About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Herbert claimed Clinton said "Obama's effort" was a "fairy tale," but did not report Clinton's denial

January 12, 2008 5:09 pm ET

Trouble viewing clip? Download: QT | WMV

SUMMARY: New York Times columnist Bob Herbert, referring to January 7 comments by former President Bill Clinton, wrote, "So there was the former president chastising the press for the way it was covering the Obama campaign and saying of Mr. Obama's effort: 'The whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen.' " But Herbert did not report that Clinton denied on Al Sharpton's radio show that he had said that. Nor did Herbert report that Clinton said Obama's "campaign" is "clearly not a fairy tale; it's real."

22 Comments

In his January 12 New York Times column, columnist Bob Herbert, referring to January 7 comments by former President Bill Clinton, wrote, "So there was the former president chastising the press for the way it was covering the Obama campaign and saying of Mr. Obama's effort: 'The whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen.' " But Herbert did not report that Clinton denied that he had said Obama's campaign was a "fairy tale" on the January 11 broadcast of Syndication One's The Al Sharpton Show. In a clip aired on the January 11 edition of MSNBC's Hardball, Rev. Al Sharpton asked Clinton, "You had said that Senator Obama's campaign was a fairy tale. How -- how do you respond to that?" Clinton responded: "First of all, it's not true. I have given hundreds of speeches on Hillary's behalf in this campaign. I don't believe I've given a single one where I did not applaud Senator Obama and his candidacy. It's not a fairy tale." Additionally, ABC News reported that Clinton said on The Al Sharpton Show that Obama's "campaign" is "clearly not a fairy tale": "Now that doesn't have anything to do with my respect for him as a candidate or as a political figure in this campaign. He has put together a great campaign. It's clearly not a fairy tale; it's real."

On the January 11 edition of Hardball, Salon.com editor-in-chief Joan Walsh commented on Clinton's original comments and his explanation of those comments on the Al Sharpton Show. Walsh said: "I don't think it was a wise remark, but specifically the context of what he was saying was that the -- the notion that Obama had always been steadfastly opposed to the war was the 'fairy tale.' Not that his candidacy was a fairy tale. And that's pretty clear in the longer clip of the Sharpton interview."

From Herbert's January 12 New York Times column:

I was not one of those who thought, during those frantic, giddy, sleepless few days leading up to the New Hampshire primary, that Mr. Obama was on his way to a blowout win.

When I mentioned my skepticism to reporters at an Obama rally in Derry on Sunday, everyone insisted he was romping to victory. "Double digits," said one reporter.

This certainty was based on poll results and the size and enthusiasm of the Obama crowds. But poll results have been unreliable for decades when it comes to black candidates and white voters. And I wrote in a column that ran on election day that whenever Senator Obama would ask how many people in his overflow crowds were still undecided, about a third would raise their hands.

I was not predicting an Obama defeat. I just had a strong sense that the news media, feeding on itself, had lost sight of reality and that the election was bound to be close.

I could also sense how hard the Clinton camp was working to undermine Senator Obama's main theme, that a campaign based on hope and healing could unify, rather than further polarize, the country.

So there was the former president chastising the press for the way it was covering the Obama campaign and saying of Mr. Obama's effort: "The whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen."

And there was Mrs. Clinton telling the country we don't need "false hopes," and taking cheap shots at, of all people, the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.

From the January 7 campaign event with Bill Clinton, as transcribed by Congressional Quarterly:

QUESTION: Thanks. One of the things that Senator Obama talks about a lot is judgment and I'm curious to hear your thoughts on the recent criticism of Mark Penn, who is Hillary's chief strategist, who's been criticized for being somewhat out of touch with reality.

For instance, he circulated a memo about Iowa, saying "Where's the balance," [sic: bounce] and then the next day, there was a 12-point jump for Obama.

CLINTON: He was wrong. He was wrong about that, because the balance [sic] always occurs on the second day, not the first day. It always occurs on the second day, not the first day.

