He was 'anxious'? Was that in the AP?

Yes, it's all about him, isn't it?

Ugh,

Bill Clinton has burned through all of his credibility with shocking speed.

You know it's bad when George HW Bush of all people comes across as more statesmanlike!!

Can we just go ahead and elect Obama and finally be done with this obsession with all things Clinton? Please??

You sure he wasn't just trying to hand McCain enough rope?

If you and all the progressiver-than-thous can take a breath of free speech for a moment, you might notice that Bill Clinton and the Democrats just seized the bi-partisan mantle from McCain/Lieberman.

Bill Clinton is a two-faced nut job. He and Hillary deserve each other. If Obama somehow wins this election w/o Clinton's help, the first thing Obama should do is take Clinton's President Portrait off the wall it is on in the White House and place it in one of the male visitor's bathrooms, near the toilet paper dispenser...

Those angry old men sure stick together, don't they?
What hurts is that Clinton himself is making everyone who described him as a shabby, narcissistic, conniver seem insightful. Clinton has just crossed over into Lieberman territory.

Good post.

When they were up at the mike together, Clinton hugged him so tight I thought they'd both need a cigarette afterward.

How long do you think it will take for these images to work their way into McCain ads, as an example of his bipartisanship--and also to woo disaffected Hillary supporters (at least the cultists who don't give a rat's ass about a candidate's political positions)?

Hey look over there! Why it's Bill Clinton!

Ignore. Him. Please.

Feh. If Clinton won't go to bat for the Democratic Party, he's irrelevant.

Bill just wants Exxon John to win so he can run Hillary against him in '12. It's so obvious...

Wasn't Bill Clinton the guy that had so little self control that America got stuck with George Bush as President, TWICE?

Isn't he married to the lady who said during the primaries "lobbyists are people too".

Yeah.

P.S. Check it out: http://www.demandthedebate2008.com/

Hee hee. A quote from Bill Clinton in praise of Washington Monthly is coming up on this page.

How much credibility is it going to cost McCain with the dittohead set to be seen embracing Clinton?

How much credibility is it going to cost McCain with the dittohead set to be seen embracing Clinton?

Patrick, you underestimate the power of cognitive dissonance in movement conservatives. Their ability to avoid perceiving anything that threatens their belief system, only to recall it or something similar when tactically convenient for attack, is truly astonishing.

All Clinton has done for the past month is run around praising McCain and Palin. I guess that is what he calls "doing everything I can to get Barack Obama elected."

Back on topic...
Via Andrew Sullivan:

Caribou Barbie's exorcism is caught on video.

Praise the Lord Jesus!

Clinton has sure been making the media rounds this past 24hrs. and he looks sedated when talking about Obama. You could get more enthusiasm from a coma patient. WTF Bill!!!!! He keeps saying he'll start campaigning hard after the CGI, then after the Jewish holiday, why not just wait until Nov.5 before getting around to it.

With friends campaigning for you like that, who needs enemies? He had the potential to rally up the undecideds over to Obama--and he talks about those folks in Arkansas who have hunting and fishing licenses and are following the election closely (in the context of Palin's appeal).

Instead of actively giving them reasons to vote Obama, my concern is he's passively conveyed enough sentiment not to. Acts of ommission (passive, reluctant dispassionate comments about about Obama)are akin to acts of commission (hurting Obama)IMO.

Boy, the rising Obama poll numbers sure have the positively Gingrich-Rovian Clinton-haters feeling feisty again. Why don't you show a level of class commensurate with that of OUR nominee and stop the irritating and unseemly Clinton bashing?

Just a thought. Need Clinton's supporters much?

Clinton has stated his focus is his project. His project isn't partisan. If McCain asked to speak, why should he deny him for the good of the Initiative? Did Obama ask to speak? I'm sure Clinton would really like to have Obama's support too. All week on every talk show Clinton has been endorsing Obama. I'm not going to fault Clinton on this one.

Is this really a big deal?
Look, $700 Billion to 1.00 Trillion dollars are up for debate, and this will get very little press.

I'd think that the impeachment, the Chelsey joke, "How are we going to beat the Bitch?" and more might have put Bill off a bit. But the Clintons are different. Kind of like Hillary meeting with Richard Mellon Scaife, y'know?

Let's just get with Obama's ground game and make Bill irrelevant.

