Bill Clinton’s Outburst

Bill Clinton’s Outburst

By Mark R. Levin

Bill Clinton is nuttier than a pecan pie. He has spent the last six years traveling the globe dumping on George Bush. Yet he turns into an emotional wreck when Fox’s Chris Wallace tries to ask him a few questions about his demonstrable failure to pursue aggressively Osama bin Laden after repeated al Qaeda attacks on Americans and American interests. Here.

Do you think his smear of “neo-cons” (which has become a codeword for Jews) will receive the kind of attention that George Allen’s “macaca” reference received from the likes of the Washington Post? Do you think questions will be raised about Clinton’s temperament? We got a glimpse of the Bill Clinton described to us by so many of his female victims over the years as he appeared close to actually assaulting Wallace.

The truth is that when Clinton had the power as president to do something about genocide in Rwanda, he did nothing; when he had the power to do more about AIDS, he did little; when he had the power to kill or capture bin Laden, he did neither. He is now obsessed with rewriting his record. That’s why he responded angrily to Wallace’s questions. And that’s why he raised such an enormous ruckus about ABC’s Pathway to 9/11, including threatening to sue the broadcast company and enlisting Democrat party operatives to pressure the network to drop the show.

Clinton is as irresponsible an ex-president and he was a president. And to think that he’s considered the brains of the family.

29 Responses to “Bill Clinton’s Outburst”

1. handyman Says:
   September 24th, 2006 at 10:44 am

   Saw the outburst. Couldn’t help but thinking how guilty Clinton came off. With no one there to cover for him, he came positively unglued. Up came the wagging boney finger, the veins, he sounded like his mouth was dry. Pathetic. The fear in his eyes. If he has any sense, he will shut up and sit down now.

2. Anna Says:
   September 24th, 2006 at 10:48 am

   Clinton gets rattled when anyone points out his personal faults, but he gets absolutely livid when faced with his failings as Commander in Chief.

   He truly believes that WE THE PEOPLE can be easily manipulated into believing what he says - then and now. To his credit, there are those kool aid drinkers who will always believe in him, but it must be absolutely maddening to an EGO like him that not all of us buy into his delusion of self-worth and self-importance.

   Face the facts, Mr. Clinton, you messed up because you surrounded yourself with people who placated your ego instead of challenging you to do your job. Had you appoached the office with humility and respect - essentially, checked your ego at the door - who knows what kind of leader you could have been.

   Your anger sickens me - all I see is a petulant child who wasn’t ever told to grow up by his mother. It doesn’t matter how smart you think you are - or your age - you’re still an angry, insolent, and impudent child.

3. Rich in MT Says:
   September 24th, 2006 at 11:13 am

   Perhaps Clinton would best be suited handing hammers to Carter as they build habitat for humanity houses.

4. nanaof8 Says:
   September 24th, 2006 at 2:25 pm

   Rich, Clinton cannot be trusted with the nails.

   Anna, Clinton did not ‘(mess) up because (he) surrounded himself with people who.. (etc).. Clinton must be held accountable for his own actions. Clinton is entirely responsible for his egomaniacal fiascoes.

   Now, finally, all can see the lack of character, integrity and maturity that is the person of William Jefferson Blythe Clinton.
   Although some may blindly continue to adhere to the fantasical myth that surrounded the ’second Camelot’, how can others fail to acknowledge the criminal ideology that drives this ex-president.

5. Tim Says:
   September 24th, 2006 at 2:43 pm

   ROFL! You have to see this:
   http://tinyurl.com/m3y7m

6. trinity Says:
   September 24th, 2006 at 5:02 pm

   Wow. What a complete meltdown. For his own sake, Clinton should really try to control himself a little better. Many of us have always believed he’s a sociopath to some degree or other, and that display should remove any lingering doubts anyone might have about that.

   Such anger and aggression. I agree with Mark. I almost expected him to take a swing at Chris Wallace. He was so out of control and full of hate. Getting in Chris’ face the way he did. That degree of intimidation is kind of scary.

