Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

...But At Least Clinton Was Willing To Say It
Townhall.com ^ | October 28, 2007 | Austin Hill

Posted on 10/28/2007 2:19:16 AM PDT by Kaslin

Given the circumstances, no other three-word combination would have sufficed: “How Dare You?”

That was part of the response from former President Bill Clinton, when confronted by hecklers at a Hillary 2008 fundraising event in Minneapolis.

The story went like this: after making a late start with what turned out to be his approximately fifty-minute speech, Clinton was rudely interrupted by several hecklers in the audience who began shouting at him, and over him, and claiming that the terrorist attacks of 2001 were a “fraud.“

Even if you haven’t seen the video, it’s not difficult to imagine how this could have played-out. Our former President could have easily ignored the hecklers, or could have easily remained silent for a second or two, and allowed them to be cleared away by security officials - - and then could have continued right along with his remarks.

But instead, President Clinton chose to confront the hecklers head-on.

In the face of the “fraud” claim, Clinton confronted them directly. “A fraud?” No it wasn’t a fraud!” he shot back, as the crowd began to cheer him on. “I’ll be glad to talk to you” Clinton stated, trying to bring closure to the interruption, “if you shut up and let me talk.”

As he then attempted to continue with his address, another heckler shouted at President Clinton, claiming that the terrorist attacks had been an “inside job.”

“An inside job?” Clinton retorted, with indignation in his voice. “How dare you. How dare you! It was NOT an inside job!”

After these brief few moments, the hecklers were indeed escorted from the facility, and President Clinton continued with his speech. But by choosing to confront the malcontents, rather than ignoring them, Clinton accomplished something noteworthy.

In a matter of a few seconds, former President Clinton used a spontaneous moment with rude people in his midst to communicate to a fearful, skeptical American people. What was the message he conveyed? That the worst suspicions about our country and government are not to be tolerated, and certainly not to be believed.

To the skeptic who suggested that the terrorist attacks of 2001 were somehow phony, Clinton made it clear that there was nothing phony at all about “Nine-Eleven.”

To the selfish individual who thought nothing of interrupting an American President for his own personal agenda, Clinton said “shut up and let me talk.”

And to the person so cynical about America as to assert that our nation’s government perpetrated the terrorist attacks on its own people, Clinton’s message was quite clear indeed: don’t you dare say such things about our country. Implicitly, he was conveying to America that as a nation, we are better than the insinuations were suggesting, and we are worthy of greater respect.

Some observers are too cynical about Bill Clinton the man, to be able to appreciate the power of his apparently spontaneous words. But imagine how different things might be, if others of our political leaders were more willing to utilize the “how dare you” rhetoric.

Things would be quite different, for example, if our current President were willing to be so confrontational with those who willingly violate our nation’s border laws.

And imagine how different things might be if Hillary Rodham Clinton were willing to confront her fellow Democrats in Congress, when they insinuate that our military service men and women are torturers, terrorists, and failures.

Bill Clinton’s presidency was far from flawless, and no doubt he still suffers with his own credibility gap today. But he also understands the power of words, and how to use them, far better than most politicians.

Let’s hope that our next President knows how and when to communicate more effectively - - and is willing to say “how dare you” from time to time.


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 911conspiracy; truthers; x42
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-105 next last
He finally said something right
1 posted on 10/28/2007 2:19:18 AM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Then why did Sandy Burger have to steal documents from the 9-11 commission.

Why did Atah and Hanjour train in the US near pilot Burlingame's city?

Why do pilots say that Attah and Hanjour and the others couldn't have done the maneuvers?

Why was Able Danger ignored?

Why were there simulated defense drills going on at the same time confusing FAA controllers?

Why did they report that 7 fell before it fell?

Why were there reports of explosions from the buildings?

Why did the Towers fall so fast in freefall and explode outwards rather than like the "pancake" theory?

2 posted on 10/28/2007 2:30:31 AM PDT by Freedom of Speech Wins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Slick feigned the same self righteous indignation when he said “How dare you?” to Jerry Brown, at a Democrat Presidential debate in 1992. Brown questioned Hillary’s involvement in shady deals, and Clinton when into this mode.

These 911 conspiracy kooks have a right to their opinion, crazy as it may be. Slick’s lines are getting old and tired, just as he is.


3 posted on 10/28/2007 2:37:20 AM PDT by Cincinna (HILLARY & HER HINO :: Keep the Arkansas Grifters out of the White house.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freedom of Speech Wins

You sound like a “truther” conspiracy nut. Are you?