What a wonderful world it would be,
If Bubba hadn't drop his pants to his knees.

par·a·noi·a [ pàrrə nóy ə ]

noun

Definition:

1. distrust: extreme and unreasonable suspicion of other people and their motives

2. psychiatric disorder: a psychiatric disorder involving systematized delusion, usually of persecution

Why is everyone so surprised that Bill Clinton isn't running through the streets with OBAMA tattooed on his forehead? His wife lost a bruising primary to Obama and it personally cost him millions of dollars. I'd be a little less than eager to go out there and stump for the man who cost me 4 to 8 more years in the Lincoln bedroom and $20 million. Clinton's doing everything required of him but nothing extraordinary.

This morning, McCain wanted to score a few points, grab a few headlines, and bolster his bipartisan bona fides, and Bill Clinton was anxious to give the Republican nominee a hand.

Yeah, because the Clinton Global Initiative speech was just a spur of the moment thing that McCain decided to do and Clinton agreed to this morning.

The former president is gracious to a fault, isn't he?

Yeah, its how you get people who aren't committed partisans not to tune out.

Or...not.

Rather than fantasy-based, vast-Clintonian-conspiracy-theory speculation with no grounding in reality, lets try looking at the facts:

(1) The Clinton Global Initiative is a charitable non-profit,
(2) Both Obama and McCain are speaking, not just McCain,
(3) While he hasn't been as personally negative as some people would want, Clinton has been consistent in his appearances in arguing that Obama would be better than McCain, and arguing rationally why rather than getting emotionally hyperbolic.

Clinton is as committed to winning this election for Democrats as anyone. The thing is, as by far the most popular outgoing President in the history of polling -- and one who was, even when running in 1992, never really phenomenally popular with the base because he was perceived as too moderate -- Clinton understands that his best utility in this election isn't, at least outside of the Convention, rally the base with red meat. Its appealing to the people who, to paraphrase his words on The Daily Show earlier this week, don't already love the Democratic Party, but need to be convinced that the Democratic Party (and Barack Obama) love them.

All week on every talk show Clinton has been endorsing Obama.

Really? Which PLANET are YOU living on?

This morning on GMA Clinton did a number of things, but one thing he did not do was to endorse Obama. He's painting himself more as a man on the fence these days. That's not at all helpful.

Nicely put, cmdicely. It's disgusting enough when Yglesias pulls this garbage, but I've come to expect it from the likes of him and Andrew Sullivan. I once had some respect for Steve Benen, though, but this just destroyed what was left of that.

You got that right. Well put. I kept feeling nauseous about the whole Bill Clinton attitude lately and thought I was over reacting. Glad to see I'm not alone. He doesn't like Obama - I think because Obama got where he was without the Clinton help and didn't ask for the Clinton help. Didn't kiss the ring I guess.

Wasn't Bill Clinton the guy that had so little self control that America got stuck with George Bush as President, TWICE?

No, that was Al Gore, who let his emotional reactions stop him from effectively leveraging his role as one of the most active VPs in history in the most popular outgoing administration in the history of public opinion polling into an election win, instead simultaneously limiting his appeal to the base and distancing himself from a Presidency that was popular outside of the base by choosing a conservative, vehement critic of the administration as his running mate.

(And even then, Gore managed to win the popular vote in states accounting for a majority of the electoral vote, but the same poor choice of running mate undermined Gore's efforts to make sure that all counted.)

It was Gore and George W. Bush's best "Democratic" friend, Joe Lieberman, that handed Bush the Presidency on a silver platter that lost an election that, given how America felt both about the Clinton Administration and the Republican actions against it, should have been an easy win for Democrats.

You got that right. Well put. I kept feeling nauseous about the whole Bill Clinton attitude lately and thought I was over reacting. Glad to see I'm not alone. He doesn't like Obama - I think because Obama got where he was without the Clinton help and didn't ask for the Clinton help. Didn't kiss the ring I guess.

I worked hard for Bill in both elections. I have had a great deal of respect for the Clintons. Even now, he gives very good advice on the economic crisis. Hell, I voted for Hillary in the primaries. However, his actions in the primaries and now his attempted "post-partisanship" has reduced my esteem for him. I don't expect him to drink the cool-aid, but I don't expect him to give aid and comfort to the enemy. Maybe he thinks Obama will win, and maybe he has an eye on the governing challenges, but it is hard to see that from this vantage point.

