Vanity Fair finds no "proof" of Clinton affairs -- but spreads rumors anyway
SUMMARY: After acknowledging that there is no "proof of post-presidential sexual indiscretions" by former President Bill Clinton, Vanity Fair's Todd S. Purdum repeatedly used anonymous sources to suggest that "tabloid speculation and Internet intimations" about supposed "indiscretions" are true.
Five paragraphs into a nearly 10,000-word article about former President Bill Clinton, Vanity Fair writer Todd S. Purdum stipulated that there is no "proof of post-presidential sexual indiscretions on Clinton's part" -- but that did not stop Purdum from devoting a sizable portion of the article to relaying what he himself described as "a steady stream of tabloid speculation and Internet intimations that the Big Dog might be up to his old tricks."
In parroting the "tabloid speculation and Internet intimations" that by his own admission exist entirely without proof, Purdum repeatedly used anonymous sources to suggest there is truth to the rumors. But not one of Purdum's sources, named or otherwise, actually professes to have even secondhand knowledge of "indiscretions on Clinton's part."
Purdum quoted, among others, "one former aide to Clinton," "[a]nother former aide," a "longtime Clinton-watcher," "one senior aide," "one former longtime aide," a "former Clinton aide," "one of [Maggie] Williams's former colleagues and friends," and "one former aide." In all, the article featured quotes or paraphrases of nearly two dozen anonymous sources. Yet even these anonymous sources professed no knowledge of "indiscretions" by Clinton.
Elsewhere, Purdum did not bother to attribute even to anonymous sources his assertions that Clinton associates have concerns about his rumored indiscretions. "Over the last few years," Purdum wrote, "aides have winced at repeated tabloid reports about Clinton's episodic friendship and occasional dinners out with Belinda Stronach, a twice-divorced billionaire auto-parts heiress and member of the Canadian Parliament 20 years his junior." How did Purdum know "aides have winced"? Purdum did not tell the reader. Nor, for that matter, did Purdum tell the reader that the "dinner[] out with Stronach" that garnered attention from tabloids (and The New York Times) was a dinner attended by about a dozen people -- far from the intimate dinners for two Purdum implied.
Purdum's fact-free exploration of rumors about Clinton's supposed "indiscretions" concluded with an alleged "intervention" planned by a former Clinton staffer -- an episode Vanity Fair hyped in the headline of a press release touting the article. But the "intervention" allegation is perhaps the most thinly sourced anecdote in the entire article. Purdum wrote:
[F]our former Clinton aides told me that, about 18 months ago, one of the president's former assistants, who still advises him on political matters, had heard so many complaints about such reports from Clinton supporters around the country that he felt compelled to try to conduct what one of these aides called an "intervention," because, the aide believed, "Clinton was apparently seeing a lot of women on the road." The would-be intercessor was rebuffed by people around Clinton before ever getting an audience with the former president, and another aide told me that the effort was not well received by either Bill or Hillary Clinton and that some Hillarylanders, in particular, were in denial about the continuing political risks that Bill's behavior might pose.
So: Unnamed former Clinton aides told Purdum that an unnamed former assistant wanted to stage an "intervention" because -- according to the other aides -- the aide "believed" that Clinton was "apparently seeing" women on the road.
That's it. That's the explosive revelation Vanity Fair is touting in a press release. Unnamed aides saying that another unnamed aide believed -- based not on firsthand knowledge, but on "complaints" from "Clinton supporters" about "tabloid reports" -- that Clinton was "apparently seeing" (not "sleeping with," just "seeing") women.
Purdum's article came to a fitting conclusion, making a point about Clinton by citing the book Primary Colors, a fictional account of the fictional presidential campaign of a fictional Southern governor, whose anonymous author publicly lied about whether he had written the book.
You're angry a lot. ;-)
sorry, I couldn't resist.
HA!
Who the hell isn't right now.
I love the term "some Hillarylanders..."
That's real objective.
Vanity Fair scribe Todd Purdum attributed the rumored romance to "high-end Hollywood dinner-party gossip" in his story "The Comeback Id."