But since you raised the judgment issue, let's go over this again. That is the central argument for his campaign. "It doesn't matter that I started running for president less than a year after I got to the Senate from the Illinois state senate. I am a great speaker and a charismatic figure and I am the only one that had the judgment to oppose this floor [sic] from the beginning, always, always, always."

First, it is factually not true that everybody that supported that resolution supported Bush attacking Iraq before the U.N. inspectors withdrew. Chuck Hagel [NE] was one of the co-authors of that resolution, the only Republican Senator that always opposed the war, every day, from the get-go.

He authored the resolution to say that Bush could go to war only if they didn't cooperate with the inspectors and he was assured personally by [then-national security adviser] Condi Rice, as many of the other Senators were. So, first, the case is wrong that way.

Second, it is wrong that Senator Obama got to go through 15 debates trumpeting his superior judgment and how he had been against the war in every year, enumerating the years and never got asked one time, not once, "Well, how could you say that when you said in 2004 you didn't know how you would have voted on the resolution? You said in 2004 there was no difference between you and George Bush on the war and you took that speech you're now running on off your Web site in 2004 and there's no difference in your voting record and Hillary's ever since."

Give me a break.

[applause]

This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen. So you can talk about Mark Penn all you want. What did you think about the Obama thing, calling Hillary the "Senator from Punjab?" Did you like that? Or what about the Obama handout that was covered up, the press never reported on, implying that I was a crook, scouring me, scathing criticism over my financial reports.

[Former independent counsel] Ken Starr spent $70 million and indicted innocent people to find out that I wouldn't take a nickel to see the cow jump over the moon. So you can take a shot at Mark Penn if you want, it wasn't his best day. He was hurt, he felt badly we didn't do better in Iowa.

But, you know, the idea that one of these campaigns is positive and other is negative, when I know the reverse is true and I have seen it and I have been blistered by it for months, is a little tough to take. Just because of the sanitizing coverage that's in the media doesn't mean the facts aren't out there.

[applause]

Otherwise, I do not have any strong feelings about that subject.

[laughter]

Go ahead. I've got to take a question back here and then I -- go ahead.

From the January 11 ABC News article:

The former president explained to [Al Sharpton Show host Rev. Al] Sharpton that his comment was not a swipe at Obama reaching for the White House but rather a reference to the fawning press treatment Obama has received. In particular, Clinton is incensed that the press has not focused on Obama's 2004 acknowledgement to the New York Times that when he spoke out against the prospect of war he was "not privy to Senate intelligence reports."

"We went through 15 debates," Clinton told Sharpton, "and the Obama campaign made the argument that his relative lack of service in the Senate was not relevant because he has better judgment than all the Democrats because he'd always been against the Iraq war in every year."

"I pointed out," Clinton continued, "that he had never been asked about his statements in 2004 that he didn't know how he would have voted on the war resolution, and there was, at that time, no difference between his position and President Bush's."

"Look," Clinton continued, "there could be a perfectly good explanation for it. Maybe, he just meant, that once it was done, everybody wanted it to work, including the UN. But the point is, it disproves the arguments that he was always against it, and everybody else was wrong and he was right. So I said, 'that's what those debates were for, and how many of you knew those two facts, in the audience?' And I said, 'So that story is a fairy tale.' Now that doesn't have anything to do with my respect for him as a candidate or as a political figure in this campaign. He has put together a great campaign. It's clearly not a fairy tale; it's real. And I have gone out of my way not [to] express any personal disrespect for him or his campaign, even when they've been fairly critical of me and Hillary."

From the January 11 edition of MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews:

MATTHEWS: Let's look at a little squall -- skirmish that started just at the end of the week. Here's former President Clinton -- Bill Clinton calling into the Reverend Al Sharpton's radio show today, Friday, attempting to clarify his comment about the Barack Obama campaign being a "fairy tale."

[begin audio]

SHARPTON: You had said that Senator Obama's campaign was a fairy tale. How -- how do you respond to that?