IMHO, the most significant statement from the Clinton Global Initiative was from Al Gore:

Al Gore, the former vice president and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, is nothing if not passionate on the issue of global warming. But his usual fired-up remarks on the subject took a step into the Gandhian realm on Wednesday when he told an audience at the Clinton Global Initiative meeting in New York that the crisis was so severe and intractable that it was time for direct action.

“If you’re a young person looking at the future of this planet and looking at what is being done right now, and not done, I believe we have reached the stage where it is time for civil disobedience to prevent the construction of new coal plants that do not have carbon capture and sequestration,� he said at the third annual meeting of former President Bill Clinton’s initiative, which arranges partnerships between the very rich and the very needy.

Mr. Gore said the civil disobedience should focus on “stopping the construction of new coal plants,� which he said would add tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere — despite “half a billion dollars’ worth of advertising by the coal and gas industry� claiming otherwise. He added, “Clean coal does not exist.�

I believe Gore is correct about the need for urgent direct action to prevent the construction of any new coal-fired power plants.

And Gore is also correct that so-called "clean coal" does not exist except as a fake, phony advertising campaign by the fossil fuel corporations. And while I obviously support Obama in general, I have been appalled by his pandering on supporting "clean coal". Obama knows better.

Yes, lobbyists are not people. That's the kind of thing I've learned from the progressiver-than-thou leftist-behind fascists who think free speech and intellectual freedom only applies to those to the left of Cesar Chavez.

Lobbyist money = bad, "not people"

Money from those who hire lobbyists = fine and dandy, good Obama supporters

Got it.

Why the hell are we arguing amongst ourselves over this! Everyone needs to step back, take a breath, and focus on the true matter at hand. Divided we fail.

And if Clinton had disinvited McCain...?

He'd be accused of playing partisan games.

CGI calls itself non-partisan. Pres. Clinton is just sticking with that commitment.

One might describe keeping commitments as ... gracious!

I think this complaining is a little over the top. The CGI isn't intended to be a political playing field, and Obama was offered the same opportunity to speak (which I believe he did by video). Clinton may be gracious to a fault - after all, he's very chummy with Bush 41 even after the sewer treatment GHWB gave him in '92 - but to think that he's inviting McCain to speak at CGI in order to torpedo Obama's chances is absurd.

Has any dem nominee done more for Obama than HRC? How many dem heavyweights have done more than WJC? This conspiracy mongering about the Clinton's wanting Obama to lose lacks any evidence and is counter-productive. Cut the crap out. There are far bigger things to talk about.

I think Bill Clinton has some idea how to win elections - is there anyone else in the Democratic party who knows better? And Obama knows that Clinton knows how to win elections. Let the real politicians handle real electoral politics and stop throwing around unsubstantiated accusations of party treason.

Ah, reading this article, I knew it would draw out the predictable response from the PUMA crowd.

Just a thought. Need Clinton's supporters much?

How many times must I tell you, Clinton isn't running for anything, neither of them. They don't have supporters.

The longer you hold on to your membership in a nonexistent group, the more foolish you will sound to those of us who dwell in reality.

Now, I know you're working hard for Barack in Indiana, and I appreciate that, we all do, but your die hard, zealous devotion to the Clintons is too much.

Bill hasn't been doing everything he could for Obama in many of our opinions, and making idle threats about defecting 'Clinton supporters' is no way to make your case that he has.

All your doing is setting up the inevitable degradation of any discussion you're involved in.

So Angus? Does this mean you'll shut the fuck up and leave? Surely you can find a blog suited to your bitterness.

Screw Bill Clinton. Better yet, neuter the bastard.

Bill's inability to keep his dick in his pants is precisely why we're here now.

Cmdicely brings some badly needed reason and perspective to this thread. Sadly, Clinton Derangement Syndrome still afflicts many of the High Church Liberals in the Democratic Party. He won, therefore he couldn't be pure.

The Obama people need to resist the impulse to get everybody to worship their messiah. We're voting for him. Isn't that enough?

Jim, you're absolutely right. So, why do Steve and the other Clinton-bashers continue to rile us up. Every HRC supporter I know (most of who work with me as volunteers at county Dem headquarters), has consistently spoken highly of Obama as a great nominee and now, candidate. We're sick of the Clinton bashing. Period. Any questions?

