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

Skip to comments.

Clinton doesn't forget friends ... or enemies
NH Sunday News ^ | 6/15/03 | Roger Simon

Posted on 06/15/2003 5:10:49 AM PDT by RJCogburn

BILL CLINTON's true distinguishing characteristic was his need to be loved. Even though he made more than his fair share of enemies, he believed that with time enough and half a chance, he could win over just about anybody.

His ability to connect with audiences during his speeches and his deep need, almost an obsession, to work the rope line afterward were manifestations of this.

Perhaps it is what drove him. Perhaps it drives him still.

Often when Presidents leave office, they want to settle old scores. Not Bill Clinton. He not only wants to make new friends, he wants to convert old enemies.

This occurred to me when I read a recent story in the New York Daily News headlined, "Clinton stands up for Times editor." The story said Clinton had called New York Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. to plead for the job of Howell Raines.

Raines, the executive editor of the paper, and his managing editor, Gerald Boyd, resigned this month in the wake of revelations of journalistic improprieties by two Times reporters.

According to the Daily News, Clinton told Sulzberger that Raines' departure was "too severe" and "unwarranted." Clinton reportedly also "acknowledged his past differences with Raines' views."

Which is putting it mildly. Raines was the editor of the Times editorial page when Clinton was President, and he wrote editorials so stinging that Mike McCurry, then the White House spokesman, once told me — on the record and I printed it — that Raines was "psychotic."

(Which was the first hint I got that McCurry was planning to leave the White House. Press secretaries who are planning to stay at the White House do not go around calling New York Times editorial page editors psychotic — even if they are.)

There are scores of examples that demonstrate how tough Raines was on Clinton, but a single editorial — perhaps the most extraordinary The New York Times has ever published about a President — sums it up.

It appeared on Dec. 16, 1998, a few days before the House voted to impeach Clinton. It was a difficult editorial to write because even though the editorial board had been scathing in its view of Clinton, it did not think he should be impeached.

The editorial begins by saying Clinton was a "man blessed with great talent and afflicted with a mysterious passion for lying." Then it begins talking about "Mr. Clinton's ugly little lies, his abject failure to lead by example and to speak truthfully to the American people, his equally dismal failure to honor the historic residence entrusted to him, and his abandonment of his constitutional duty to defend and uphold the law. He is, in sum, a man you cannot trust whether you have his handshake, his signature or his word on a Bible."

The editorial goes on to talk about Clinton's "mendacity," but it also warns that the House vote "will be setting precedents by which the nation will be governed when this Presidency is a memory as distant and distasteful as that of Warren G. Harding."

It also calls Clinton's term in office the "most disappointing White House tenure since that of Richard Nixon" and describes Clinton as "wrapped in dishonor, his face a mask of depression. . . "

But my favorite line, and this shows why Raines was such a wonderful writer (though, admittedly, there was room to disagree with what he was writing), was the sentence that followed the argument that the transfer of power between Presidents in this country has to be orderly and not by a politically charged vote in the House.

"That transfer of power without gunfire or legislative chicanery is the jewel in the crown of American democracy," the editorial said. "It should not be sacrificed over Bill Clinton's inability to resist looking at thong underwear."

Pow! Right between the eyes!

Even people who had wanted Clinton to resign, such as Timothy Noah of Slate, wrote that this editorial showed Raines' "pathological hatred" of Bill Clinton.

So what happens? Less than five years later, Clinton is the most beloved figure in the Democratic Party (admittedly the competition is not fierce) and Howell Raines is out of work.

But who comes to Raines' defense? Bill Clinton!

Why? Because Bill Clinton still trying to win Raines over, still trying to get some love. And something else. A lesson from yet another President, Abraham Lincoln.

"The best way to destroy an enemy," Lincoln once said, "is to make him a friend."


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: x42

1 posted on 06/15/2003 5:10:49 AM PDT by RJCogburn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
Oh, I don't know. Since the NYT never once called for Toon's impeachment, I think Raines was always an FOB.
2 posted on 06/15/2003 5:13:42 AM PDT by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
yeah, the both end up on the body count list
3 posted on 06/15/2003 5:15:16 AM PDT by The Wizard (Saddamocrats are enemies of America, treasonous everytime they speak)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Wizard
Yep. There sure were a lot of "friends" as well as enemies that died under mysterious circumstances. I have only known one person in my entire life who committed suicide. The Clintons knew too many. Too many died of suicide, too many died in plane crashes, and too many died under weird circumstances that just aren't normal.
4 posted on 06/15/2003 5:19:50 AM PDT by TommyDale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
Refreshing that somebody on their side remembers that Clinton is a chronic liar. Most Clinton supporters have an uncanny ability to lap up every lie and be ready to believe the next one, no matter how outrageous.