Still, Gershon, 45, wants the world to know that she has only been in the same room with Clinton on three occasions, and the meetings always took place in the presence of at least a dozen chaperones.
"Rumor mongering was substituted for fact-checking," Gershon's lawyer Lynda Goldman of Lavely & Singer wrote in a letter obtained by the celebrity web site TMZ.com.
"It is apparent that Vanity Fair was intent upon publishing unsubstantiated rumors, and that it avoided learning the true facts so that the truth would not get in the way.
"Such conduct is reckless and malicious, giving rise to substantial liability for defamation," Goldman wrote.
Gershon is demanding a retraction and a "sincere apology."
I totally out-WITHed you, Tommy! Get on the trolley, Bub.
"Proof? We don't need no stinkin' PROOF! We're rightwing smear merchants!"
What this illustrates is what passes for "sourcing" for the so-called "legitimate Media" ... i.e. those who profess to have credibility in reporting the NEWS. The rightwing echo-machine OFTEN kicks off with "tabloid speculation and Internet intimations", and next thing you know, the New York Times and Washington Post are running front page stories. WITH THAT SOURCING. And ... with no "PROOF".
The cable news has become almost 100% speculations by talking heads with obvious rightwing bias. There IS no "news", and they NEED no news. They have their agenda, and a podium, and by God, they'll engage in their framing and narrative-building using rightwing talking points as their premises.
It has nothing to do with news reporting, and everything to do with PROPAGANDA.
The problem Tex is Vanity Fair isn't anywhere near "right wing". In fact I'd say they slant way left of center to fringe left. The articles author is Dee Dee Myers (former clinton press sec) husband, so I doubt he is "right wing" either. I guess you need to clean out the lefts closets before you clean the rights?
I think you should delve into clinton's associations with the likes of Jeffery Epstein, Vinod Gupta, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum, Saudi donors to his library and massage parlor, Ron Burkle and Steve Bing. Pretty motley crew.
The public divorce with the clinton's is in full swing. Should have happened ten years ago.
"Gosh, picking apart a Vanity Fair article, crack conservative misinformation uncoverers really have the pedal to the metal."
I'd be apt to agree with you if the story were being confined to Vanity Fair and the bowels of the right-wing slime machine where crap journalism like this belongs, but the infection is spreading:CNN
ABC
Fox
The Washington Post
LA Times
Huffington
Be sure to forward the WITH decree to these sources as well.
The Clintons are at the heart of why it went beyond the right-wing slime machine. They chose to respond.
As far as MMFA going after the rest of the media over this, I would expect them to, since they did two years ago over another anonymously sourced article about the Clintons. (MMFA was kind enough to link this on their front page, BTW.)
Well, I think they have to respond, don't they?
You know the media is going to be all over it one way or the other.
And, given the history- and the Right wing Hillary Hate- it isn't going to go away.
MSNBC will take anything Clinton and work it till its thread bare.
"I was not aware the Huffington Post was part of the right wing slime machine..."
- TOMMY / Monday June 2, 2008 4:49:19 PM EDT
Tommy, Pete was commenting on how the "infection" was spreading outside of the right-wing slime machine to venues like the Huffington Post.
"CNN, ABC, Fox, The Washington Post, LA Times, Huffington...
Tommy, Pete was commenting on how the "infection" was spreading outside of the right-wing slime machine to venues like the Huffington Post."
You mean fox is being infected with right wing slime, now? I thought you all claimed they start the slime. Why would he include a 'slime starter' in a list of 'slime infected'? Unless he was saying fox is not one of the right wing slime venues?
It's pretty obvious he is saying that huffington is one of the right wing slime venues. It's also pretty obvious he only parrots what he is told by liberal pundits, otherwise he would know the difference between fox and huffington.
No, they are part of the anti clinton slime machine.
Don't forget Arianna once was on the far right and has really had a hate on for them for years.
I, too, was not aware the The Huffington Post was right-leaning. However, Arianna does not do well one-on-one with aggressive interviewers. She tends to fold up under the hot lights. A segment with John Stossell was very lame.