CLINTON: First of all, it's not true. I have given hundreds of speeches in Hillary's behalf in this campaign. I don't believe I've given a single one where I did not applaud Senator Obama and his candidacy. It's not a fairy tale. He might win.

[end audio clip]

MATTHEWS: Well, I don't know what we make of this. The definition of "is" comes to the surface again. Bill Clinton saying he didn't call it a "fairy tale." Everybody on planet Earth heard him call it that.

CHUCK TODD (NBC News political director): Yeah -- no -- look, they have some problems in the African American community [inaudible].

MATTHEWS: The Clintons do.

TODD: I've gotten a bunch of calls -- I've gotten a bunch of calls today, and it's shocking, of all -- I mean, the Clintons have been --

MATTHEWS: What was the remark that hurt the community, at least the way we're reading it right now?

TODD: It's the "fairy tale" remark that's really hurting. And Sharpton, he put out a press release to say, "I'm having former President Clinton on, and I'm going to ask him about the 'fairy tale' comment." You had [Democratic strategist] Donna Brazile, unaffiliated in this right now, completely unaffiliated, so a very much sort of this - this --

MATTHEWS: A big DNC figure, obviously.

TODD: Exactly. This is where it's having reverb, inside that DNC world. And so it's sort of in Washington, sort of the insider African-American leadership class, very upset about this. [Rep.] Jim Clyburn [D-SC] comes out in The New York Times and basically issues a warning shot: not only may I endorse Obama, but I'm going to do it and take a shot at the Clintons at the same time. It's --

WALSH: But I --

TODD: It's something that makes -- it just gives them an extra political headache.

WALSH: We need to be fair, though, to President Clinton here. I don't think it was a wise remark, but specifically the context of what he was saying was that the -- the notion that Obama had always been steadfastly opposed to the war was the "fairy tale." Not that his candidacy was a fairy tale. And that's pretty clear in the longer clip of the Sharpton interview.

So it still probably wasn't a wise thing to say. We don't want to hear "fairy tale" about Obama, but it was about his war stance, not -- not his candidacy. So let's get that right.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by mary59 (January 12, 2008 5:38 pm ET)
         

      It's hard enough to sift all the claims that the candidates and their supporting players are saying without distorting what they have said. 

      Anyone with a microphone or a print voice has the responsibility to get the story right before expressing an opinion.  This so called journalism is sloppy and irresponsible.  The people who professionally lie for a living are a step below that.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by johnny_nyc8351 (January 12, 2008 8:11 pm ET)
           
        Current Vegas odds are 6/5 that Tim Russert uses this lie in a question to HRC during tomorrow's hour long interview.

        Timmy asks decent questions sometimes but doesn't listen and that's disaster for a professional interviewer.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by johnny_nyc8351 (January 12, 2008 8:13 pm ET)
             
          He'll probably even quote Herbert's column.

          This isn't the far right media folks this is the supposed middle of the road or liberal journalists.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by tex (January 13, 2008 12:06 pm ET)
               
            REALITY CHECK QUIZ:

            When President Clinton used the phrase, "a fairy tale", was he referring to:

            A. Obama's "efforts" as a candidate.

            B. Martin Luther King's "dream".

            C. The notion that Obama's record on the Iraq War is consistent.

            ANSWER:

            A. Is intended to be construed as a PERSONAL attack with racial overtones. FALSE.

            B. Is an overtly RACIAL "interpretation" (meaning, a total distortion of what was actually said), meant to portray Clinton as dissing a beloved black leader. FALSE.

            C. Is a factual examination of candidate Obama's record on the Iraq War over time. No personal and NO RACIAL component involved. TRUE.

            It is nothing short of INSANE that our "Mainstream Media" on national shows is putting forward the FALSE and INFLAMMATORY lies seen in A and B. Usually posed as a question to a guest, in the form of "some people are saying" nonsense, the MSM is putting these smears front and center, blatant misrepresentations which are easily dispelled if they just run the clip.

