About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Wash. Post again misreports Bill Clinton's Swift Boat comments

November 30, 2007 12:24 pm ET

SUMMARY: A Washington Post article reported that "[a]fter the Democratic debate in Philadelphia last month," former President Bill Clinton "insinuated that his wife's Democratic rivals were mounting attacks on her akin to the 'Swift boat' campaign Republicans launched against Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) during the 2004 race." In fact, Clinton did not accuse Democrats of swift-boating his wife; rather, he condemned Republican attacks on Democrats and the role the media play in contributing to such attacks. The article was at least the third in which the Post has reported on Clinton's comments without accurately reporting his statements.

33 Comments

After two previous Washington Post articles falsely reported that former President Bill Clinton had criticized Democratic presidential candidates for engaging in "swift-boat"-style attacks on Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) during an October 30 debate, a November 29 article by Post staff writers Glenn Kessler and Anne E. Kornblut again failed to accurately report President Clinton's statements, which he made during a November 5 speech. In the article, Kessler and Kornblut wrote:

After the Democratic debate in Philadelphia last month, the former president insinuated that his wife's Democratic rivals were mounting attacks on her akin to the "Swift boat" campaign Republicans launched against Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) during the 2004 race -- an explosive charge that prompted some of Hillary Clinton's rivals to lash out more aggressively than ever.

As Media Matters for America has noted, President Clinton did not criticize Democratic presidential candidates for swift-boating his wife. In his November 5 speech, he warned against allowing elections to be decided by "trivial matters," and then discussed "snide comments" and "dishonest claims" about former Vice President Al Gore, as well as ads attacking former Sen. Max Cleland (D-GA) and the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth campaign that targeted Kerry. Later, President Clinton criticized the format of co-moderator Tim Russert's debate question about New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer's (D) proposal to allow illegal immigrants to obtain driver's licenses, saying it would "let the Republicans run an ad saying, 'All the Democrats are against the rule of law.' " At no point in the speech did Clinton accuse Democrats of swift-boating his wife; rather, he condemned Republican attacks on Democrats and the role the media play in contributing to such attacks.

In a November 8 report, Washington Post staff writer Dan Balz advanced the false claim that "the former president compared the attacks on his wife by Democratic opponents Obama, former senator John Edwards (N.C.) and Sen. Chris Dodd (Conn.) to the television commercials aired against Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) in the 2004 presidential race and to GOP ads targeting then-Sen. Max Cleland (D-Ga.) in 2002."

Similarly, in a November 14 article, staff writer Michael D. Shear wrote, "With less than two months until voting begins, the Democratic front-runner [Hillary Clinton] has become a target for rivals in her own party as well, prompting her husband, the former president, to accuse them of 'Swift boat'-style piling-on during the latest debate."

From Clinton's speech:

PRESIDENT CLINTON: [T]he point I'm here to make to you is whoever you're for, this is a really big election. We saw what happened the last seven years when we made decisions in elections based on trivial matters. When we listened to people make snide comments about whether Vice President Gore was too stiff. When they made dishonest claims about the things that he said that he'd done in his life. When that scandalous Swift boat ad was run against Senator Kerry.

When there was an ad that defeated Max Cleland in Georgia -- a man that left half his body in Vietnam. And a guy that had several deferments ran an ad with Max Cleland's picture with Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, because he dared to vote against the president's version of the Homeland Security bill.

[...]

PRESIDENT CLINTON: Why am I saying this?

Because, I had the feeling, at the end of that last debate, we were about to get into cutesy land again. "Ya'll raise your hand if you're for illegal immigrants getting driver's licenses." So, we'll then let the Republicans run an ad saying, "All the Democrats are against the rule of law."

I don't -- look, I think it's fine to discuss immigration. We should. Illegal immigration needs to be discussed, and it's fine for Hillary and all these other guys to be asked about Governor Spitzer's plan -- but not in 30 seconds, yes, no, raise your hand. This is a complicated issue. This is a complicated issue.

So, do I hope you'll vote for my wife? You bet I do. It'd be good for America and good for the world. But, more than that, I came here to tell you today: Don't you dare let them take this election away from you. This belongs to you and to your children -- and to the future of America.

Don't be diverted. Don't be divided. Our best days are still ahead, claim them. Thank you.

As Media Matters has noted, several other media outlets have made false claims about what Clinton said. By contrast, a November 7 New York Times article reported: "Jay Carson, a spokesman for Mrs. Clinton's campaign, said Mr. Clinton had not been referring to Democratic candidates' criticisms of his wife but to Republicans' criticism of her debate performance."

From the November 29 Washington Post article:

Although Bill Clinton is still viewed as a political asset, particularly in the hotly contested Democratic primaries, he has also repeatedly made remarks that have put him out of step with his wife's message and irritated Clinton campaign aides who have been forced to address them.

After the Democratic debate in Philadelphia last month, the former president insinuated that his wife's Democratic rivals were mounting attacks on her akin to the "Swift boat" campaign Republicans launched against Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) during the 2004 race -- an explosive charge that prompted some of Hillary Clinton's rivals to lash out more aggressively than ever.

