested to hear what rights the left wants to take away from you.
Dave, I think you can add Fox News as a part of the far right conspiracy as well as Rush and some of those other talk radio guys. Fox came out early on that they would be the netowrk of opposition and thus far they are holding true to their word.
It was Clinton's reference to "wanting him (Obama) to fail" that made me think he was specifically targeting Rush. I haven't heard anyone else with enough guts to say it quite so straightforwardly. Of course, Rush would probably be glad to add "the vast right-wing conspiracy" to his growing list of monikers.
Tom, I don't think either a radio talk show host or a news network qualifies as a conspiracy. They are not doing anything under cloak of darkness, but are only speaking a viewpoint over public airwaves that is in oppostion to the current liberal agenda.
As for what rights the leftists want to take from us, we can start with the right to bear arms for self-defense. Also, every tax dollar that gets spent on charity (welfare, public housing, cash for cluckers, health care, etc.) robs me of my right to pursue happiness by unlawfully depriving me of the fruits of my labor. Also, one-half of all unborn African American babies will never make it out of the womb alive, a clear deprivation of the right to life. To me, these are the big three.
Look, the very nature of our political system means that political parties work in opposition to each other. But calling a political party's opposition to those they disagree with a "conspiracy" is a howler of vast (if you'll excuse the term) proportions. Of course, such language is consistent with the left's inclination to criminalize or even medicalize (see the Soviet Union) dissent now that they're - temporarily - in powe.
I for one certainly hope the republican party is even now conspiring to take back the White House and Congress at the earliest possible date.
A sidebar on Hillaery's "vast right wing consiracy": Even as she made the assertion, she conceded that if the allegations about her husband's carryings-on were actually shown to be true, she'd have to reconsider her remarks. Of course, when she made that statement, she was unaware of the blue dress. She figured that the case would always be a he-said, she-said thing in which the benefit of the doubt would favor the word of a president over that of a patently ditzy intern.
Needless to say, even when all of the stuff about Bill turned out to be true, she and the left couldn't give up the "vast right wing conspiracy" shtick. It worked too well for them with their increasingly foaming-at-the-mouth core constituency.
Tom, It strikes me that there is, implicit in the tone of your comment above, a barely masked supercillious sneer. In saying "I would be interested to hear what rights the Left wants to take away from you," what you're really saying is, "You can't name one thing the Left has taken away from you, so there!" And do I hear a subtext along the lines of "There you go again; a knuckle-dragging neanderthal worried about your precious "rats?" (Dave knows the reference here.)
But if you're really interested, Tom, here's the answer:
All our rights as free men are always at risk. That's the fundamental and recurring lesson of history. There is always a dynamic tension between freedom and government, between the governed and the governors, between the rule makers and those to whom the rules apply.
The problem today is that our government has been siezed not just by partisan operatives - the system can accomodate that - but by true believers. Rights - rights as we traditionally understand them in an American context - are very much a secondary consideration for our current leadership. Those in charge today truly believe that as an elite and enlightened class they can make better decisions about how you ought to order your life than you can yourself.
As one of their court jesters, Tom Friedman, put it rercently, "One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century."
Breathtaking stuff, really. I for one don't understand how anyone who has benefitted from the blessings of freedom can look around today and not be alarmed.
DOE has loaned money to 2 car companies; Fisker and Tesla to help fund the development of more fuel efficient cars. All afternoon on Fox News, their news people and pundits have been saying these are foreign companies. Both are American companies. You can debate all day long and quite legitimately if these loans are a role for government to play.
From Cavuto's show today. "I am not for this stuff. But then I would just say, 'All right, well, if we are going to do this -- if we are going to do this, then let's make sure that American companies exclusively benefit.'
Why is Fox not being honest with this report? If I were a betting man, I would bet by the end of the week this will be on several blogs and talk radio programs as a slam to Obama giving money to foreign companies. Don't let facts get in the way of a good story. This gentlemen is all part of the right wing conspiracy. Soon it will be Obama gave them the money as payback for votes, or to pay back Al Gore, or some false reason. What won't be said is that this is a continuance of a GWB program. Kinda like never saying GWB granted money to Libya. Instead let's just say Obama did. This is the kind of stuff I consider all part of the conspiracy.
http://www.energy.gov/news2009/8050.htm
As for Clinton. He was certainly not the most moral guy around, but lets not forget the fact the republican congress was continually legislating special prosecutors against him, right wingers were calling him a murderer and that Hillary killed Vince Foster. Sheesh, they still go after him today for stuff.The one thing they got him on was the blue dress and it seems that is all anyone now remembers. That and Hillary's denial of that charge where she used the term vast right wing conspiracy.
I guess we just look through different prisms. I have heard nothing of my freedoms being threatened by the current administration, except for possibly taxing, not a fee, those who do not buy some kind of health insurance. That's wrong and I would think is would be challenged in court rather quickly. It just amazes me that this freedom stuff comes up any time a democrat is in office. Probably the most threatened piece of legislation towards freedom in the last 40 years or more was the Patriot Act. Wasn't it in 1961 that Ronald Reagan gave a speech that if medicare is passed, the freedom we have all known would be gone forever. The government would tell doctors where to live, who to treat, etc. and we would be telling our children what it was like to live in a free land. 19 years later I don't think Reagan ran on that platform.
Thomas Friedman has nothing to do with the Obama administration as far as I know. Heck, he supported the Iraq War and has been called a muslim hater. How elite can he be? The extremes on both sides say a lot of stupid stuff and they also write a lot of theoretical, what if, kind of stuff. It's called freedom of expression...something not lost after 200 plus years under this constitution.
Bill, the post you referred to got removed, so I am not sure what I said or why it was removed.
Last word, from me at least, about the purported vast right wing conspiracy:
There's something pathetic about a political party that holds a near veto-proof, filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, a commanding majority in the House, control over the appointnment process to the federal judiciary, control over the appointment of US attorneys, absolute control of the executive branch, unprecedented use of the nearly bullet-proof position of "czar," an indisputably kid-gloved media, unprecedented penetration of the enetertaiment/information establishment, virtual steel-grip control of the nation's university system, dominance of the boards of directors of most of the largest of the nation's great charitable trusts and foundations, deep penetration into the policy making apparatus of most of the nation's old mainline churches, deep-rooted influence over the nation's elementary and secondary classrooms, a deep symbiotic relationship with the nation's corrupt labor movement, surging influence in an increasingly co-opted corporate sector . . .
there's something pathetic about a political party with all the assets listed above complaining with a straight face about a "vast right wing conspiracy." Getting their knickers in a twist when a couple of kids with a video camera and an invest of, what?, 1,500 bucks, expose the criminal sould at the heart of Obama's favorite community organizing group. And talking about these kids in the context of a "vast right wing conspiracy."
And there's something pathetic in not seeing how pathetic these people really are.
Look, even if there were a right wing conspiracy, how could it be "vast?" I mean, there just isn't any room left for the conspirators to play in (see the list above).
But let's talk about conspiracies: The left announced its intention two generations ago to complete a "long march through the institutions" and they have largely accomplished that march, largely through deceit, misdirection, misrepresentation, and outright criminality (see ACORN et al). If there has been a conspiracy at work in this country over the past 40 years, that's been it.
And now, as I said, this is my last word about this absurd topic.
Well said, Bill. Let us hope that they are too stupid and incompetent to bring their revolution to fruition now that they have attained power.
ok...we can just call it the GOP Noise Machine
No, it has little to do with the GOP. What we're talking about is the voice of conservatism.
Yes, Tom. Given where I suspect your political predilections lie, I suppose you would call the voice of the people -- the average, go-to-work-everyday, pay-your-bills- on-time, pay-your-taxes, go-to-church, and educate-your-kids people -- to be "noise." Perfect. And perfectly apt and revelatory.
Bill, Bill, Bill. No, I have no problems with what went on at townhall meetings or any of these tea parties or the people involved. All those hard working people, etc. That is democracy at work. Some of the placards may have been a little over the top, but that's ok. Thickens the skin up. The noise are things like John Perry on Newsmax (http://www.newsmax.com/john_perry/obama_military_coup/2009/09/29/266012.html). Glenn Beck and all his conspiracy theories. Fox News example cited in previous post, any commentator that promotes the birther nonsense (Lou Dobbs). Sean Hannity misinformation and untruths.
The 'noise' comes from the conservative media guys. They are out there Bill. Despite what Rush says, they are out there and the MSM, whoever they are these days, seem to be going to great lengths to give them a voice.
Did you know that when Brit Hume retired, Media Research Center gave him an award and he thanked them for all the "material" they provided him over the years when he hosted Special Report. Fair and balanced?
What bothers me is there is so much legitimate things to debate on without the misinformation, but the noise continues and when the legislators trumpet what these guys say, it freaks me out. Even that nasty MSNBC gave more air time to Joe Wilson's "you lie" than they did to the speech or to what the supposed lie was.
And just so you know, I don' think it is appropriate to have kids singing songs like what has been on tv lately, but since the noise machine always seem to leave out that it was all part of Black History month and was part of an overall program in the school, it probably ain't that bad. There sure weren't any complaints when kids sang to Laura Bush that praised her husband and FEMA for their post Katrina help, but it seems Fox cannot locate that video like the other networks did. Kinda doubt you will hear Rush talk about that song to Bush either.
never heard of this guy, but what he writes on his blog is pretty much what I have been trying to say in these posts. I shuda taken more writing classes in school I guess. Take 3 minutes and read it, please. He's a conservative.
http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2009/09/29/silence-equals-assent-why-pointing-out-conservative-lunacy-must-be-done/
After reading this I thought about why is the rhetoric so different this time?
Simple: 60 person majority in the senate.
Tom referring us to an allegedly conservative blogger because of his allegedly inadequate communications skills? What is this discourse coming to? I, for one, don't care to be told by a liberal who is a conservative. What kind of fool do you take me for? I'll read who I want to read, and I know who is who, thank you very much. And let your statements speak for themselves. You can't "outsource" your blogging, my good man!
keep hiding Brian. btw, its me with the writing problem, not the guy who wrote this blog. He says he is a conservative. Just reporting what he says he is. But you keep hiding. Heaven forbid should read something that might just have a tinge of accuracy to it. :)
Plllllbbbbbbbffffffttttt!
There's this drumbeat from the left that is basically calling on conservatives to renounce, disown, disavow and repudiate the more extreme elements in the conservative universe. The left, thoughtful and sensitive as always, is just trying to help us, you know.
The fact is, the right has a pretty decent track record of repudiating the crackpots in their ranks: Bill Buckley personally led the charge against the John Birch Society, made it abundantly clear that Birchers weren't representative of conservatism. There have been similar examples right up to today. The right effectively purged and marginalized Pat Buchanan, a smart guy who self-destructed because of his undeniable anti-semitism.
By contrast, the left elevates its crackpots to the highest levels: Obama makes "czars" of them; Minnesota voters send them to the Senate; former presidents place them in seats of honor at state functions.
Great point, Bill. We on the right are happy to mete out political justice on our reprobates. The left, on the other hand, defends their bad actors to the death. I guess a liberal can never be wrong. They're perfect. They cannot sin.
Post a Comment