RECENT POSTS
- White House Study Looks at Job Creation in Illinois if Gitmo Prisoners Transferred There
- President Obama: Asia Trip Helped Usher in a New Era of American Engagement
- Secretary Sebelius Celebrates the Tenth Anniversary of National Adoption Day
- Organizing for America Targets Sarah Palin
- Obama Administration Starts to Publicly Raise Issue of Detained US Citizen Xue Feng
- President Obama Gives Interview (of Sorts) to Dissident Cuban Blogger
- "You Guys Make a Pretty Good Photo Op," President Obama Jokes to Troops at Osan Air Base
- Did the Chinese Government Crack Down on an Obama Interview?
- Our Trip to the DMZ
- President Obama Greets U.S. Troops in South Korea, Wraps Up Week in Asia
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
Bill Clinton Assails Vanity Fair's Purdum After Tough Story
June 02, 2008 7:14 PM
Vanity Fair national editor Todd Purdum, the former New York Times White House correspondent, was subjected to some tough words from the man he used to cover today, prompted by Purdum's latest story in VF, "The Comeback Id," which takes a critical look at Clinton's post-presidency.
Former President Bill Clinton told the Huffington Post's Mayhill Fowler that Purdum was "sleazy" and "a really dishonest reporter. And one of our guys talked to him . . . And I haven't read [the article]. There's just five or six blatant lies in there. But he's a real slimy guy."
Purdum writes of Clinton's "cavernous narcissism," looks at "the motley crew that constitutes some of the post-presidential rat pack" (gazillionaires Ron Burkle and Steve Bing), and says that "among the not-so-small cadre of Clinton friends and former aides, concern about the company the boss keeps is persistent, palpable, and pained. No former president of the United States has ever traveled with such a fast crowd, and most 61-year-old American men of Clinton’s generation don’t, either. 'I just think those guys are radioactive,' one former aide to Clinton who is still in occasional affectionate touch with him told me recently, referring to Burkle and (to a lesser extent) Bing. 'I stay far away from them.'"
The former president's monologue made it clear that he saw Purdum's story as part of a Vast Left Wing Conspiracy co-run by the media and the Barack Obama campaign to take down his wife.
"You know he didn't use a single name, cite a single source in all those things he said.. It's just slimy. It's part of the national media's attempt to nail Hillary for Obama. It's the most biased press coverage in modern history. It's another way of helping Obama. They had all these people standing up in his church cheering, calling Hillary a white racist, and he didn't do anything about it. The first day he said 'Ah, well.' Because that's what they do-- he gets other people to slime her. So then they saw the movie they thought this is a great ad for John McCain -- maybe I oughta quit the church. It's all politics. It's all about the bias of the media for Obama. Don't think anything about it."
"But I'm telling ya, all it's doing is driving her supporters further and further away-- because they know exactly what it is-- this has been the most rigged coverage in modern history-- and the guy ought to be ashamed of himself. But he has no shame."
- jpt
UPDATE: The Huffington Post has posted the audio as well; the reporter did not apparently identify herself as a journalist. Meanwhile, Clinton campaign spox Jay Carson has issued a statement saying,
"President Clinton was understandably upset about an outrageously unfair article, but the language today was inappropriate and he wishes he had not used it."
June 2, 2008 | Permalink | Share | User Comments (62)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
It's been anything goes as far as attacks on Hillary Clinton and face it, the timing on this was calculating. In light of everyone telling Hillary to get out of the race for the last 2 months and the fact that the hinting of impropriety on a plane flight when it turns our Chelsea & her boyfriend were on that flight makes this more like The National Enquirer. Bill Clinton has every right to be mad. Attack the Clintons for fun. We saw what happened when the adds came out about Michelle Obama. Obama's couldn't take it and that was a spit in the ocean compared to the trashing that Hillary took. If journalists had actually done their jobs in the first place, there would be no Obama and had it not been for the internet we still wouldn't know the truth. That is why he will not get elected in November. It will be interesting to see how the Obama's handle the coming months because the worst is yet to come.
Posted by: RL in Illinois | Jun 3, 2008 5:30:36 PM
Women leaders have performed superbly in recent history: Margaret Thatcher, Indira Ghandi, Benazir Bhutto. It's a shame that a woman seeking the presidency in this country is subjected to the media and punditry attacks that Hillary Clinton has sustained.
Posted by: katrina | Jun 3, 2008 12:02:14 PM
History books will mention Bill Clinton's name along with the names of people who help make history.
Some people are jealous to death because they are resentful in their heart and soul.
Who cares how many mistresses he had or didn't have. Who cares that JF Kennedy had lots of mistresses in the White House.
Historical deeds and facts only will remain.
I presume that people on this blog who trash Bill and Hillary are young because they were still wearing diapers to remember how good were the Clinton years.
Some people make a living feeding others with negative and dirt.
Oh they make history by preventing a woman to benefit from the name she carries by throwing dirt at it, and consequently will raise doubts in people's mind about her electability!
Voters, can't you figure this out and move on to the important issues : economy, health care, war, global warming.
Posted by: jane | Jun 3, 2008 10:52:26 AM
Pres. Clinton is so RIGHT. The media ripped the democratic party apart by their BIAS coverage. They intentionally injected race into the campaign (e.x. after Obama won IA they were commenting on the white state of IA voting for Obama and predicting the SC win for Obama because of the large black population), way before the MLK/LBJ,"fairytale" and "Jesse Jackson" comments and then BLAME the Clintons. Reporting every criticism of Obama by Clinton as an attack. In any political contest, you must criticize your opponents recpord and lack thereof, so why in this election, that became an attack? And guess what? too many IDIOTS in the democratic party fell for the media's machinations - the democrats are split and the media's real darling McCain will be president. JOURNALISM IS DEAD.
Posted by: Funny | Jun 3, 2008 9:31:52 AM
House Painter,
Amen to that. I just want the Republicans out of MY White House, LOL!
Posted by: Fired UP!! | Jun 3, 2008 8:29:22 AM
Anyone wondering how George Bush was elected to two terms just has to read the
childish comments posted here.
God help us.
I, for one, will proudly vote for Barack Obama in November and then take responsibility for my government by holding my elected officials to the law and to their promises.
Posted by: HousePainter | Jun 3, 2008 8:22:53 AM
Good Morning Kate!!
I'm half asleep, up late watching the Red Wings lose! :(
Posted by: Fired UP!! | Jun 3, 2008 8:20:43 AM
tired dem
I Understand exactly how you feel. I am Independent also. I vote for whomever I feel will do the best for our Nation and our family.
That being said, I just cannot vote for McCain. We live in MI and NAFTA has just obliterated our economy.
My husband works (for now at least, LOL) for Chrysler.
McCain supports tax cuts for large Corporations. These companies thank the Government and the American people by building factories overseas.
I can remeber when American's used to build things, make things. Now we just buy things. Us spending OUR money is what drives the economy today and we can't afford it.
McCain wants a "free market" health care plan. Bush did the whole "free market" with Student loans, now our kids (my son turns 18 in 2 weeks) will have to pay 25% interest, when my husband and I paid 4%. I don't want to have to pay 30% on a valve replacement, LOL!
There is just too much at stake to elect John McCain. He just doesn't get it.
We used to be Upper Middle Class, now we are struggling.
Posted by: Fired UP!! | Jun 3, 2008 8:18:24 AM
I truly respect Pres. Clinton and appreciate the way he is campaigning for and defending his wife. Fortunately and unfortunately for Sen. Clinton, her husband still commands a "bully pulpit" and thus every word he utters is scrutinized by the media and played in sound bite after sound bite. This does not happen for the other candidates' spouses as they are not as famous.
As for the questions about how a "true Democrat" or a Clinton supporter would vote for McCain, I can only speak for myself but imagine that my thinking is similar to many others.
When voting, I look at each candidate. I do not vote a straight ticket, however, almost every time (except one person), I have voted for the Democrat. But it still comes down to that candidate, his/her platform, ideas, and character. As a president, I feel character and work ethic are most important. Thus, I over whelmingly support Sen. Clinton. As it appears that she will not the Democratic Nominee, I will either write in her name or vote for Sen. McCain because I feel his work ethic and character can be called into question much less than Sen. Obama. In my opinion (and let us please all remember it is opinion in these comments), he is too inexperienced, has not truly offered anything new for the American people and I am concerned about his judgement.
Do I realize that there will most likely be Supreme Court nominees? Yes and I believe the Democratically (hopefully still will be) controlled House and Senate will do its job and truly scrutinize each nominee accordingly. If they will not, when I vote I will remember that and vote for the better work ethic and character.
Posted by: tired_dem | Jun 3, 2008 7:38:01 AM
His latest outburst is as good an argument for not putting Hillary on the ticket as I've ever seen. Can you imagine this clown having these kind of self-pitying meltdowns during the general election campaign?