Did I somehow include Huffington as part of the right-wing slime machine?
Or did I say that it spread beyond the right-wing slime machine to the sources that I lised?
I believe it was the latter.
Pete,
HuffPo is a Pro-Obama site.
HuffPo takes every opportunity to find something to knock the Clintons over or make them look sleazy.
They would have picked up this story even if the MSM didn't.
YEP.
Wonder what MSNBC will be doing with this tonight?
An hour with Matthews on how will this affect Hillary and Bill's campaigning for Obama. a Special Comment by Keith further smearing him?
Gregory's show aT LEAST ONE SEGMENT, OR TWO WITH MORE OF THE WELL, SHE JUST CAN'T BE VP... AND HAVE BILL RUNNING AROUND THE WH.
ITS PRETTY SCARY WHEN YOU FIND YOURSELF THINKING PAT BUCHANAN IS THE ONLY ONE MAKING SENSE HALF THE TIME!
LOL
Oh Hell,
Sorry about the cap lock.
Bad typist and lousey keyboard.
yeah, that's the ticket.
Well, see y'all, the cousin and gardener of a former Clinton aide twice removed said that Bill was too happy. And when he gits his happy face (as opposed to his "purple" face) then that means he's gittin him some lady love.
Then y'all there's the boyfriend of the sister of a former Clinton advisor thrice removed who said, "gee willkers, I done seen it with my own two eyes. Bill Clinton had dinner with at least 2 women at once" (now the dinner party included 10 guest). But that means he was involved in a 3 way.
Hey, you just "know" this stuff.
Yawn...
Anonymous sources make for lousy stories.
While given Bill's past exploits it's not outlandish to think the hound is out of his cage... but unless there's something concrete [names] this isn't much more than just more of those Bill being Bill gossipy tabloid tales.
;-)
I'd much rather hear about the sexcapades of our former president that hear another story about how our present chair moistener in the oval office disregards the constitution or sows the seeds of a third war.
Well J, at least VF didn't label Bill a "savage", because you know that would imply he is bloodthirsty and cruel, and we would just be ignorant and ethnocentric.
:)
Double yawn.
I think I saw Tommy, Jeter and Gov in a 3 way. And it was savage :-0)
Now now Tommy, don't get the Dem/Lib here all hot & bothered. You know they act just like savages when they get angry ;-)
Angry, man I'm just excited about all the sexy talk. I'm going off my nut (Jeterism). ;-)
Hey, is your sense of humor in the laundry?
Cooking chicken on the grill tonight :-)
I guess I just don't find Bill Cheats On Hillary Stories all that interesting anymore.
We need new stuff. Like Barack cheating on Michelle? :-O
Hey, give him my address once you find out he's gone all Bill Clinton on us. I have a sister in Arkansas too.
Julia, you dirty girl ;-)
Back when Bill was elected my wife's best friend [a respectable first grade teacher] used to tell us she wanted to go to D.C. to do Bill. Oh & she wanted my wife to go & act as a look-out for Hillary. My wife said to her "how come you get to have all the fun?" Then smiled at me & said "just kidding"
Mmmm I wonder :-O
So, you are saying size DOES matter?
Brain size, yes. That's a turn on for us Lefty ladies. ;-)
Ya know, EC, if you clean up the punctuation & spelling, maybe start a new paragraph once in a while, it makes a comment much more readable.
Also, it makes it not so obvious that it's taking 100% of your mental powers to work a French phrase into your pretentious post.
Also, it makes it not so obvious that it's taking 100% of your mental powers to work a French phrase into your pretentious post.
And the French phrase he should have used was "Je ne sais rien."
"Ya know, EC, if you clean up the punctuation & spelling, maybe start a new paragraph once in a while, it makes a comment much more readable."---Col. Sanders
I don't know this particular individual, but I see this level of sloppiness as a passive-aggressive show of disdain for one's audience.