   Wagging finger, thumping the table, eyes squinting with anger, veins just about popping, voice shaking from rage….all because someone had the sheer audacity to challenge his version of the “truth”. Incredible video. Great tv! Poor Chris will probably have nightmares tonight.

   Makes you fully appreciate the strength of character of our current president even more. Look at the incredible difference in the way that both men handle criticism. And the media have been ruthless and unrelenting in their attacks on President Bush. What an amazing contrast between the two!

7. betsyross1776 Says:
   September 24th, 2006 at 6:18 pm

   Why didn’t Wallace ask , were you convicted of perjury sir and how can we beleive you now? Instead Wallace chickened out and acted like a scared rabbit. If Clinton ever got into my face like that I would say mr. clinton are you threatening me like you did Disney and abc. I sure hope not, cause I would hate to take this personal. Personal things really make this lady mad, and you don’t want that do you?

8. whofan65 Says:
   September 24th, 2006 at 6:40 pm

   That’s an outstanding point-it would’ve been refreshing to see ANY ‘journalist’ take the credibility tack on BJ, but there aren’t any out there who are willing to risk losing ‘access’ to lib politicos. But yes indeed..Mr. (thankfully FORMER) President, why should we believe a word you say when you demonstrated a willingness to lie under OATH?

9. debbie Says:
   September 24th, 2006 at 6:43 pm

   Hum. Wasn’t that the same wagging finger he used to lie, to the American people?

10. Suziq Says:
    September 24th, 2006 at 7:00 pm

    What did Willie think, that this was MTV and the hardest question would be Boxers or Briefs? I think Wallace has set the stage for the rest of the media to start asking serious questions.

    If Bill wanted a softball interview, he should have gone on with Chris Matthews or Katie Kuric.

11. MarkLevinFan Says:
    September 24th, 2006 at 7:08 pm

12. John in Dublin Says:
    September 24th, 2006 at 7:26 pm

    The hillbilly whore hopper was more concerned with hiding the little willie than find obl…

13. debbie Says:
    September 24th, 2006 at 7:38 pm

    LOL, MLF!

14. hammer Says:
    September 24th, 2006 at 7:38 pm

    Fear not, Wallace will be the last to question BJ in such a manner. It is not in the interest of the left stream media to challenge their pagan god and he will avoid FOX like it was Hillary, herself. I just watched the Sunday NBC news (why?). It was a 25 minute hit on Republicans and conservatives, in the guise of news. The small clip of the Clinton interview featured his attack on the Bush administration. Proving that propaganda is rampant in the leftist Pravda media.

    Right on, Great One! Truth is alive in your penetrating orations. We always await your insight and echo your patriotism.

15. saxmachine Says:
    September 24th, 2006 at 7:40 pm

    Ooops again, that was me before not Suzi.

16. handyman Says:
    September 24th, 2006 at 8:35 pm

    I’ll tell ya Betsy, I’m not so sure Wallace chickened. Sometimes when a person is bent on making an absolute fool of himself the best thing to do is what Wallace did, back off and let him. Voila! Unprovoked, center stage, Clinton just raging on. Reality TV at its finest.

17. Museum Curator Says:
    September 25th, 2006 at 1:43 am

    Maybe Clinton thought it was Mike Wallace that would be questioning him. LOL!

18. NtvAmrcn Says:
    September 25th, 2006 at 8:42 am

    Like I said in my post in the forums, Makes Me wanna Puke! Why is this asshole all of a sudden on every air and satellite signal that we recieve? If this doesn’t motivate people to vote against dems I don’t know what will. I repeat my earlier statement, “mmwp”.

19. Long Island Pete Says:
    September 25th, 2006 at 8:48 am

    BJ is the clear definition of a sociopath. Nothing is his fault, everyone else is to blame.

    BJ said, “The CIA and the FBI refused to certify that bin Laden was responsible while I was there.” Did he mean collectively they refused and if so how could they with Gorelick wall in place?

    Another lie by BJ, he said, “Now, I’ve never criticized President Bush, and I don’t think this is useful.” I guess he doesn’t remember some of his speeches in Europe.

