Skip to comments.The man behind the book "The Truth About Hillary"
Posted on 06/21/2005 5:43:55 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
June 21, 2005 | "I'm not being used by anybody," said Edward Klein, author of the book "The Truth About Hillary: What She Knew, When She Knew It, and How Far She'll Go to Become President," published today by Sentinel, a conservative imprint of publishing behemoth Penguin Group. Klein was responding to a question about whether the right wing was using his past work at supposedly liberal institutions like the New York Times and Newsweek to lend authority to his book's assertions about Hillary Clinton, which many are calling shoddily reported and nastily personal.
"I worked for the organizations that I worked for and people can make of that whatever they want," Klein continued evenly. "But it's absurd to suggest that anybody has put me up to this." He went on, with a touch of amusement, "It's that people are confused. They don't know what to make of me. Because what is somebody with my background and reputation doing writing a book like this? Why aren't I writing a book supporting Hillary?"
OK, we'll bite: What is a guy with Klein's background and reputation doing writing a book like this? "The Truth About Hillary" boasts a passel of petty, sexist and plain old "no duh" claims against Hillary: "She shows no wifely instincts," "She isn't maternal," "She's a feminist, but she rode to power on her husband's coattails," "She has abetted decades of chronic infidelity," "Many of her closest friends and aides were lesbians." It claims to shed light on the way that "the culture of lesbianism at Wellesley College shaped Hillary's politics" and that "she set up an elaborate system to monitor her husband's girlfriends." The book opens with a scene in which former White House intern Monica Lewinsky fondles Bill Clinton's penis at Radio City Music Hall.
(Excerpt) Read more at salon.com ...
Nah. Rape is "nastily personal."
Surrendering to a peach ad (absolut vodka) from the tale end of the posted excerpt.....
A little strange for this early in the morning.
Toward the end of the article.
***..........Like "The Kennedy Curse," "The Truth About Hillary" relies heavily on anonymous sourcing, and has already drawn criticism for it. This drives Klein crazy. "Why don't people feel that way about Bob Woodward's books in which he doesn't even have any footnotes?" he asked. "I'm not knocking Woodward, but why did Ben Bradlee go with Woodward and Bernstein? Yes, I rely on anonymous sources and I'll tell you why. You cannot write about Hillary Rodham Clinton unless you're willing to let people [speak anonymously]. They're afraid the Clintons will wreak their vengeance on them and they have good reason to believe this." ................***
I think that's the exposer she doesn't want.
The left screams "Lies! Klein sold out to the VRWC!"
The right says, "No, no. Here's some more memos (also retyped on plain paper?) that contradict the first memo. Let's talk about this."
Which gets through to the typical apolitical American?
Thanks to citizens (talk radio and the Internet) at least the reaction to the leftists' Gitmo lies is the proper one.
The article is bookended with criticism but they can't carry it throughout the entire article. They want to destroy him but they can't. He's like Horowitz, in that he knows them.
The most interesting and revealing quote from the piece at Salon.
Interesting, because nowhere does she present the facts or make the argument that he backstabbed anyone at the New York Times. In fact she presents him as a pretty darn good journalist and her only sticking criticism seems to be that he done it for money -- not a bad motive, so long as one uses good journalism and avoids slander.
So what of this statement then? Klein is a Judas Iscariot to the Messiah, the New York press, the messenger for the good news of the brave new world as envisioned by their redemptrix Hillary Rhodam Clinton?
i'm not enthused about any anonymous sourcing, especially woodward's.