Stop being sore winners. Is that so hard to understand? Honestly!

Again, show the graciousness and class of OUR candidate and, yes, Bill Clinton in inviting McCain to speak at an event dear to his heart.

All this condemnation of Bill Clinton for not putting personal feelings aside and being fervent in his endorsement of a campaign that smeared him as a racist. His crime: making an oblique reference to the demographics of South Carolina. President Clinton has done everything former opponents were ever required to do-- endorse the candidate. Those who would police every thought, word, and gesture in their tests of party loyalty apply TMZ and Perez Hilton standards to politics. Oh, how gross such and such is!

Where were all the scolds when Obama chose Biden, winner of 9000 electoral votes, rather than Hillary Clinton, winner of 18 million electoral votes? If the Democrats lose this election, it will be a disaster for the nation and the world. Yet Obama did not make the choice that would have united the party and made victory a virtual certainty. No, like Al Gore, he put his personal feelings first. If he loses it will not be because Clinton did not sing his praises enough.

All this condemnation of Bill Clinton for not putting personal feelings aside and being fervent in his endorsement of a campaign that smeared him as a racist. His crime: making an oblique reference to the demographics of South Carolina. President Clinton has done everything former opponents were ever required to do-- endorse the candidate. Those who would police every thought, word, and gesture in their tests of party loyalty apply TMZ and Perez Hilton standards to politics. Oh, how gross such and such is!

Where were all the scolds when Obama chose Biden, winner of 9000 electoral votes, rather than Hillary Clinton, winner of 18 million electoral votes? If the Democrats lose this election, it will be a disaster for the nation and the world. Yet Obama did not make the choice that would have united the party and made victory a virtual certainty. No, like Al Gore, he put his personal feelings first. If he loses it will not be because Clinton did not sing his praises enough.

Rustle,

That's probably one of the better excuses for Clinton's behavior in this particular instance that I have seen, although one would wonder why Clinton would invite McCain in the first place.

Seriously, McCain isn't an expert on any of the policy issues the CGI cares about? I would like an honest answer to what McCain would bring to the table that was so valuable Clinton was able to forgive McCain's many prior transgressions?

Additionally, it doesn't explains Clinton's other behavior which many have found lacking. Hillary has been a much better Democrat lately. Bill would do well to follow her example.

Babba has always been a wanna-be republican (very small r). He forgot what being a Democrat means. Maybe he can join Bush Sr. for another golf match and then just go republican full time.

Steve- I think that all this Clinton hating is ridiculous and juvenile. He was the best president in my lifetime. His initiative is labeled as bi-partisan for Christ sake. He has and continues to campaign for Obama. If you think he doesn’t praise Obama enough or hate McCain enough I think you should start every post with something like: “Obama is a God and McCain loves Bin Laden� to prove your bonafides. WTF?

Ah, reading this article, I knew it would draw out the predictable response from the PUMA crowd.

It might be worth remembering what PUMA stands for: the people attacking Clinton are demonstrating that attitude as much as any die-hard anti-Obama Hillary-ites there might be; conversely, those who are defending Clinton's methods and approach aren't showing it at all.

doubtful,

"die hard devotion" to the Clintons?!? WTF are you talking about. I'm saying that we (just like you) supported our candidate for good reasons and for their good liberal, progressive Democratic credentials.

Your guy won and we're working for Obama now. We always liked him second-best and I defy anyone to find any Obama-bashing threads now or in the past, like this Clinton-bashing one here today.

All we're saying is we feel bad enough that our candidate lost and we've always liked Obama enough to proudly support the nominee our fellow Democrats chose.

Is that "reality-based" enough for you? If not, sorry.

I think the better question about this is how does McCain have time to go pick up a nice bi-partisan photo op when he's so worried about the crisis that he wants to suspend the debate? That's the right way to look at this. I'm no fan of Bill. I think he did more to destroy the New Deal than anyone before or since (but let's just see if we start directly giving tax money to Wall street before we close the book on W). However, the ability to swallow his not inconsiderable pride, in the hopes of furthering the goals of his charity, is a sign of grace.

In 2012 the joke will be: "whats the difference btw hillary clinton and joe liberman ........lipstick"

So Miss Mudd? Does this mean you'll shut the f**k up and leave? Surely you can find a blog suited to your bitterness.