As the author pointed out last night on MSNBC, Bubba's response to the Vanity Fair article didn't dispute anything factually. He just calls the guy names. Sounds like the current White House response to a book by a former Press Secretary.
Posted by: Brooklyn Democrat | Jun 3, 2008 6:05:27 AM
The most biased coverage in history ? Gimme a break Bill ! The almighty Clinton's sure do not like losing , they are acting like spoiled rotten children ! There's always some nut job writing and saying outrageous garbage , there's been plenty of it to go around , it's not been all on poor Clinton , not by any stretch .
Posted by: K.J. | Jun 3, 2008 2:16:08 AM
The Clinton's found out to their dismay they are not thee Democrat party after all and their egos are smarting , very poor no class losers is what they are . What did Hillary say ? If you can't take the heat ...
Posted by: John K | Jun 3, 2008 2:06:06 AM
June said "This means that the mainstream press ought to now give full coverage to the Larry Sinclair allegations of gay sex and cocaine use with Obama back in 1999. Come on Vanity Fair. Why don't you cover that story?"
You are absolutely right. With junk like the Purdum story getting out there via Vanity Fair and the punditocracy, it seems to me that Larry Sinclair's allegations deserve some attention, too.
Posted by: cappamore | Jun 3, 2008 1:39:09 AM
Not only is it a ridiculous collection of speculation of unnamed sources and the author's own amateur psycho-babble, it is poorly written. It seems to go haphazardly from fantasy to allegations to attack to sarcasm and third-party analysis. This whole piece sounded more to me like a high school student's first attempt at a research paper.
Good for Bill Clinton that he has fought back on this!
Posted by: cappamore | Jun 3, 2008 1:36:39 AM
Purdum's hit job on President Clinton is in incredibly poor taste. God, what has this country come to? It amounts to smears with no sources or references. Well guess what? This means that the mainstream press ought to now give full coverage to the Larry Sinclair allegations of gay sex and cocaine use with Obama back in 1999. Come on Vanity Fair. Why don't you cover that story?
Posted by: June | Jun 3, 2008 1:06:58 AM
sledd | Jun 2, 2008 10:25:30 PM;
We will be voting for a man whose integrity and patriotism is unquestioned.
His experience in the Senate is lengthy and his associates are not questionable.
There would be none of the drama of Obama....... but there would be none of the danger, either.
Posted by: eyes open | Jun 3, 2008 12:41:45 AM
The last time I check, Vanity Fair Magazine and Hustler Magazine was in the same rack. Both trash.
Posted by: Mai | Jun 3, 2008 12:39:32 AM
The Vanity Fair article is very unfair and biased. Why don't they check out why Senator Obama saw Tony Rezko almost every week, why Rezko was forced to buy an unwanted vacant lot so the Obama could get their dream house mansion, why Obama and Bill Ayers are still close friends, why the Obamas stayed in a racist, hate-mongering church for twenty years. The article against Bill was for the political pandering against Hillary Clinton. Obama has so much baggage, a freight train is needed to move it a mile down the track. He is sleaze and so is Purdum, the writer of the article. The Clinton are a class act compared to the Obamas
Posted by: Mary | Jun 3, 2008 12:31:34 AM
I read Purdum's hit piece until page 2 (out of 8) and as soon as I read he blamed Bill for playing the race card in SC, I knew it was nothing but a hit piece. AxelRove at it again. I wonder how much Purdum collected from the BO campaign to write that unbelievable cr*p?
What make this hit piece even MORE hurtful? Purdum is married to Dee Dee Myers who was Bill Clinton's WH Press Secretary.
People are hateful and mean just to be hateful and mean. Shame on Purdum and shame on Dee Dee for not stopping it out of respect for her old boss.
Posted by: Vickie | Jun 3, 2008 12:29:24 AM
Come on people...do all of you support your own family as you so fervently patronize President's and candidates you don't even know? The Presidency was once an office held in high esteem and now has succumbed to idiots being chosen no matter the political party. One poster is correct: Clinton; take responsibility for your own actions and stop blaming everyone else. Good God, Americans blame their problems and everything on everyone else but yourselves. It's pathetic the people and country we have become. None of you realize it yet, but the days of our country's glory are over. We will fall just like Rome...from within. Study your history. Very sad...
Posted by: Objective | Jun 3, 2008 12:19:06 AM
Post a comment