Here you go ECM,
juliajayne: you poor, confused,female. if the size of a man's brain truly does turn you on, how could you possibly be salivating over pea-brained obama?
I’m not sure what you’re referring to by “pea brained”. If it’s the size of his cranium, I don’t think there is a correlation of brain size to IQ. If there were, very big people who also have proportionately larger skulls would tend to be smarter than very small people’s proportionately smaller skulls. Also females (who tend to have smaller craniums) would also tend to be less intelligent than males---also not the case. If you mean just that he’s just dumb, I’d say passing the bar exam makes that unlikely.
must i perform the role of the child who enlightened the emperor's subjects that their emperor had no clothes.surely you intellectually superior libs must realize that you are about to nominate a boob who is intellectually nude.
In this election year people are looking for a change and if he isn’t as up on everything like a long time Washington insider such as Senator McCain (who doesn’t look so good even in that department) it may not even hurt him.
i know the media has decided to give him a pass on his numerous gaffes,
I guess the Right-wing radio shows blaring non stop around the country on the many hundreds of stations don’t count as media in your book.
but i can't believe the looney left is actually oblivious of the fact the man is an idiot.
Now that’s just dumb on your part, insulting the people you’re presumably trying to persuade. Also it’s obvious to any fair minded person that he far from an idiot---again your persuasion skills need work.
the boob can't complete a sentence without including a few uhhs,ahhs, and you knows. unless he's on script and reading from a monitor.however ,
That is something I personally think he should work on, but surely you’ve known of people who’ve had slight idiosyncrasies in their speech patterns who weren’t either smarter or dumber because of them.
…permit me to return to point of the article.are we dimwitted trogs…
I don’t see the Right as dimwitted per se, but intellectually impaired by all the misinformation and disinformation they have been exposed to over the years.
…to accept the premise that vanity fair is a conservative publication and that purdum is a member of the "vast rightwing conspiracy"?surely that must be mmfa's premise ,since,as i understand mmfa's raison d'etre, is to monitor, analyze ,and correct conservative misinformation.the author of this article ,purdum, is married to dee dee meyers,yes, that dee dee, former clinton press sec. seems to me the democrat party is in the process of dumping the clintons.there are no republican fingerprints on this hatchet job.
One doesn’t have to be of the Right to put forward and promote a Right wing talking point.
we trogs are enjoying this display of cannibllization you dems are providing, and i have a suspicion that this suicidal performance is far from over. i can't close without saying that the bill clinton portrayed in this article should not come as a surprise to anyone whose brain is not room temperature. the man disgraced the office he held and the people's house, so it should not be surprising that he continue his sleazy behavior.
No, the Republicans disgraced themselves in their attempt to disgrace him.
"...but don't bother to respond to........ah,the hell with it..." EC
Is this where you realized that, in that long, droning pseudo-intellectual pile of crap, you hadn't said anything ?
What you're all ignoring is very important.
THIS ARTICLE was NOT a right-wing hit piece. There is NO evidence to believe some right-wing conspiracy was behind this Vanity Fair article. Therefore to label it as CONSERVATIVE mis-information is incorrect. MMFA's mission statement clearly states they are a progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.
Just because this article is unflattering to Bill Clinton does not qualify it as Conservative mis-information. If anything, this article is an example of Progressive media bias against Bill & Hillary brought on by the division within the Democratic Party.
The PRO- Obama/Progressive/Liberal media has been bashing Hillary & Bill for months. This article was a final crushing blow.
Jeter, my sweet. In the "About Us" section of MMFA is this:
Launched in May 2004, Media Matters for America put in place, for the first time, the means to systematically monitor a cross section of print, broadcast, cable, radio, and Internet media outlets for conservative misinformation — news or commentary that is not accurate, reliable, or credible and that forwards the conservative agenda — every day, in real time.
So ask yourself if it does further a conservative agenda? Some people would say definately. Others - maybe Obama supporters - might say it furthers their agenda (I mean if they admitted it).
