An Internet hub for moderates, centrists, and independents, with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, and right

Report: Angry Bill Clinton Rant Shocked California Delegates

DUCT_TAPE_3M.jpg

Is former President Bill Clinton helping or hurting his wife Senator Hillary Clinton in her battle to become the 2008 Democratic Presidential nominee? The debate has often focused on some of the former President’s public pronouncements — but now there’s a report about an angry, red-faced Bill Clinton losing it while talking to California delegates:

The Bill Clinton who met privately with California’s superdelegates at last weekend’s state convention was a far cry from the congenial former president who afterward publicly urged fellow Democrats to “chill out” over the race between his wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Barack Obama.

In fact, before his speech Clinton had one of his famous meltdowns Sunday, blasting away at former presidential contender Bill Richardson for having endorsed Obama, the media and the entire nomination process.

“It was one of the worst political meetings I have ever attended,” one superdelegate said.

This report is worth looking at it in detail, because it raises some issues — including one that Republicans could pick up on if Hillary Clinton gets the nomination: Senator Barack Obama’s controversial pastor could be a problem for him, but increasingly there will be some Americans who will not want Bill Clinton hanging around the Oval office again. Especially with reports like the San Francisco Chronicle’s.

Read on. It gets much worse:

According to those at the meeting, Clinton - who flew in from Chicago with bags under his eyes - was classic old Bill at first, charming and making small talk with the 15 or so delegates who gathered in a room behind the convention stage.

But as the group moved together for the perfunctory photo, Rachel Binah, a former Richardson delegate who now supports Hillary Clinton, told Bill how “sorry” she was to have heard former Clinton campaign manager James Carville call Richardson a “Judas” for backing Obama.

It was as if someone pulled the pin from a grenade.

“Five times to my face (Richardson) said that he would never do that,” a red-faced, finger-pointing Clinton erupted.

TRANSLATION: Carville insisted those were just his words but you can put two and two together and realize now that Carville was a formal or informal surrogate for Bill Clinton, who must have given him an earful. And Carville apparently took that perspective and threw it out there.

The former president then went on a tirade that ran from the media’s unfair treatment of Hillary to questions about the fairness of the votes in state caucuses that voted for Obama. It ended with him asking delegates to imagine what the reaction would be if Obama was trailing by just 1 percent and people were telling him to drop out.

“It was very, very intense,” said one attendee. “Not at all like the Bill of earlier campaigns.”

When he finally wound down, Bill was asked what message he wanted the delegates to take away from the meeting.

At that point, a much calmer Clinton outlined his message of party unity.

“It was kind of strange later when he took the stage and told everyone to ‘chill out,’ ” one delegate told us.

“We couldn’t help but think he was also talking to himself.”

When delegate Binah - still stunned from her encounter with Clinton - got home to Little River (Mendocino County) later in the day - there was a phone message waiting for her from State Party Chairman Art Torres, telling her the former president wanted him to apologize to her on his behalf for what happened.

Can this help Hillary Clinton?

Still, word of Clinton’s blast shot all the way back to the New Mexico state Capitol, where Richardson spokesman Pahl Shipley reiterated Tuesday that his boss had never “promised or guaranteed” Bill and Hillary his endorsement.

The bottom line: it isn’t an issue now but, yes, Hillary Clinton has a Bill Clinton problem and look for the Republicans to pick up on the slightest Bill Clinton slip or explosion and rally the party faithful together in a bid to try and stop the Clintons from running the Oval office again. For Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton is a political time-bomb waiting to happen.

Enough Democrats and independents are disgusted with the administration and GOP in general so this would not be enough to tilt the scales in a general election. But if Hillary Clinton wins the nomination in a controversial manner, some Democrats staying home plus a unified Republican party means (a) her election will be tougher than ever and (b) if she wins she will take office as one of the most instantly-polarizing American Presidents in history.

The saddest spectacle is what has happened to Bill Clinton.

Almost all Presidents leave office and the aura of the Presidency encases them so their reputations in many ways improve out of office (President Harry Truman, President Richard Nixon and, for his work in building houses etc, President Jimmy Carter). Some become ex-Presidents who are respected although their reputations don’t grow substantially (President Gerald Ford and President Lyndon Johnson).

But seldom in American history has a President left office and seemingly shrunk in stature – going from someone who has the aura of the Oval Office to becomings seemingly just one more political operative.

Increasingly, Bill Clinton is coming to resemble an angry “troll” that comments on weblogs. Rather than trying to win over, he is lashing out.

Can showing bitterness to Superdelegates convince them to tilt to Hillary Clinton when the time comes? (Please note our suggested solution to Hillary Clinton, in the photo above…)

  • Bill is still in the denial stage of grief.
  • Marlowecan
    There are few better examples of Free Passes in American political life than that given Bill Clinton over his anger management problem.

