Wednesday, November 19, 2008

Am I wrong . . .

or does the press absolutely hate Bill Clinton. Here's a snip-it of some of his scandalous dealings over the last few years that might mean his wife shouldn't be Sec. of State:
Other reports have cited donations from officials in Saudi Arabia, Morocco, the United Arab Emirates and Kuwait -- each one a contact for Bill Clinton and a potential conflict for the Obama White House.
Wasn't the last president a wholly owned subsidiary of Saudi Arabia? Am I being silly? I haven't come to an opinion about Hillary as SoS, but I think the stuff about Clinton is old school empty Clinton bashing.

4 comments:

Matt Dick said...

People have been after him for a while to disclose his library's list of donors. I think they're mad at him for not doing that.

I think it's a real, but minor issue.

shadowfax said...

You are not wrong. The Clinton Rules of Journalism are still entirely in effect. It's certainly the biggest down side of having Hillary in the administration.

JimII said...

Matt, I think you're right it is a real but minor issue. However, I think the play it gets demonstrates what Liam and I are talking about with the Clinton Rules of Journalism.

Matt Dick said...

Yeah, certainly he's a target. He is 99.95% responsible for how the media treats him, though. If you screw a woman 30 years your junior while being, you know, the president, and then sell nights in the White House to Chinese nationals, then pardon everyone who ever knew anyone you've ever known, and then hide everyone's name who is donating to your semi-public library, and then be the husband of a presidential candidate, it's just what's going to happen.

His every move is treated like a story, but he's worked like a mad man getting himself to this point.