I, like you, have seen both conservative and progressive media attack HRC, some for good reason, most for bad reason (IMO). I think the timing of this article is telling though, trying to remind people of Bill Clinton's sexual peccadillos. I say the timing smells since many want HRC to scram. But if that is indeed the case, it could be both Obama supporters and conservatives. None of them want the Clintons around - or so it seems in many instances.
I think some of the Obama supporters may be a bit short sighted if this is indeed what their intention is and I'm not saying it is. I don't know, it's just speculative on my part. But as far as MMFA goes and as far as you and I know, it is still furthering a conservative agenda as well.
My sweet Julia,
In this specific instance I think the only agenda this article furthers is an Obama one. Were Hillary the frontrunner then a case for a Conservative agenda would be more plausible. The Clintons are yesterdays news for the GOP. They have little reason to push an anti-Clinton gossip piece. On the other hand, the Obama camp & their media cheerleaders do. And the timing does smell of the Obama Democrats hoping to hammer the final nail in the Clinton coffin.
Are some Cons personally enjoying what appears to be the final downfall of Bill & Hillary? Probably. But politically this hit piece is a moot point for them.
I believe it's up to Hillary & Barack to pull the party back together by their remarks & actions in the next few days/weeks. If they can't, I still believe it will be a close general election...with McCain heading to the Oval Office.
Curiously your last statement may have proved my point (to use a sorry and tired Tommyism). If all this serves to put McCain in the WH, then all the media operatives have done their job. If the Clintons beleive this is the work of Obama supporters they may not want to reconcile.
Anyway, you have kept your "Masshole with cajones the size of Texass" status in place. Now don't get mad, I've just been waiting to call you that for a while. :-0)
And I hope you weren't up all night thinking about this. I noticed you posted mighty early this morning :-) What??? I kid ;-)
Great points Jeter. The long love affair with the clintons looks like it is finally over. Like the abused spouse that continually gets beat, but comes back home time after time, it looks like the left has finally dialed the spousal abuse hotline and having the offending party carted off.
I especially like how little tidbits of info are dripping out about donors to the clinton library and massage parlor, in particular the donors from the Saudi Royal Family. Posters on MMfA have tarred and feathered the Bush's over connections to the Saudi's ad nauseam.
I get the feeling we'll see this type of article more and more now until the clintons's get back in line. Things the clinton's didn't want the public to find out and the left gave them cover on in the past.
The long love affair with the clintons looks like it is finally over. Like the abused spouse that continually gets beat, but comes back home time after time, it looks like the left has finally dialed the spousal abuse hotline and having the offending party carted off.
Hog, excellent analogy.
It has been an extraordinary story to observe: Democrats turning on the Clintons after fighting tooth & nail for their honor, & attempting to cover-up or spin their faults throughout the 90's.
I get the feeling we'll see this type of article more and more now until the clintons's get back in line. Things the clinton's didn't want the public to find out and the left gave them cover on in the past.
The Clintons have been dumped unceremoniously by their former loyal troops. All the dirty laundry that had been hidden away in a guarded closet will likely find that door unguarded now & who knows what may come tumbling out.
Wow. Amazing.
God, what an idiot. Anyone who can convince a chick to let him stick a cigar up her kitty kat to flavor the tip is a hero in reich wing land. Oh, I forgot. Yer hero's have wide stances, bend over pages and like underage girls and boys. No wonder you hate Bill, he's a proven heterosexual. The reickwinger dream.
Here's a kleenex, clean the dribble off of your lip.
I know women who still say "yum"
I have a very good friend who is 60, gorgeous, a married woman,to a younger gorgeous man... and a Reverend.She'd "do him." I think that's why she campaigned for Hillary!
LOL
Julia my love,
What the heck are you & Snoop going on about?
I haven't "spoken" to Gov in at least a week [he's on my IGNORE list] I've sworn off all posters with mental problems...
Me thinks Snoop has gone to that dark side of his again. Sausages & meatballs. Snoop are you talking in "code"? You dirty dog ;-)
Think Jeter. This is a sexy thread. Italian, sausage, meatballs. Sheesh. Must we spell it out for ya, you chicken? :-0)
(and don't get me started on the clam sauce).