The following week, Clinton strayed off-message again, continuing to reinforce the theme that other candidates were piling on his wife after her strategists had decided to drop the issue. In a speech on Nov. 12, Clinton complained about the "boys" in the campaign "getting tough" on his wife. It was then that Clinton campaign aides began quietly distancing themselves from the former president, saying his comments were not part of their coordinated effort.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by NiceguyEddie (November 30, 2007 12:37 pm ET)
         

      And yet, Rush, Bill-O, etc... always whine about their quotes being taken out of context.  (By MMFA, no less!) What a joke.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (November 30, 2007 1:03 pm ET)
           

        How about a little "program" for every "journalist" in the mainstream conservative media? Before writing/reporting on one of these issues, they need to go to MMFA or another site that monitors the media. There. they can read transcripts, watch clips, and see what actually happened.

        They could then be given a short quiz on the facts.Until they pass that quiz, they are not allowed to report.

        Of course, I'm only dreaming that the media isn't run by those who depend on these facts being repeatedly funked up.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by caucasion jesus (November 30, 2007 1:22 pm ET)
         

      not enough real news to report, so let's make up some news or spin in a completely false way.

       

      anybody who saw that speech knew perfectly well Clinton was talking about the right-wing noise machine

       

      especially given the "don't let them take this election away from you" comment

       

      here's some news: Bill Clinton isn't running for president 

      Report Abuse
    • Author by justicetruthus8276 (November 30, 2007 1:55 pm ET)
         

      Justice and Truth(tm) in the USA - Fact Check(R):

      Several corrections are needed in this misleading "topic" -

      First, the Swiftboat Vets for Truth were truly brave and courageous Vietnam veterans who told the truth as they knew it.  Although this is under some dispute, AlGore (a few years too late, obviously) has finally 'manned-up' and took the challenge from Pickens to prove that there were any lies in the Swift ads -  let's all wait and see what happens before we make anymore slanderous lies up about those brave guys!

      Second - the obvious attempts by Bill and Hill to bully the liberal MSM is well documented - here  and here

      Finally, when it comes to Bill, let's face it - the guy is just a liar as documented here here and here

      I have to call this one clearly against MMFA and Clinton -  And honestly, whenever you truth Bill C. you're obviously on slipper ice.

      (C) 2007 - Justice and Truth(tm)

       

      Report Abuse
      • Author by solon (November 30, 2007 2:01 pm ET)
           

        More BS from the nonsense king liesandpropagandatroll

        First you must mean Kerry but couldnt resist that stupid Algore thing dumb as it is. Kerry has nothing to prove the official record and majority of eye witnesses show Kerry deserved his medals and is a war hero in comparison to the terrified of going to Vietnam, checked the box NOT to go, use influence to get into the guard to skip out on a war he APPROVED of, deriliction of duty, stripped of flying status coward George W Gump

        I call this one for you clearly being an idiot

        Report Abuse
        • Author by justicetruthus8276 (November 30, 2007 2:33 pm ET)
             

          Correction:  Noted -  my "AlGore" auto-text feature sometimes really gets in the way of an outstanding post.

          My error.

           

           

          (C) 2007 - Justice Truth (tm)

          Report Abuse
          • Author by solon (November 30, 2007 3:13 pm ET)
               

            More delusion by you. It is just typical stupidity typical in a stupid post

            Report Abuse
          • Author by NiceguyEddie (November 30, 2007 3:22 pm ET)
               

            Wow.  You must magic or something.  I don't know how else you can fit so much bull$#!+ into such a small space.

            And what's with the "(C) 2007" now?  Do honestly think ANYONE is going to copy something you wrote and NOT attibute it to you?  Usually people plagurize to appear MORE inteligent than they are, not less.  I think your "outstanding posts" are safe from theft.  ;)

             

            Report Abuse
            • Author by justicetruthus8276 (November 30, 2007 3:45 pm ET)
                 

              Usually people plagurize to appear MORE inteligent than they are, not less.  I think your "outstanding posts" are safe from theft.

              It's best not to take any chances.

               

              (c) 2007 - Justice and Truth(tm)

              Report Abuse
              • Author by solon (November 30, 2007 4:40 pm ET)
                   

                TrustUs, you arent taking any. Even a six year old would laugh at your tripe

                Report Abuse
              • Author by pete592 (December 01, 2007 3:05 am ET)
                   

                Injustice and Falsehoods in Right Wing Wacky World - Reality Check:

                The phrase "Justice and Truth" is not trademarked by anyone.

                The usage of parentheses "(c)" is not a legally recognized method of declaring copyright. 

                 

                Report Abuse
          • Author by snoopy (November 30, 2007 3:23 pm ET)
               

            Fact check.

            When you push crap into the meat grinder and turn the handle, crap comes out.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by foghornleghorn (November 30, 2007 4:52 pm ET)
                 

              "the Swiftboat Vets for Truth were truly brave and courageous Vietnam veterans who told the truth as they knew it."