Hey I like it here, twit. You're the one who's whining.

Post-partisanship for me, but not for thee, eh?

President Clinton has done everything former opponents were ever required to do-- endorse the candidate. -Dan

I believe you're conflating President Clinton with Senator Clinton, a problem which plagued her supporters throughout the entire primary campaign, and I believe hurt her chances of being Vice President.

Your guy won... -colonpowow

Dennis Kucinich won! Woohoo! Why didn't anyone tell him?

All we're saying is we feel bad enough that our candidate lost and we've always liked Obama enough to proudly support the nominee our fellow Democrats chose. -colonpowow

I think you are also conflating President Clinton with Senator Clinton.

I can't speak for Steve or anyone else, but I think we would be hard pressed to find fault with Senator Clinton's post convention behavior.

This post and our concerns are directed President Clinton's behavior. The two Clintons are not one and that same, but you and most of the rest of those commenting in defense of Bill's behavior are treating this post and any critical comments as if they were somehow Hillary bashing.

When you keep referencing yourself as a 'Clinton supporter' and talking about your 'candidate' having lost, it makes it really hard to have a rational discussion with you about Bill Clinton's behavior because that's clearly not what you're focused on.

It makes me wonder if you even read Steve's post or just came in reflexively angry and ready to defend Hillary at the cost of your integrity and our sanity. Harboring an illogical anger ready to pounce on any criticism of any Clinton is certainly not healthy.

I don't know any of the Obama supporters here who share that same level of unhealthy devotion to him, and you have only to ask them what they thought about things like FISA to verify that.

I think Bill is simply coming across as childish, and I held him in high regard up until the last couple of years. He knows the stakes in a McCain presidency; he knows that his words and deeds will be watched closely. Under these circumstances all that is being asked of him is to support his party and not undercut the candidate. This means that you say "of course Obama is qualified" when asked; it means that you don't give photo and ad opportunities to the opposition candidate. He doesn't have to be effusive - he just has to be courteous and a team player.

He is coming across, repeatedly, as a spoiled kid - his hurt feelings are more important than the future of the country. Enough.

colonpowwow,

Please forgive me for misspelling your handle in my previous comment. It was not intentional. I apologize.

Whatever angle on the issue one takes, it's interesting to compare Clinton-McCain to McCain-Bush, and to figure out what variation of the Stockholm Syndrome (or the abused-spouse syndrome) is at work here. Giving Clinton full credit for benign intentions, it's still bizarre to have not just forgiven but embraced McCain, in the wake of the personal offenses listed by previous posters (as McCain did after South Carolina). Maybe if we understood the psychology of it better, public figures would be better able to avoid it (and the heated criticism that goes with it).

hillary should divorce him.

then she would get the next nomination.

For all those folks posting and still saying that Obama should have chosen Clinton as VP - how do you know Clinton wanted the position? Also, what about Bill? How would Bill have figured in the GE? What role would he have played? What would have happened and what would have been the strategy if the MSM and repubs had forced us to re-fight every god damn year of Bill's presidency? Do you all believe Bill has been a good boy these past 8 years? What would have stopped the MSM and the repubs from criticizing and smearing everything Bill has done the past 8 years? And, god forbid, what would have happened if there had been a "bimbo eruption?" None of you ever answers these questions when asked. The reality is that if Hilary had been chosen for the top of the Dem ticket or the second slot this election would not have been about Hilary and the repub nominee but would have been about Bill. You know this but refuse to accept it.

Look, they called him "Slick Willy" for a reason. He's an unprincipled, duplicitous sonofabitch obsessed with his own ambition and that of his wife.

Sen. Clinton, on the other hand, has been gracious in defeat, and is working for Obama.

Didn't the Clintons realize her best hope for 2012 was for them to do their best helping Obama and for Obama to lose? Didn't they learn anything from Lieberman's shameful 2000 performance? If Obama loses, the Clintons will get most of the blame, not Obama, at least from the hardcore Democratic faithful. And if Obama wins, the Clintons will likely be frozen out of the Obama Administration. One just has to wonder how much Clinton's instincts have left him.

Apparently when McCain "suspended" his campaign, he didn't stop the checks to the ratf**king blog comment trolls.

doubtful-

No problem on misspelling. I do it myself sometimes when I'm sputtering and trying to type at the same time LOL.