    And the best was when he said, “All I’m saying is, you falsely accused me of giving aid and comfort to bin Laden because of what happened in Somalia.” I don’t recall Chris Wallace saying that. The again BJ must be hearing those little voices in his head.

    Amazing how he gets when asked the tough questions or is shown the truth. He got that way with Peter Jennings. He is so afraid that his legacy is going to be remembered by cigars that it drives him nuts.

    And Debbie I was thinking the very same thing with his finger waving. So here it is, the three ways to tell BJ is lying. Waves his finger, southern drawl becomes thicker and the number one way to tell BJ is lying…His lips are moving.

20. Burlem Says:
    September 25th, 2006 at 11:06 am

    I thought Clinton was “putting On” he did more bashing of the republicans, and the media having the gall to say”Media gave president bush a pass” Say What? Our president is bashed every day for petes sake. In my humble opinion his so called outburst was a political calculation as elections are in 6 weeks and republicans are closing the gap. He wanted to try and sway the publics opinion, much like Hillary and her “Right Wing Conspiracy” (the phrase coined by a columnist by the way)RWC is still used today. amazing!

    I do not trust the Clintons or their groupies no matter what they say or do.

21. nanaof8 Says:
    September 25th, 2006 at 11:49 am

    Clinton snatched Chris Wallace’s notes. They have been found.

    The follow up question that Wallace never asked Clinton was —

    ” Mr Clinton, you said you failed but you still ‘left a comprehensive anti-terror strategy’ Mr Clinton are you saying you left a proven failed policy for the next administration, knowing it was useless, or are you saying it was workable but not by you and your people due to ineffectiveness??”

22. nanaof8 Says:
    September 25th, 2006 at 12:57 pm

    Clinton kept saying “theres not a living soul” can say such and such.

    Did Vince Foster and the other dead people in the Clintons’ wake know something condemnatory they could have said about Clinton and his anti-terrorist actions? Hmmm? Hmmm?

23. John in Dublin Says:
    September 25th, 2006 at 1:19 pm

    Nana, I can’t believe you would use clinton’s name in the same sentence as “snatch”!!!

24. Tim Says:
    September 25th, 2006 at 1:35 pm

    Nanaof8: Your comment (#21) is spot on. Please read the four sections of the 9/11 Commission’s staff statement (#6) and decide for yourself how hard former President Clinton “tried” to get bin Laden.

    Richard Clarke says the new administration was briefed on the bin Laden situation yet both he and Sandy Berger say no military plan was briefed to the Bush administration during the transition. Clarke told the Commission that he raised the bin Laden issue only after the transition was completed and was pleased to see the Bush administration update the plan as it had last been updated in 1998. The new plan, more aggresive plan was approved for presentation to President Bush on 9/04/2001. In light of 9/11, immediately after it SecDef Rumsfeld reviewed the military options withnin the plan again and “didn’t see anything he liked.”

    Make sure you read the conclusions of the Commission’s staff summary.

25. EZ-E Says:
    September 25th, 2006 at 2:05 pm

    I missed the interview when it aired. If you did too, a complete replay is at:

    Enjoy.

26. John in Dublin Says:
    September 25th, 2006 at 2:14 pm
    
27. Burlem Says:
    September 25th, 2006 at 2:22 pm

    Posted on another thread…

    I’m sure this has already been noted on the thread, but I caught
    several slurs in Clinton’s speech patterns. He may have been looped.

    “Rithdraw” (withdraw) from Somalia…..

    “Lonts” (launch) a full scale attack and search for Bin Laden…

    Special “Forshez” (Forces)….

    “Shradegy” (Strategy)…..

    If I were “shtill” (still) President we’d have more than 20,000 “troots” (troops)…

    Special “Forshez” (Forces)… (twice)

    Mistakes I “sot” (thought) I made….

    Any of you believe as I do, that it was contrived, knowing that us “rightwingers” would talk at length about it.

28. John in Dublin Says:
    September 25th, 2006 at 2:24 pm

    Hmmm….looks like someone has a bend to the left….

    

29. DubInDallas Says:
    October 1st, 2006 at 3:57 pm

    Thanks for posting the whole interview, EZ-E. I missed it and had only heard out-takes.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.