              They were paid to lie, and most have since recanted.

               

              Report Abuse
              • Author by justicetruthus8276 (December 01, 2007 11:44 am ET)
                   

                Fog:

                 

                If what you are saying is true, then Kerry shouldn't have any problem in meeting the challenge from Pickens.  

                I want to wait and see.

                 

                (And by the way, no one forced Kerry into accepting this challenge - so it's all up to him to prove that the ads were lies.)

                Report Abuse
            • Author by pete592 (December 01, 2007 3:06 am ET)
                 

              Only the peanuts are smaller.

              Report Abuse
      • Author by worrierking (November 30, 2007 2:05 pm ET)
           

        Fact Check this.

        I know that Al Gore "manned up" and served in Vietnam but I don't remember him taking any "challenge".

        Could it be you've got your facts wrong once again?

        Didn't you mean John Kerry who also "manned up" and served.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by HuntingtonBeachLefty (November 30, 2007 2:30 pm ET)
           

        "...whenever you truth Bill C. you're obviously on slipper ice."

        Can't argue with that. I'd add that anytime you justice Sunny D., you're on loafer wind.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by pete592 (November 30, 2007 2:41 pm ET)
           

        Injustice and Falsehoods in Right Wing Wacky World - Reality Check:

        It was John Kerry who accepted Pickens' challenge, not Al Gore.

        It was Pickens who moved the goal posts and altered his 'challenge' after Kerry accepted it.

        It was Kerry who called Pickens out for moving the goal posts. 

        Report Abuse
    • Author by jeter2 (November 30, 2007 1:55 pm ET)
         

      PRESIDENT CLINTON: Why am I saying this?

      Because, I had the feeling, at the end of that last debate, we were about to get into cutesy land again. "Ya'll raise your hand if you're for illegal immigrants getting driver's licenses." So, we'll then let the Republicans run an ad saying, "All the Democrats are against the rule of law."

       

      at the end of that last debate

      Mmmm...the last debate-->where it was Democratic candidates not Republicans that had the audacity to demand a straight answer from Hills.

      So why is Bill bringing up Republicans? Good question...

      Bill is firing at the Right, but don't kid yourself.

      His [veiled] message was for everyone, Left or Right...Don't mess with my wife. Even if she deserves it.

      Yeah I'm real excited about getting the Bill & Hill show back in the White House ::eye roll:

      Report Abuse
      • Author by caucasion jesus (November 30, 2007 1:59 pm ET)
           

        I've read several of your posts and I think you are on the level.

         I think you could be wrong about this, though

        Report Abuse
        • Author by jeter2 (November 30, 2007 2:23 pm ET)
             

          I'll admit this is just my interpretation of Bill Speak. But I think I'm on the right track. It could also be his pre-emptive strike for the general election... BUT I think he's a very savvy politician [retired or not] and he's getting a message out.

          The fact that he made these remarks after Democrats had challenged Hillary leads me to believe it was meant for everyone.

          Report Abuse
      • Author by LarryE (November 30, 2007 2:13 pm ET)
           

        why is Bill bringing up Republicans

        Oh for pity sake. In that quote he was going after the media, specifically the way Russert handled the debate.

        His [veiled] message was for everyone

        Oh no! Bill Clinton supports and defends his wife! Oh, the horror!

         

        Report Abuse
      • Author by Eric Jaffa (November 30, 2007 2:19 pm ET)
           

        Why is Bill Clinton talking about Republican ads?  Because he can think ahead to 2008.

         

        Report Abuse
    • Author by nerzog (November 30, 2007 2:33 pm ET)
         

      I think it may be possible that he intended the message to be heard by everyone, but the actual words of his speech make it clear that his targets are the Media and the GOP Professional Liars.

      I don't really buy the Clinton "Hillbilly Mafia" stuff, but I guess anything is possible. However, if you subscribe to the theory that the Clintons have had people threatened and even killed, then you have to admit the possibility that Cheney and Bush were behind 9/11. Both theories have equal degrees of credibility.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by ehs2559 (November 30, 2007 4:36 pm ET)
         

       I agree with the above comments-This is an excellent article. LKA and Media Matters a big "thank you"!!

      Report Abuse
    • Author by doraosh9303 (November 30, 2007 5:30 pm ET)
         

       I first heard this tale on MSNBC and suspect that they  (Matthews, Tucker, Scarborough) decided to spin Clinton's comments this way in order to avoid having to discuss his legitimate implied criticism of Tim Russert's idiotic questions. As usual, others in the MSM then jumped on the story without  bothering to read what Clinton actually said.  What I found most distressing was that this falsehood was repeated on NPR's "Here and Now". I emailed the show to complain, but as far as I know, they never corrected their mistake.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by eddy3957 reregistered (November 30, 2007 10:22 pm ET)
         

      Jesus Christ these guys live in the past.  

      Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.