So we agree on Kucinich and not on Clinton bashing as self-defeating support.

Let's just agree to disagree on this then.

PEACE

This week Clinton has praised Sarah Palin and today he's praising McCain's campaign "suspension" that even most of NRO finds to be a cheap political ploy.

Y'know we all want to like Bill because he stood up to Gingrich and the economy did so well during his two terms, but at some point we're going to have to admit that he was a great president -- for the Republicans.

He started the DLC to move the party to the right. Once in power he mismanaged so badly his first two years (Somalia, Waco, Health Care, Don't Ask Don't Tell) that the Democrats lost the House and Senate for the first time in 40 years. He did ride the economic boom to re-election, and he did stand up to Gingrich's government shut downs, and after the Oklahoma bombing did a good job on national security -- but he also signed NAFTA, Welfare "reform", the infamous salvage logging rider, the 1996 All-Republican Media Act, and of course he paved his own downfall by continually approving extensions to Starr's charter.

Furthermore he was part of the Democratic Party Shrinkage strategy, targeting only a few districts for pickups and only running Republican Lite candidates.

While he did have some foreign policy success, notably in Northern Ireland, his bombing of Sudan and Kosovo were unnecessary war crimes. As proof, at the Milosevic war crimes trial it was shown that all the events Milosevic was convicted of occurred after the bombing began -- the one event that he was charged with that allegedly took place before the bombing was shown to have been a hoax. Then of course his frequent bombing of Iraq and the horrible sanctions also qualify as crimes.

So, during his term Clinton oversaw the acclimation of the U.S. public to: bombing whenever and whereever we like; All-Republican Media all the time; a weakened safety net; the death of the independent prosecutor law, which would have been extremely useful under GWB; worsening of the environment; weakening of the nationwide Democratic party apparatus; and a false national sense that bipartisan meant right of center.

Clinton, in other words, laid the table for Rove to grab Florida in 2000 (which Clinton did not raise a finger to stop) and all that followed.

And now he's trying to sabotage Obama so that Hillary has a shot in 2012.

Sorry, if somehow Obama loses this I will be one of many Democrats who will do whatever I can to beat Clinton in 2012. By all means the next Democratic president should be a woman -- just not that one.

"Hillary should divorce him. "

She should have divorced the prick before they ever left Arkansas.

But she still won't win. She's just oh so last millennium.

We lost Congress in 1994 because Congress was out of touch and corrupt, and also because the south was finishing its transition from solid Democrat to solid Republican.

Frankly, Democrats and liberals were getting blamed for everything when, really, the Congress had been dominated by Republicans and Southern Democrats for about 70 years.

All week on every talk show Clinton has been endorsing Obama.

Really? Which PLANET are YOU living on?

This morning on GMA Clinton did a number of things, but one thing he did not do was to endorse Obama. He's painting himself more as a man on the fence these days. That's not at all helpful.

Well the talk shows I've seen: The View & Daily show he basically made the same endoresements of Obama: that he is the right man for the job. Even Jon Stewart joked that maybe Clinton should tattoo Obama on his forehead to make sure people knew where he stood. I didn't see Letterman, but I assume it was the identical endorsement he's been giving - he mirrored talking points almost verbatim. Didn't see GMA, so I can't confirm or deny your statement.

Clinton just has to endorse Obama, which he has. Spoke at the convention and endorsed Obama, which he has. Make national televised appearances and endorse Obama, which he has. He's been playing up the Democratic party his entire career - there is no mistaking where he stands. How much more do you want of him?

He's also been Endorsing his Clinton Global Iniative which is his pet project for a few years now. You can't ask him to stop his project for Obama. He's not running for president, he's fund raising for his priorities. Obama has to win the presidency, not Clinton and I believe Obama can do it on his own merit.

But let's not depict Clinton as some backstabbing turncoat that doesn't endorse, nor publicly endorsed Obama, I already think he's gone above and beyond what is required of him.

Bill Clinton was the first president I ever voted for and I registered to vote just to re-elect him in 1996. I supported Bill throughout the 90's and had high respect for him until this year. So could we please put away the idea that anyone who says negative things about a Clinton is a Clinton-hater? I don't like what he did this year. I don't like what Hillary did either. It's not personal, I just don't like the campaign she ran, which was largely designed to convince people that Obama was dangerous and unelectable. Even now, there are Clinton supporters who believed those attacks and still don't trust Obama, based upon what Hillary told them during the primaries.

