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 previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-105 next last
To: Freedom of Speech Wins

DU is missing another idiot.


81 posted on 10/28/2007 7:23:05 AM PDT by Brytani
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

I was waiting to read that someone beside myself thought it was a plant.


82 posted on 10/28/2007 7:26:31 AM PDT by go-ken-go (i)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: pigsmith
Clinton’s message was quite clear indeed: don’t you dare say such things about our country My Presidency.

You are right on the money. Everything is all about him.

83 posted on 10/28/2007 7:43:55 AM PDT by Semper911 ("We can stand here like the French, or we can do something about it." -Marge Simpson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: chiller

...a bit much? This has always been THE PLAN. Billy Blythe would be President for 8 years. Next Miss Hitlery would be President while he was Sec. Gen. of the UN. This goal they formulated many years ago. Billy’s sex addiction slowed them down, but they’re back on track.


84 posted on 10/28/2007 8:19:55 AM PDT by abclily
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

The scary thing is that this “inside job” viewpoint is WIDESPREAD among the Soros fringe of the Democrat party. I once infiltrated a DailyKos event in NYC, and was stunned to hear how many of them believed that 9/11 was a conspiracy by Bush for oil or Israel or both.


85 posted on 10/28/2007 8:23:51 AM PDT by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
I agree with those posters on this thread and another yesterday who believe this was a set up by the Clinton campaign. Until we know the identity of the hecklers, as well as their backgrounds, I cannot accept that Clinton's reaction was anything but another political ploy to soften the impression that the TRUTHERS speak for the RATS, while making himself appear to be a strong authority figure, which he is not. Republicans need to sift everything that happens with the Clintons through a cynical, fool us once etc., lens. Their machine leaves nothing to chance, is calculated and moves unrelentingly toward their goal of electing Hillary to the Presidency.
86 posted on 10/28/2007 9:45:38 AM PDT by mountainfolk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #87 Removed by Moderator

To: FReepaholic

Don’t confuse him with facts.


88 posted on 10/28/2007 10:40:29 AM PDT by CaptainK (...please make it stop. Shake a can of pennies at it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine
Don't wish to join with those that say there is proof of complicity on the part of the Bush administration or that Muslims weren't responsible.

Rather wish to say there are many unanswered questions.

There also was apparently possibly deep intelligence penetration on the part of the terrorists.

Seems there should be more bipartisan support for the answers otherwise conspiracy theories will abound.

89 posted on 10/28/2007 9:32:33 PM PDT by Freedom of Speech Wins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dearolddad
Exactly, what I have is just questions.
90 posted on 10/28/2007 9:33:17 PM PDT by Freedom of Speech Wins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Freedom of Speech Wins

Give it a rest. Conspiracy theories will always abound because conspiracies are more comforting than the reality.


91 posted on 10/28/2007 9:36:05 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: lentulusgracchus
Thank you for the good information here.

Makes sense.

92 posted on 10/28/2007 9:36:36 PM PDT by Freedom of Speech Wins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Lead Moderator
No, just undecided and don't feel like we have all the information or that we will get it anytime soon. Keep hearing different things from different people and don't know what to believe.
93 posted on 10/28/2007 9:38:02 PM PDT by Freedom of Speech Wins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
It was NOT an inside job!”

Uh oh, now I am suspicious.

Anything this SOB says is a lie.

94 posted on 10/28/2007 9:39:38 PM PDT by Rome2000 (Peace is not an option)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinna
National Guard was activated in New York City in conjuction with the Millenium celebration for 12/31/99 effective earlier possibly due to a threat that existed.

Preparations for this began to be made that summer.

Government did a good job stopping those in Washington state as they crossed in.

95 posted on 10/28/2007 9:40:54 PM PDT by Freedom of Speech Wins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I hope your right in terms of absolutely no complicity on the part of the puppet master . . . though I’m skeptical on that score.

But the notion that any of us should trust Dilldo Klintoon about anything is . . .

preposterous on it’s face, it seems to me.

Except . . . perhaps that he knows his wife uncommonly well . . . and when he tells who was it . . . Kathleen W . . . that his wife has [had more oral sex with women] than he has . . . I’m inclined to believe that.


96 posted on 10/28/2007 9:42:53 PM PDT by Quix (GOD ALONE IS GOD; WORTHY; PAID THE PRICE; IS COMING AGAIN; KNOWS ALL; IS LOVING; IS ALTOGETHER GOOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: durasell
More offensive should be the put options taken out on American Airlines stock which haven't been adequately explained.

Shows apparent possible foreknowledge on the part of someone possibly the terrorists.

A lot hasn't been explained.

Not saying that Cheney or Bush directed the whole thing as some of the truthers suggest or that just because they trained in Florida Jeb Bush is responsible.

Trying to say that there are some legit questions that these people bring up amidst the nonsense.

97 posted on 10/28/2007 9:44:42 PM PDT by Freedom of Speech Wins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Freedom of Speech Wins

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occam’s_Razor


98 posted on 10/28/2007 9:47:20 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
Clinton said “shut up and let me talk.”

Bill and Hillary sure did their share of talking about our national security - with Johnny Chung, Charlie Trie, John Huang.

Google: Clinton National Security Scandal and Coverup

99 posted on 10/28/2007 9:55:26 PM PDT by Mr Apple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: skeptoid
Deep penetration of our intelligence could have taken place.

Government seems to have been afraid of this possiblity.

Also having a lot of information but not knowing specifics or how to stop it would explain a lot of things that took place.

100 posted on 10/28/2007 10:00:19 PM PDT by Freedom of Speech Wins
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100101-105 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