I guess I just don't find Bill Cheats On Hillary Stories all that interesting anymore.
Even when there's no proof anything of the sort ever happened?
I guess I just don't find deliberate ignorance from the usual wingnuts all that interesting (or rare) anymore.
Vanity Fair is the glossy version of the National Enquirer. I guess Media Matters has been so successful at driving conservative misinformation from the MSM that now they have the time to go after the tabloids. Great Job MMFA. I'm curious J.F. - it this something you were assigned to or something you picked up doing some bathroom reading?
Here's your next piece though. I noticed a supermarket rag last night with the headline "Space Aliens Promise Gore". The photo showed a city in total destruction but I didn't look long enough to see if it was about war, politics, or global warming. It was pretty funny though.
Dem,
A few weeks ago I mentioned here that my wife had read either The Star or Inquirer while at the hairdressers & there was a story about Michelle Obama demanding Barack to come clean on his affairs past & present. Of course all sources were anonymous [what a surprise]
I wonder why MMFA didn't pick up on that story? ;-)
Did that story get any traction in the MSM, like this one is? (See my reply to Tommy above).
Pehaps even if Obama knew about that article, he played it smart (unlike the Clintons) and simply ignored it.Pete,
I think any story that appears in Vanity Fair about any politician would automatically get more traction with the MSM than one that comes from the tabloids [though of course the Gennifer Flowers story began with The Star if I remember correctly.]
And I was only being a tad facetious about the Obama story, didn't you see my ;-)
And yes, if Obama knew about the article he was smart to ignore it. Of course the MSM didn't pursue it, so he was also lucky.
The article and Bill's reaction to it is getting the attention of the MSM. See my reply to Tommy above.
Yes, they are married (Wikipedia).
Snarky comments are easy,not to mention boring and predictable from all of the conservative lovers of our decrepit media. Vanity Fair 's circulation is 1.1 million a month, not huge, but not insignificant.
I'm glad somebody got that humor. I should have linked to the cover for visual aide.
Why Col, you were just patting yourself on the back for being the first to WITH us all here, now you're calling those comments snarky, predictable and boring?
Are you flip-flopping?
But I see a shift of emphasis.
It's becoming very popular among the righties since that trend setting Grampa wrapped up the Republican nod.
Maybe I wasn't clear. I'm not really familiar with Vanity Fair, but I wasn't aware that it was a primary source for news to many people. I would figure it's a secondary source for the sort of Sex-obsessed, trivial distractions that are increasingly taking over the major media outlets.
My point was that MMFA didn't need to go to this article to find baseless allegations from conservative hacks. The WITH was sort of tongue in cheek, VF is reaching another 1.1 mil a month, some of whom may not get to catch Professional pervert Dick Morris and his nightly creep-a-thons.
"Primary source for news to many people"? How did you reach that conclusion? Because of their circulation?
Well, just because Judge Judy draws 8 million viewers, I wouldn't say people that watch that do so for their primary source of criminal justice news in this country?
I wasn't aware that it was a primary source for news to many people.
OK, you read that as my conclusion that VF is a primary source for news.I was saying, if it is, it's news to me.
Meaning I would not consider it a major source for news.
Things have changed so much that now even Drudge is in the tank for Obama, as explained by Politico magazine today, which cites strong evidence to explain the inexplicable phenomenon.
link:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/10744.html
Seeker Of Truth,
Almost the entire media is in the tank for Obama. Folks are all caught up in Obamamania....
I hope I catch Obama Fever...I'm really starting to feel kinda left out of hoopla :-/
Folks are all caught up in Obamamania....
So when the fawn and faint at his feet are they having Obasims?
Yeah, Limboob is even in the tank for Obama...
The Miami New Journal is reporting that Ole' Fathead has an Obama sign in the front yard of his $70 million mansion!
I've had this theory since coultergeist and rush were touting that they would go for Hillary instead of McCain that it was a ploy not to get the right riled up as mush as to get Hillary Haters incensed.
How many people have you seen using it against her on the blogs saying they wanted to run against her. The more I saw it the more I became convinced that there was an orchestration to get Hillary out.
Now that its likely she is going to concede by the end of the week they will be trying to keep them Bill and Hill, from campaigning because, as should be obvious by now they are a force. Mistakes?
Sure. But for sheer tenacity, doggedness and willingness you can't beat her.
Has anybody here actually read the article? The reporter, (DeeDee Myer's husband,) only points out that Clinton's behavior and associations since his Presidency is, even if you are a Clinton supporter, very questionable.
The behavior by Clinton, without any accusation of illicit sex but with opportunities and relationships, is enough to make his supporters wonder what is going on. Definitely not ex-presidential.
One of my sources has informed me that Another American...
Could be Another Moron. I'm not saying for sure, I'm just saying that's what my sources are sayjing.
Clinton's behavior and associations since his Presidency is...very questionable. (AA)
For example?
AA
What are the examples of his behavior that has been questionable?
Sue,
Read the article.
Not only did I read the entire article I printed it out to show anyone who may have missed it. How would YOU react if I wrote an article about YOU in a national magazine saying you were a pedophile? I have no proof, no witnesses, no film or tapes or any other offerings other than my "gut" feeling. Sure would be "entertaining", don't ya think?
Don,
I would not be surprised if you wrote that article. :-)
All kidding aside, the article did not bring up any new allegations. It also made sure to say that nobody had accused Bill of any indescretions. It did source anonymously the fact that Bill puts himself in situations where he can be questioned. The VF article looked at his associations with millionaire/billionaires, both men and women, his personal assistant, his money making schemes, and his angry outbursts. The article also said some good things about Bill.
I would classify it as interesting and even without those anonymous sources, the article and it's critical look at Bill, stands on its own.
"Aliens Taught My Cat To Type!"
"Two Women Give Birth To Same Child!"
"New-Born Gorilla Brad Pitt Look-a-like!"
Todd Purdum's ever-so-smart article is just typical of Vanity Fair (think about the name of this mag). Did anybody ever WANT to imagine ANY Republican HAVING sex? Yeeeuee! The vast majority of the public had no criticism of Bill's sexapades. Our European friends thought it ridiculous to even discuss such things. Bill's big mistake was seeking service from an air-head who was taped by her "friend", Linda
Tripp, whose only experience blowing anything was a whistle.
"Aliens Taught My Cat To Type!"
Wait a minute - not only is this true but he posts here as well. Here Funnymanpants, heeeere Funnymanpants.
What has this Purdum written in the past?
He sounds like your garden variety dirtball trying to make some money.
Republicans having sex? The horror, the horror.
Actually I think they are probably much more freaky and deviant than liberals. They just like to project their lurid, guilty thoughts on to someone and it's those "danged, sex crazed liberals".
Oh JJ, weren't you the one who fantasized about a Tommy/Jeter/Gov three way earlier in this thread? If that isn't deviant to you, well.....
;)
Poster fantasies eh - as if sixty-something posts to this lame thread wasn't enough of an indicator of how bored we are today. Here's wishing for some better quality misinformation tomorrow.
Well, suffice to say I look like I'm married to Angelina, have an odd square yellow face, wear a stovepipe hat, and have a cute moustache.......dream on Sister....
:)
"Man Cuts Off Own Head Then Drives Himself To Hospital".
LMAO.
You guys are hilarious.
I need to browse comments here more often. Even the snark is fun.
Wish the anonymous author had stayed anonymous.
Wish Purdumb had done the same.
Right wing hit job?
Maybe to try to sideline Hillary and keep her off the campaign trail for Obama.
The've gone after her before through him.
I've come to the belief that they never forgave her for being on the Watergate Impeachment committee and supposedly digging up the precedent that made Nixon resign.
The symmetry of going through with impeaching Clinton to wreak revenge on her just strikes me as something Cheney and the neocon crowd that came from the Nixon WH would do.