    In the Clinton White House they were called his "purple fits" which Bill Clinton had first thing every morning. Pure rage.

    George Stephanopoulos writes in his memoir that believed his primary role in the WH was to take the brunt of Clinton's anger every morning...instead of him lashing out with 4 letter words (both Clintons are well-known to swear blue streaks like Nixon in private) at his nice middle aged secretary or whatever poor unfortunate aide happened to cross his path.

    Stephanopoulos ended up clinically depressed, and grew a beard to conceal the rash he developed as a consequence of taking Bill Clinton's free floating anger every morning.

    Amazingly...the press did not see this as noteworthy. Ironically, these days we see stories floating of McCain's occasional bursts of temper.

    But Bill Clinton's daily rage...like his bimbos until Monica...were verboten in the MSM.

    Until now, that is. Perhaps we have Obama to thank for that. Had HRC been crowned and gone to face the Republicans in the fall, Bill's rage -- of which there have been numerous examples over the years -- would still be swept under the carpet by a compliant MSM.
  • But Bill Clinton's daily rage...like his bimbos until Monica...were verboten in the MSM.


    You can't be serious.
  • Marlowe,
    And otherwise, yes it's interesting, if true, that you never hear much about his fits of anger. Sorry to be so curt in my previous message.
  • GaiasChild
    This type of rage doesn't bode well for the heart's health. Adding these explosions to the understandable stress of the campaign, the money troubles, the losing proposition, and the denials needed to keep going, plus the just plain physical ordeal of that much travel and that much campaigning, I think there's a concern, a real concern, for fmr pres clinton's health and well-being.

    I cannot support Sen. Clinton because we have a chance at inspiration and eloquence. That's all.
  • Rudi
    This is one of my problems with the Clintons, I Bill in the role of the mad monk - Rasputin.
  • Rudi
    I Bill - I see Bill
  • Marlowecan
    ChrisWWW said: "And otherwise, yes it's interesting, if true, that you never hear much about his fits of anger. Sorry to be so curt in my previous message"

    No prob. I think Joe's post is interesting on this topic as there has been so much talk of Obama getting a free ride by the media.

    Yet Bill Clinton's daily eruption of rage every morning of his two terms in the WH was...with the exception of a few insider books...not mentioned by any news media.

    Americans are finally seeing the real nature of Bill Clinton. A charmer, undeniably. But a darker side that was kept hidden, with the assistance of a subservient media.

    I know of only one video of his rage. It was on nightly network news (ABC I think, as I watched it a lot then) From early in his first term he was out on a photo op in a residential neighbourhood, and an aide had made some goof. Bill Clinton was caught on video raging at the aide in the street as they walked, with the aide literally bent over at the waist and keeping his head down (out of camera, and in abject submission) as the Big Dog ripped into him. It was appalling.

    I tend to support HRC... but like Rudi I shudder at the thought of Bill amok in the political landscape. Everything is, of course, about him.
  • Holly_in_Cincinnati
    If I were Bill Clinton, I'd be angry too. His statements as reported above seem both true and appropriate. Only fools could be shocked by them.
  • Pyronite
    Remind me not to put Holly in charge of the red phone. ;)
  • jmcdonough120
    from swimming freestyle:

    "Barack Obama's election to the presidency in November would put a serious crimp in Bill Clinton's power, influence and resulting earnings. Obama and his Administration would, by virtue of their position, become the de facto leaders of the Democratic Party. Bill and Hillary Clinton will continue to be powerful forces in the Party, but the bulk of that power shifts from the Clinton's to the new guys in town. They become a good deal less marketable.

    One can understand why the thought of losing all that might make Bill Clinton a little grumpy."

    http://swimmingfreestyle.typepad.com
  • DLS
    "Perhaps we have Obama to thank for that."

    Or rather, what the Economist called "Foolish Love" (cultish groupie-dom) of the Clinton fans of years past has been redirected toward today's younger, cuter, more hip "identity politics" candidate.
  • elrod
    Note how it's all so personal with the Clintons. The party or the country is never above the ambitions of the Clintons.
  • skippy
    remind me not to put holly in charge of the red phone

    also, don't pu holly in charge of commenting word for word at pam's house blend.
  • skippy
    don't pu = don't put.

    sorry.

    jokes are way funnier w/o the typos.
  • StockBoySF
    Bill definitely wants the power back!
blog comments powered by Disqus
© 2005-2009 The Moderate Voice/Joe Gandelman | Designed by Elegant Themes | Customized by Tyrone Steels II/Enxit Group, LLC