I used to cock an ear and wait for him to tell a truth, but it took about five or six years, and when it happened, it seemed so trivial I almost missed it. What he said was (I think), "I was hungry so I had something to eat." Or it may have been, "I was tired so I went to bed." One of those. Half an hour later, I sat bolt upright and realized he'd spoken a truth. I was so surprised that I reported it in a column I was writing at the time.

5 posted on 06/15/2003 5:29:45 AM PDT by T'wit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
The only reason BJ Clinton wants to be mayor of NYC is to have protected sex again (if ya know what I mean).
6 posted on 06/15/2003 5:41:32 AM PDT by rvoitier (There's too many ALs in this world: Al Qaeda Al Jezeera Al Gore Al Sharpton Al Franken)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
"That transfer of power without gunfire or legislative chicanery is the jewel in the crown of American democracy," the editorial said. "It should not be sacrificed over Bill Clinton's inability to resist looking at thong underwear."

Pow! Right between the eyes!


Roger Simon, like every other thick skulled liberal, refuses to tell and accept the truth. ONCE AGAIN, CLINTON'S IMPEACHMENT WASN'T ABOUT CLINTON'S INABILITY TO RESIST LOOKING AT THONG UNDERWEAR!

Pow! Right back at ya, Roger, you dimwit.
7 posted on 06/15/2003 5:50:49 AM PDT by demkicker ((I wanna kick some commie butt))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: demkicker
Not fair to the author...he was quoting the editorial.
8 posted on 06/15/2003 5:58:21 AM PDT by RJCogburn (Yes, I will call it bold talk for a......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: demkicker
Often when Presidents leave office, they want to settle old scores. Not Bill Clinton. He not only wants to make new friends, he wants to convert old enemies.

Presidents settle old scores when they are in the White House and have the power.

Once out of power they usually quietly leave the stage and enjoy old friends and golf.

Not Clintoon.

Clintoon has been like a bad case of herpes on America. He flares up from time to time and just won't go away!

9 posted on 06/15/2003 6:01:06 AM PDT by CROSSHIGHWAYMAN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: CROSSHIGHWAYMAN
Clintoon has been like a bad case of herpes on America. He flares up from time to time and just won't go away!

LOL! A good analogy...painful, too.

10 posted on 06/15/2003 6:07:33 AM PDT by RJCogburn (Yes, I will call it bold talk for a......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: CROSSHIGHWAYMAN
Good analogy.
11 posted on 06/15/2003 6:08:26 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
Not fair to the author...he was quoting the editorial.

"Pow! Right between the eyes!", are Roger Simons' words. He was not quoting the editorial. Roger thought Raines was on the money with his remark that the transfer of power (impeachment) shouldn't be over Clinton's inability to resist thong underwear.

I rest my case and stand by my statement.
12 posted on 06/15/2003 6:11:40 AM PDT by demkicker ((I wanna kick some commie butt))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: demkicker
I don't take it that way, but it's not worth arguing about.
13 posted on 06/15/2003 6:14:20 AM PDT by RJCogburn (Yes, I will call it bold talk for a......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
We'll agree to disagree then :)
14 posted on 06/15/2003 6:18:12 AM PDT by demkicker ((I wanna kick some commie butt))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale
Not only were there many "coincidental" deaths many of them were about to testify
or were witnesses to attorney general governer and POTUS William Jefferson Blythe Clinton I
Kinda makes one wonder how it is he is still smokin an joking dont it?
From Loas Cambodia Tailand To Columbia Mena New Orleans to the big white puzzle palace
The truth will set you free...
15 posted on 06/15/2003 6:30:38 AM PDT by joesnuffy (Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
Yes, that Bubba, just lookin' for love, even with his enemies. He was such a uniting force in American politics, wasn't he?

I mean, he never accused talk radio of causing the OKC bombing, did he? He never said that the rich didn't deserve tax cuts, did he? He never accused President Bush of being a frat boy with a rich daddy who thought the presidency was owed him, now did he?

Obviously, when these statements along with many similar ones were made, I just didn't understand. He was simply looking for my love and approval, and not attacking people whom I respect. Silly me.

16 posted on 06/15/2003 6:37:36 AM PDT by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: joesnuffy
"...many of them were about to testify or were witnesses..."

One of those potential witnesses was an engineer from Loral, who was scheduled to testify before a congressional/senate committee regarding the transfer of sensitive secrets to China. Kearn A. Cottingham was found dead of "natural causes", but most likely RICIN poisoning. The records were expunged and local police in Palo Alto were unable to locate them when asked.

17 posted on 06/15/2003 6:43:00 AM PDT by TommyDale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
AMEN! Both of the Clintons have been the most DEVISIVE people in politics in modern history.

I felt SICK and DIRTY after watchng Clinton on LKL for 10 seconds last night.

18 posted on 06/15/2003 6:47:11 AM PDT by Ann Archy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
"He never accused President Bush of being a frat boy with a rich daddy who thought the presidency was owed him, now did he?"

