Comments on: Two Critical Biographies

By: kritter

kritter — Sat, 26 May 2007 04:44:23 +0000

Well I like them separately, but already know way more than I want to about their marriage and their personal lives. They do seem to have burned a lot of bridges. Just raise money for charity, develop a health care plan, end the war, whatever. As long as I don’t have to hear about who Bill’s cheating with, and whether Hillary is standing by her man!

By: Rudi

Rudi — Sat, 26 May 2007 01:41:19 +0000

The Clinton marriage is typical of failed marriages before the restrictions were relaxed on divorce. Doona Reed and other BS was 1950’s fanatsy. I don’t know whats worse, the Clinton marriage of convience or the thrice married Republicants telling others about family values.

By: Davebo

Davebo — Fri, 25 May 2007 19:52:31 +0000

Jeff Gerth has made a decent living writing stories about the Clinton’s based on, shall we say misconceptions on his part.

I have no doubt this book will be more of the same. (And I don’t even like the Clintons!)

By: kritter

kritter — Fri, 25 May 2007 19:34:35 +0000

I think both incidents were shameless political posturing, CS. But its not as though Clinton was able to put his adultery behind him after the breakfast. I don’t think either man should be judged by what religious leaders do or don’t do, but maybe that’s because I’m not religious myself. Newt was only remarkable because he led the charge to impeach Clinton, when he was having an affair of his own. I don’t remember Clinton judging others for their sexual misconduct, though there is plenty of it to go around up here in Washington. Many of the Conservatives who judged Clinton had some hanky panky on the side.

By: C Stanley

C Stanley — Fri, 25 May 2007 19:15:28 +0000

Kim,
(since you brought it up, I assume it’s fair game)- have you forgotten Clinton’s tearful apology to the religious leaders at the national prayer breakfast? Many of them had been supporting Clinton and saying that they believed him when he said that the accusations of the affair with Lewinsky weren’t true, and then he really had to do the mea culpa when he finally admitted his lie. Of course I don’t think he ever got around to apologizing to “that woman, Ms. Lewinsky” or her family for what he put them through.

I’m not condoning Newt or anyone else but I’m not sure why you think the Dobson/Newt exchange was any different than what Clinton did when he confessed his sin and asked for forgiveness.

By: kritter

kritter — Fri, 25 May 2007 19:15:01 +0000

BTW, MvdG- I think Hillary was considering what would happen to Chelsea, not just her future in politics. Even the smear books give her that.

By: kritter

kritter — Fri, 25 May 2007 19:03:07 +0000

Bill just seems like he is stuck in the party animal stage. He probably shouldn’t have gotten married in the first place, since he is incapable of fidelity. But at least he’s done a lot with his life.

Well, they would have been drummed out of the GOP by now- can you imagine Bill asking James Dobson for forgiveness? Oh wait, he did forgive Newt, so anything’s possible in the nexus of politics and religion!

By: AustinRoth

AustinRoth — Fri, 25 May 2007 17:42:04 +0000

I think she would wait until after being elected to a second term to divorce him.

By: DLS

DLS — Fri, 25 May 2007 17:26:12 +0000

She needed him, he didn’t just need her. As far as her rise to the Presidency goes (officially this time), she can divorce “Booster Bill” after he’s been spent during the last stage of ascent between now and November 2008.

By: Hillary Clinton ‘08 » Two Critical Biographies

Hillary Clinton ‘08 » Two Critical Biographies — Fri, 25 May 2007 17:07:39 +0000

[...] View original here: Michael van der Galien [...]

By: Lynx

Lynx — Fri, 25 May 2007 17:02:41 +0000

I can’t help but think that for an obviously strong woman, having to graciously smile and “stand by her husband” while he showed her little respect must have been utterly humiliating. Such a thing is completely humiliating for any woman, but at least a normal woman doesn’t have to pretend it doesn’t bother her, or have the entire world think that her husband considers her a drag in bed and is out looking for greener pastures.

Considering revenge, even career ending revenge, actually contributes positively to my view of her. It makes her human, at least.

By: C Stanley

C Stanley — Fri, 25 May 2007 16:56:56 +0000

Well, that’s what insiders say, isn’t it- that a bargain was struck? (I think it was Dick Morris that I’ve heard that from).

And Michael, she didn’t decide to do that so obviously she’s smart enough for logic to prevail, but we’re just saying that it doesn’t surprise us that initially it must have been difficult to get past the anger and humiliation and figure out how to turn the situation to her advantage instead of reacting emotionally.

By: kritter

kritter — Fri, 25 May 2007 16:48:15 +0000

I guess he owes her everything for sticking by him- over and over. She could have very easily ruined his career.

By: mikkel

mikkel — Fri, 25 May 2007 16:29:28 +0000

…Not to make a woman angry!

By: Michael van der Galien

Michael van der Galien — Fri, 25 May 2007 16:23:25 +0000

lol – that’s certainly true. However, again, I don’t think it’s likely.

On the other hand, I am a man, what do I know?

By: kritter

kritter — Fri, 25 May 2007 16:22:53 +0000

Well, CS, she wouldn’t be human if she didn’t at least think about it! From her perspective, it must have been humiliating to be his wife and First Lady of Arkansas, and be expected to smile graciously through it all.

By: DLS

DLS — Fri, 25 May 2007 16:18:37 +0000

Don’t forget, too, that Hillary has a throwing arm like John Elway’s.

By: C Stanley

C Stanley — Fri, 25 May 2007 16:09:29 +0000

LOL, obviously we think alike at least on some things, Kim: before I clicked the link to read your comment I was thinking “hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” and all that.

By: kritter

kritter — Fri, 25 May 2007 16:04:56 +0000

I think you underestimate the emotional state of a woman scorned. It doesn’t say that she decided to do it- probably reason and personal ambition held her back- just that she considered it. We don’t often think of Hillary as hurting and vengeful, but that is because she always seems to have her emotions in check in the Senate.