So why do her supporters here keep insisting that we have to remain silent about this, to the point that we can't even complain about the former president we once supported? Why are they still trying to blackmail us by threatening to give us John McCain if we don't hold our tongues; as if respect for Hillary is more important than the fate of our nation? This isn't about you or Hillary. This is about the country. Sure, there are Clinton-haters, but most of us just hate what they did this year. And I really resent the idea that I'm being lumped in with the old-school Clinton-haters that I used to defend the Clintons from.

I'm not asking that you have to agree with what we're saying about Bill. I'm just saying that it'd be nice if we weren't personally smeared just because we don't like what Bill did. Again, I was a loyal Clinton supporter and only picked Obama after Dodd dropped out. But now I'm being personally insulted because I'm not giving more respect to the Clintons. I don't see how that's called for at all. If I insult you, you can insult me. But I don't see why we should be insulted because of what we say about Bill.

I love Bill Clinton, I really do, but all I can say is, if anyone ever mocked my daughter not only wouldn't I piss on him if he was on fire, I'd probably throw a little gasoline on just to make sure it was an even burn.

Big Dog mutates into PUMA Puppy. Details at 6 and 11....

I was such a big supporter of Bill Clinton - he has definitely disappointed me during this election. Everytime we see him, he is deceivingly supportive of McCain, e.g., 'we should not "parse" McCain's reason for suspending his campaign. He is taking these steps because he believes that is right for him.' Give me a break -then there is the Palin is a bright woman that gave a spark to McCain's candidacy. Clintin is supposed to be a surrogate for Obama - sounds more like he is a surrogate for McCain

Why don't you just ignore the man? Otherwise you're just feeding his ego that he's in any way relevant.

So you TOTALLY IGNORE that OBAMA got to speak as well?
Here is the link to Obama remarks:

http://thepage.time.com/obama-remarks-to-clinton-global-initiative/

The global initiative is supposed to be "non-partisan". DUH. Separate Agenda. Why should Clinton NOT give equal time to both candidates and be gracious?

I cannot possibly imagine Bush doing any type of post-presidential activity that was not TOTALLY paritsan.

Not everything is about presidential politics. The Clintons are going to bat BIG TIME for Obama in Ohio.

Dry up.

This is a ridiculous and shameful post. Mr. Benen, you need to see a shrink to get over your Clinton hatred. And all you commenters too. And Yglesias.

The CGI is supposed to be a non-partisan initiative to bring people together. The mission statement:

"The Clinton Global Initiative (CGI) is a non-partisan catalyst for action that brings together a community of global leaders from various backgrounds to devise and implement innovative solutions to some of the world’s most pressing challenges."

In light of this, it is no surprise that *both* candidates were invited to speak, and they did. If you feel that McCain was covered more than Obama, take it up with the media, not Bill Clinton.

But somehow this shows that Clinton is actively undermining Obama? I have to question your sanity, Mr. Benen.

Also, commenters, if you're going to criticize him for what Clinton said on ABC, do at least two things: 1) Watch the whole thing, 2) Start by not assuming ulterior motives.

Stop the circular reasoning: "Bill Clinton is a bad guy. Therefore I will explain things he said in a negative way. Which then becomes proof that he's a bad guy".

Please.

Debate this!!

Obama remarks at CGI:

"Disease stands in the way of progress on so many fronts. It can condemn populations to poverty, and prevent a child from getting an education. And yet far too many people still die of preventable illnesses. Today, I’d like to focus on one: malaria.
We have eliminated malaria in the United States, but nearly one million people around the world still die from a mosquito bite every year. 85 percent of the victims are African children under the age of 5. In Africa, a child dies from a mosquito bite every thirty seconds. Beyond the devastating human toll, malaria weighs down public health systems, setting back global capacity to fight other disease.
So today, I want to join with the global malaria community that is meeting here in New York in making a new commitment: when I am President, we will set the goal of ending all deaths from malaria by 2015. It’s time to rid the world of death from a disease that doesn’t have to take lives. The United States must lead, and when I am President we will step up our focus on prevention and treatment around the world to get this done.
The first project of my Small and Medium Enterprise fund will be investing in the developing world’s capacity to meet the demand for 730 million bednets. We’ll also increase access to doctors and nurses through a new program – Health Infrastructure 2020 – that trains medical professionals in countries around the world, and gives them incentives to stay there. And we’ll invest in research and development into new vaccines, and ensure that low cost anti-malaria drugs are available everywhere.
This effort must bring together governments from around the world. It must be a public-private partnership that draws on the resources, and ideas, and resilience of business and non-profits and faith groups. It must be a cause for countless individuals, and a common goal that unites us all."