            Once again, examples of MISINFORMATION that is doing the bidding of the rightwing smearmongers. Disgusting.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by bruce1ace (January 13, 2008 1:32 pm ET)
                 
              This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen. - former President Clinton.

              If you take an objective look at that comment, you would have to acknowledge that former President Clinton is exaggerating quite a bit in order to score political points for his wife.

              I bet if you put your mind to it, you could come up with "fairy tales" that are quite a bit bigger than Obama's voting record on the war.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by juliajayne (January 13, 2008 8:46 pm ET)
                   
                Actually, I have great respect for people like Russ Feingold who have not only spoken up with vehement opposition to the war, but based their votes to match their rhetoric. Obama can not say the same. If Obama wasn't pounding that issue, there wouldn't be any room to go after him. He has voted much like Hillary.
                Report Abuse
        • Author by johnny_nyc8351 (January 13, 2008 10:05 am ET)
             
          Man, I should have checked out the odds of this being the very first question Russert asked HRC.

          Right off the bat Russert read from Herbert's column and played the truncated video which made Bill Clinton seem to be saying something he wasn't saying. 12 minutes, 20% of the interview, was spent on Russert running this script.

          This is the state of our press in 2008.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by juliajayne (January 12, 2008 5:44 pm ET)
         
      I'm glad Joan Walsh was there to straighten this out. These so called "journalists" can not get anything right. I am surprised and upset about Bob Herbert buying into this without all the facts. He's is usually a very good guy, not here though.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by Clevenative (January 12, 2008 6:39 pm ET)
           
        The big question here Juilajayne, is why did Joan Walsh have to straighten this out?

        Chris Matthew starts the whole intro into the Sharpton blip my saying “… Bill Clinton calling into the Reverend Al Sharpton's radio show today, Friday, attempting to clarify his comment about the Barack Obama campaign being a fairy tale."

        Matthews knew this was lie, - that Clinton never said Obama’s campaign was a fairy tale - and no one can tell me otherwise. I mean, to say that the Almighty Grand Wizard of political knowledge in America was not aware of the actual context of Clinton’s original remarks would be preposterous!

        I swear we should lighten up our slander laws here in The United States, because these wingnut pundits know they can say whatever they please and most of the viewers will never hear otherwise. It’s disgusting.

        I've quit watching his show – and all of MSNBC, just like I promised in my email to MSNBC the other day.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by juliajayne (January 12, 2008 7:56 pm ET)
             
          Yes, you are correct about Matthews. Expert liar and "smear merchant" to use a BillOism. He sets up the frame in a disingenuous way and then people have to bat it down if they're able to get a word in edge wise, but only if they're not playing along with the dishonesty.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by atheist (January 12, 2008 9:29 pm ET)
             
          I swear we should lighten up our slander laws here in The United States

          I AGREE !!
          Report Abuse
    • Author by atheist (January 12, 2008 6:00 pm ET)
         

      I have no trouble determining from Clinton's comments that the "fairy tale" is the discrepancy between Obama's campaign claims about his position on the Iraq war and the actual historical record AND the media's softball approach toward Obama.  How these people can take the fairytale remark as regarding Obama's entire campaign, I have no idea !

      Oh wait, yes I do.  It's Hillary Haters Incorporated. 

      Report Abuse
      • Author by Clevenative (January 12, 2008 6:43 pm ET)
           
        I sense the wingnuts feathers must be getting ruffled lately?
        Report Abuse
      • Author by atheist (January 12, 2008 7:18 pm ET)
           
        You don't need the apostrophe, corpulant.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by mary59 (January 13, 2008 10:09 am ET)
             
          misplaced apostrophes really bug me too. But then, much of what copious b.s. posts are errors, lies and omissions, so what's new?
          Report Abuse
    • Author by 1st Republic 14th Star (January 12, 2008 9:44 pm ET)
         
      Bill Clinton was CLEARLY referring to Obama's claim that he's always been against the Iraq war as being a "fairy tale." Even after he further explained and clarified, Herbert lied about it.  Clinton referred to the 2004 Obama speech that said his Iraq position was the same as Bush's, which Obama has now removed from his web site.  In short, Bill Clinton's context was unmistakable.   Herbert couldn't have gotten that wrong by accident -- to say something this obviously false took extra effort on his part.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by LarryE (January 13, 2008 1:29 pm ET)
           
        Herbert couldn't have gotten that wrong by accident

        Of course he could. Do you really Herbert is any less prone to the lazy acceptance of conventional wisdom than the rest of even the supposedly liberal part of the punditry?