Every time I read about Clinton taking pot shots agaings GWB I have to laugh -- at least GWB KNOWS WHO HIS DADDY IS!!!! That's certainly more than Clinton can say.

19 posted on 06/15/2003 6:48:45 AM PDT by TommyDale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
The 'Pow...' line is by the author. The quotes from the editorial are in quotation marks.
20 posted on 06/15/2003 6:49:56 AM PDT by TommyDale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Ann Archy
I went to the CNN web site to get the transcript for posting, but it isn't there yet. It may not show up until next week, but I will keep checking and will post it when it appears. I bet it's just full of unifying comments, don't you?
21 posted on 06/15/2003 6:54:24 AM PDT by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
Both of the Clintons are the walking dead - putrified dead at that - and normal people feel soiled even by the mention of their name. There has never been a worse president, and the entire concept of his inept wife of convenience becoming president through her name recognition speaks volumes of just how desperate the DemonRats have become to field a candidate.

The world will be a better place for all in this nation when those two are having an eternal dirt nap.
22 posted on 06/15/2003 6:57:26 AM PDT by 11B3 (We live in "interesting times". Indeed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
Yeah...right...."Bill the Unifier"...... my arse.

You ARE a glutton for punshment!!!I coudn't read his lies for all tea in China. Was Larry drooling??? LOL!

23 posted on 06/15/2003 7:00:29 AM PDT by Ann Archy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Ann Archy
I didn't watch it, having been warned by my husband, who is afraid I will break the television if I see Clinton. LOL!

However, I think the transcript is useful because it lets us analyze what he is up to, plus his comments are always so low-class that it further puts a period to his reputation as a great speaker.

24 posted on 06/15/2003 7:05:47 AM PDT by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: mewzilla
I guess criminals need to stick together.
25 posted on 06/15/2003 7:15:53 AM PDT by sweetliberty ("Having the right to do a thing is not at all the same thing as being right in doing it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale
Kearn A. Cottingham was found dead of "natural causes",

Haven't heard of this one before. Got details?

26 posted on 06/15/2003 7:55:37 AM PDT by RJCogburn (Yes, I will call it bold talk for a......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
Cottingham was an engineer at Loral. He was to appear before a committee investigating the transfer of secrets to China prior to the 1996 election, when the Chinese "donated" (via a quid pro quo) campaign contributions to Clinton and the DemocRATs. He was reported in the local Palo Alto weekly newspaper, as having been found in some bushes and pronounced dead from "natural causes". When his name came up as a Loral employee that was to appear before the committee, there was no record to be found in the mainstream local newspapers. I asked an acquaintance there on the police force to check on it, and he reported that there was no record on file as well. This should have raised a lot of attention, but as we all know, it did not because Clinton was in power. The guy was too young to die of natural causes. His name appears on Alamo Girl's list. I researched this cased personally, and it smells really bad.
27 posted on 06/15/2003 11:10:08 AM PDT by TommyDale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
From the Palo Alto Weekly

Publication Date: Wednesday Oct 28, 1998


Deaths
Kearn A. Cottingham

Kearn A. Cottingham, 53, a 23-year resident of Palo Alto, died Oct. 13. He was a senior program management engineer in subcontracts at Space Systems/Loral in Palo Alto, where he worked for 22 years. He loved golf and cooking. He is survived by his wife, Shirley Kedrowski Cottingham of Palo Alto; his parents, William and Nell Cottingham of Chico; and a sister, Sandra Merlo of Chico. Services have been held. Donations may be made to Green Hills Country Club Tree Gift, or Junior Program, End of Ludeman Lane, Millbrae 94030, or the Kearn A. Cottingham Memorial Fund, c/o Halsted Holman M.D., 1000 Welch Road, Suite 204, Palo Alto 94304 (checks payable to Stanford University).

28 posted on 06/15/2003 11:20:03 AM PDT by TommyDale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn
The House Select Committee will probably not want to share all they know about this. I sent requests to Congressmen Rohrbacher and Cox, with no responses. They would be a good source for information, if they wanted to.
29 posted on 06/15/2003 11:38:26 AM PDT by TommyDale
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: demkicker
This has been the recurring theme lately - the impeachment was all about sex.

We need to start counter attacking that with the truth - x42 was impeached because he lied in a court of law (while he was a lawyer - sworn to tell the truth); committed obstruction of justice (telling people to lie about the situation).

And ... most people don't know x42 was deprived of his law license (not a minor thing), as well as the USSC depriving x42 of EVER bringing a case before them.
30 posted on 06/15/2003 11:55:40 AM PDT by CyberAnt ( America - You Are The Greatest!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale
Thanks!

Would that AG Ashcroft were interested in seeking justice.
31 posted on 06/15/2003 4:26:46 PM PDT by RJCogburn (Yes, I will call it bold talk for a......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

.
32 posted on 06/18/2003 5:13:48 AM PDT by firewalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

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