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

















And yet, Rush, Bill-O, etc... always whine about their quotes being taken out of context. (By MMFA, no less!) What a joke.
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.
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
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)
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
Correction: Noted - my "AlGore" auto-text feature sometimes really gets in the way of an outstanding post.
My error.
(C) 2007 - Justice Truth (tm)
More delusion by you. It is just typical stupidity typical in a stupid post
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. ;)
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)
TrustUs, you arent taking any. Even a six year old would laugh at your tripe
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.
Oh, let the little boy have his fun. He makes me laugh. :)
pete:
I'm having my attorneys look into this matter.
yeah, i've heard of them. dewey, cheatem and howe.
Fact check.
When you push crap into the meat grinder and turn the handle, crap comes out.
"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.
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.)
there's no need to wait. hare are several of the swift boaters who contradicted not only official records, but themselves at different times. if you are going to accuse someone of making things up, you better first be sure you're not doing it yourself.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/nation/president/2004-08-08-kerry-vets_x.htm
Only the peanuts are smaller.
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.
"...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.
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.
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:
I've read several of your posts and I think you are on the level.
I think you could be wrong about this, though
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.
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!
Why is Bill Clinton talking about Republican ads? Because he can think ahead to 2008.
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.
Good point. To be on the safe side, I'm not voting for any of 'em.
If you want to do what is safest for America dont vote at all.
I agree with the above comments-This is an excellent article. LKA and Media Matters a big "thank you"!!
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.
Jesus Christ these guys live in the past.