        Put another way, do I think Herbert could have just taken what he heard from another Villager and run with it, without checking to see if it was the full context? Damn straight I can.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by itsbenj1158 (January 13, 2008 12:00 pm ET)
         

      Well, Clinton does deserve to be taken to task for being deliberately misleading about Obama's record on the Iraq war, which has in fact opposed, from the beginning and in the buildup.  Obama spoke out against the war and gave specific reasons why which have pretty much all played out as he described.  Obama stated publicly in late 2002 before the invasion began that he would have voted 'Nay' on the exact authorization passed by the Senate which gave Bush the power to invade and occupy without the necessary revisiting of the matter with Congress.

       

      Clinton says the quotes are from a "speech" by Obama, but it was an interview, I believe, which is also misleading.  Someone giving a speech retracting earlier statements (which is what Clinton implies) is different than answering interview questions.  Besides, it was right at the time of the '04 convention, and Obama was trying not to say anything which would implicitly attack the Dem. presidential ticket.

       

      As far as Obama voting the same as Clinton, there are simple reasons for that which Bill Clinton certainly knows as well.  Before the '06 elections, there were no bills which tied funding to timelines for withdrawal to vote in favor of.  Part of the reason Obama said he opposed war was because of the enormous cost, which would absolutely have to be paid, of an occupation for a sustained amount of time.  He was opposed to the war, and he is also opposed to troops being left without proper funding.  After the Dems gained a majority, both he and Hillary Clinton started voting in favor of bills which tied funding to a timeline, because they now existed, whereas they did not before.  Once the war is on, your options are kind of limited on matters this grave and important.  Which was, of course, Obama's point in the first place.

       

      Herbert was using Clinton's quote in a more overall sense to sum up a lot of Dems' frustration with watching a former president sully himself by attacking one of the most beloved new Dems to come along in a long time with misleading statements and half-truths.  Even shamelessly stating that he himself had "opposed the war from the beginning", which is itself clearly the real 'fairy tale'.  Herbert should have been more specific, yes, but in terms of his assessment, I think he has a point the Clintons would do well not to ignore.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by dangrady (January 13, 2008 1:01 pm ET)
         

      SAVE DEMOCRACY, VOTE FOR A DEMOCRAT!!

      Much of the support the Clinton's get today is as a result of the distortions people like Todd/Matthews make about them. It's one thing for the wingnuts like Limbaugh/O'Reilley/Hannitty/Savage, ect.... make wild distortions to support their views, it's another when network political correspondents resort to it. It gives credibility to the incredible, it allows distortion to replace truth, it dissolves the free press into the corporate propagandists on the public airways whether it begins on cable or not.

      We did better than this, we were the example to world of what a free presses looked like, instead we are becoming just another cliche of a press falling in line with a Fascist transformation. The Chilean model of a corporate takeover of governance, all we need now is the disappearances, the economic break down, and a state of emergency, and the process is complete.

      I know, paranoia will distroya, yet do you think the fear mongering since 9/11 is my paranoia, or theirs?

      Happy Thoughts;

      Dan Grady

      Report Abuse
    • Author by mary59 (January 13, 2008 6:27 pm ET)
         
      "The forceps of our minds are clumsy things and crush the truth a little in the course of taking hold of it.  -H.G. Wells
      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.

Most Popular Tags

Feed IconRSS Feeds

Get personalized rss or email alerts

Connect & Share

Facebook Twitter Digg YouTube MySpace