That's right, jwb2005, Bill Clinton is irrelevant and what he's really looking for is just to have his ego stroked by the progressiver-than-thou wing of the Democrats, because then . . . uh . . . uh . . . exactly, what?

Get over it. The reason we're seeing so much of Bill Clinton these days is that people want and value his insight more that of the Emperor or his wannabe replacements.

Bill Clinton is a sack of shit! Even though he was the best republican president in the last 30 years.

Frank,

Hear, hear!

McCain's Remarks:

"As we have done with the scourge of HIV and AIDS, we should embark on a more concerted effort to fight tuberculosis, which accounts for nearly two million deaths each year. We should work to dramatically raise agricultural productivity in Africa: America helped to spark the Green Revolution in Asia, and they should be at the forefront of an African Green Revolution. We should reform our aid programs, to make sure they are serving the interests of people in need, and not just serving special interests in Washington.

Aid is not the whole answer. We need to promote economic growth and opportunities, especially for women, where they do not currently exist. Too often, trade restrictions -- combined with costly agricultural subsidies for the special interests -- choke off the opportunities for poor farmers and workers abroad to help themselves. That has to change. And by promoting free trade, and ending unfair subsides, I intend to be the agent of change."

The real story is this. Obama has pledge to personally commit to ending malaria. What does McCain commit personally other than lip service? Free trade platitudes. That isn't commitment. There is a story here that exposes differences in the core values of McCain and Obama. Obama truly wants to make the world better. McCain is a politician in pursuit of ideology over action.

Steve,

McCain speaking puts the lie to all his bluster and rhetoric. Imagine what Letterman will do with it tonight realizing that McCain was in New York the entire time. Clinton didn't have to lift a finger.

This is a ridiculous and shameful post. Mr. Benen, you need to see a shrink to get over your Clinton hatred. And all you commenters too. And Yglesias.

Again, I don't understand why the personal attacks against us. We don't like what Bill is doing and said so. But we're not insulting his supporters. Why are you insulting us? What's so hard about a "I disagree with this post because..." comment? Why are we all insane Clinton-haters just because we point out that we don't like something he did?

And I for one think it was a mistake to invite McCain. The man has proven himself to be a discredible jerk and everything he does is presidential politics. Inviting McCain to speak at a non-partisan event is like inviting a convicted pedophile to speak at your daycare (no moral equivalence implied). I see no reason for giving McCain any legitmacy by allowing him to speak at such events. Even the media has realized what a phony McCain is and is denying him photo-ops and a platform to repeat his lies. I see no reason why Clinton shouldn't have done the same. McCain has destroyed his once good reputation. I see no reason why we should help him get it back.

Why don't you just ignore the man? Otherwise you're just feeding his ego that he's in any way relevant.

At first I thought you were talking about colonpowpow. Well, maybe you were.

Harry Truman threatened to kick the living hell out of a MUSIC critic who panned his daughter's recital. McCain publicly slandered Clinton's only child in the crudest of terms, chuckled appreciatively when his wife was referred to as a bitch in his presence, yet the ex-president has continually lauded the mean spirited SOB as a statesman and worthy contender for the POTUS (neither of which he is).

What kind of man acts like that?

Steve wasn't the only one pointing this out:

Bill Clinton: He's really, really glad to see John McCain

But we're not insulting his supporters.

Really, what exactly do you call the upthread PUMA comment and the like?

Being a supporter of Bill Clinton in this thread, and, in the recently passed primary, of first John Edwards and then Barack Obama, and never of Hillary Clinton, I find it downright insulting.

Why NOW?

The downswing of McCain's polling is mere coincidence?

As long as Obama isn't WINNING, the Clinton's back him full bore. When he retakes the lead... time for a little boost for John McNugget.

What would Occam have to say?