They went after Plame to get Joe Wilson. There was a symmetry there as well. He disputes the WMD lie and she works with WMD intelligence.
Something about that is what started me thinking about them during the Clinton years... it was mind boggling the insane hate and irrational obsession was bizarre, the frenzy that the NC drummed up against them was close to a mass psychosis!
I could never figure out why.
No Silver Spoon?
No connections?
No Skull and Bones?
What was it?
That's my conclusion.
Yipes.
They really are Such Pigs.
check this out,
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/c/clinton-watergate.htm
Same link but opens in new window,
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/c/clinton-watergate.htm
Don't want to sound dumb, but what is a WITH decree?
Where have I been?
Don't want to sound dumb, but what is a WITH decree?
"Why is this here"
Where have I been?
From your previous post - I'm guessing....Bellview?
that would be Belle-view to you my dear.
And here I thought my tinfoil hat was hiding my Belle-view connections.
I'm so dissapointed.
Your usually far funnier. the linda tripp comment was hilarious, but I'm easily amused.
keep it coming big boy.
PS Dem
You didn't answer the question there baby cakes.
Don't tell me- this is a private party and outsiders aren't welcome.
OOPS,
never mind , thanks. YES YOU DID
That sounds suspiciously like a slogan.
Diana, don't mind Dems Sol. He and Tommy and other cons here are part of a conservative tradition of asking WITH (why is this here) to derail threads and express their comtempt for a site they can't seem to live without :-)
WITH also stands for "WHY is Tommy Here". When asked he gives oblique answers like "for the gravy". But you must feel sorry for them because now that conservatism is dead, they have to have some outlet for their scorn. :-0)
Now don't get your boxers in a bunch, guys. Don't go "off your nut".
I have read Vanity Fair every month for the last 2 years. The reason I read it is because of the excoriating articles and editorials about Bush Co. contained in the issues. Trust me Graydon Carter can't stand Bush and I'm sure he will catch flack for this article from lots of readers.
That being said some of the articles I have read in VF have enlightened me a lot on some issues I had never even heard of or knew very little about. IMHO VF is one of the most liberal magazines I've read in a long time. While I have not yet gotten or read this month's issue of VF I'm sure I will read it from cover to cover like all the other issues I've gotten so far.
Some of their best articles have dealt with the massacre at Hadaniyah (which led to the 60 Minutes story), a lengthy article about the "vulcans" (Rummy, Perle, Wolfowitz et.al.) and an article about Judy (oops I forgot she prefers being called Judith) Guiliani that tore the face off her and her constantly marrying "up".
While I'm tired of all the gossip about the Clinton's ad nauseum for the last almost 20 yrs. I sure won't cancel my subscription over this unlike I did with Time magazine when they did their puff piece on old adam's apple Annie.
I agree, and keep her andBill from campaigning for Obama.
They are nuts if they think they can knock her out or ruin her. Haven't they learned that yet?
She does not fold for anyone.
I like that story about her coming home crying because a neighbor boy was picking on her and her mother wouldn't let her in, saying we don't have cowards living in this house.
So she went back out and beat him up.
LOL
I disagree with the mother's methods but it makes me see how Hillary stands up to it all.
ROFLMAO!
This has been a great thread but this one takes the cake.
Love it.
I think you should go to HuffPo and use it.
Bill Clinton is hanging with womanizing multimillionaires.
Yawn Yawn Yawn!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Frankly I have never been concerned what any of these people have done in their private lives unless they have
preached one thing and done another.
Bill Clinton is perennially late that means he is egotistical
and uncaring. Blah Blah Blah!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
In the large scheme of things -I don't care what leaders and
elected officials do in their personal lives-I don't want to have a beer with any of them or have a cup of coffee. I want them to do the job they were elected to do. Boooooring!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sometimes they have no idea what they're talking about as, for example, in their lurid, nonsensical, racist caricature of Africa a year ago, overseen by that witless, feckless nerd Bono (not Sonny),
I suspect the latest rumors about Bill's tawdry behavior are true. Can't wait to buy the issue.