4 posted on 10/28/2007 2:39:04 AM PDT by Lead Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Freedom of Speech Wins

Ron Paul is that you?


5 posted on 10/28/2007 2:40:09 AM PDT by Joe Miner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Freedom of Speech Wins

Eight stupid, pointless, unpredicated, assinine, dumb, over-answered, disgusting, dishonest, and disgusting questions, that ought to get you permanently banned.


6 posted on 10/28/2007 2:41:02 AM PDT by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine

Especially the Sandy Burglar one.

Sandy Burglar was sent in there by the Clintons to steal documents that show that Slick had been aware of Bin Laden’s threat to the US and when given the chance, Slick refused to take him out.


7 posted on 10/28/2007 2:43:26 AM PDT by Cincinna (HILLARY & HER HINO :: Keep the Arkansas Grifters out of the White house.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cincinna

And, Sandy Bruglar didn’t steal those documents from the 9-11 Commission anyway. As I remember, it was from the National Archives.

Only an idiot would go around spouting this kind of evil crap.


8 posted on 10/28/2007 2:45:45 AM PDT by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Freedom of Speech Wins

You forgot to mention the the government blew up the New Orleans levees and started the California fires.

>>/sarcasm/>>


9 posted on 10/28/2007 2:50:10 AM PDT by Ditter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Freedom of Speech Wins

You’re serious?


10 posted on 10/28/2007 2:53:21 AM PDT by DCPatriot ("It aint what you don't know that kills you. It's what you know that aint so" Theodore Sturgeon))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lead Moderator

He must be


11 posted on 10/28/2007 2:55:39 AM PDT by Kaslin (Peace is the aftermath of victory)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Sure sounds like it. I just wish s/he/it had the courage to reply. Nothing like Crispy Truther early in the morning.


12 posted on 10/28/2007 2:57:18 AM PDT by Lead Moderator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: Kaslin
How many opportunities has Bill Clinton, his wife, and many other Democrats had to repudiate these ridiculous (and far from harmless to our country) claims, prior to that evening?

It is instructive to me that only when such injurious lunacy interrupts him from running his trap that it deserves a rebuke. The "inside job" bombs have been lobbed at America by the extreme left (and apparently from the right, see post #2) incessantly, since 9-12- 2001. Six years. Way too late, as far as I'm concerned.

14 posted on 10/28/2007 3:01:40 AM PDT by wayoverontheright
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freedom of Speech Wins
Didn’t you get the memo? You must be the only one here who wasn’t in on it.
15 posted on 10/28/2007 3:03:22 AM PDT by InABunkerUnderSF ("Gun Control" is not about the guns. "Illegal Immigration" is not about the immigration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

did hilarys campaign pay him his $250,000.00 speaking fee?


16 posted on 10/28/2007 3:03:38 AM PDT by sure_fine (• " not one to over kill the thought process " •)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Freedom of Speech Wins

Hey you must have seen the you tube video. What a lot of cr#p that was. Mate you need to get a life and stop seeing conspiracies in everything. Of course there is an overall conspiracy of evil but that has nothing to do with W or just about anyone else it has to do with evil itself.

Have a nice day and watch out for the CIA who obviously have your number and are going through you trash cans as I type. Maybe, just maybe, I am a CIA plant looking to dicredit you.

MWAAHAHAHAHA!


17 posted on 10/28/2007 3:08:38 AM PDT by melsec (A Proud Aussie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lead Moderator; Kaslin
I did a little historical past posting check on this person.
It seems to be normal other than any mention of 9-11. When
9-11 is mentioned he/she/it goes into this type of rant
every time.

Sad, most of the other topics it posts on are rather normal.

18 posted on 10/28/2007 3:09:26 AM PDT by ThreePuttinDude ()... Cevapi & Slivovitz for everyone....()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Freedom of Speech Wins
Then why did Sandy Burger have to steal documents from the 9-11 commission.

He stole them from the National Archives.

But that's a minor point.

Your broader point, on the other hand...

Please.

19 posted on 10/28/2007 3:14:30 AM PDT by andyandval
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sure_fine

did hilarys campaign pay him his $250,000.00 speaking fee?
************************************
That’s a good question... Would waiving his customary fee be an in-kind contribution...Would it be a taxable event?


20 posted on 10/28/2007 3:24:04 AM PDT by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-105 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson