Clinton did not diss Dean - the Washington Times made it up

From the LIBERAL source the American Prospect:

http://www.prospect.org/webfeatures/2003/10/tomasky-m-10-23.html

The Times picked up this quote: "But I don't believe that either side should be saying, 'I'm a real Democrat and the other one's not,' or, 'I'm a winning Democrat and the other one's not.'" The Times account suggested that this was an implicit slam of Howard Dean.

Here's the whole context: I asked Clinton about the schism within the Democratic Party. I said to him that sometimes the arguments between the liberals and the centrists had taken on a tone of not mere disagreement but of mockery. "And this has happened," I said, "more from the centrists toward the liberals than the other way around," at which point he cut me off and said, "Yeah, and I think it's a big mistake."

Now how is that an implicit criticism of Dean? An agreement that the centrists have sometimes gone overboard in criticisms of liberals is pretty obviously an implicit criticism of Joe Lieberman and Al From, the head of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC). If Clinton hadn't cut me off, I would have mentioned the DLC's attack on Iowa delegates awhile back, or the letter the DLC wrote to the attendees of a conference sponsored by the Campaign for America's Future, the DLC's liberal counterpart, with its silly joke about how they should all enjoy their Ben & Jerry's ice cream. I didn't get to say those things, but Bill Clinton is no dummy; he knew exactly what I was talking about, and exactly what he was saying.

Thank you! Thank you!

:kick:

The Washington Times may have distorted what Clinton said in order to make it look like an attack on Dean, but since this was their intention all along, they clearly got it right.

you are splitting hairs - there is only so much room in the title block, but I'll change it for you

Could you rephrase that? I saw with my own eyes how wrong they got it. How could you think they got it right?

and thought my title was ambiguous

it was - "the Washington Times got it wrong"

Actually, had I the room, I'd have said "the Washington Times deliberately misinterpreted Clinton's remarks because they are scared like little baby rabbits that Dean will beat Bush."

But true, so true!

Isn't it interesting and sad that the disinforming Washington Times piece drew DUers like flies to honey, and the truth seems to leave them cold.

1. They want to divide us (look at the surge of personal attacks against the Clintons)

2. This spin will help fuel their lies about how Hillary wants to run for President, since the whole "Hillary 2004 arguement" is based on "stopping Dean".

I got mad at Clinton. I thought, to hell with him. Thank God, I came to my senses. And found this article by the author refuting the Times (first heard of the article from another DU-er - this place is good!) And if a political junkie/activist like me fell into the trap, imagine how many ditto heads are walking around today thinking Clinton dissed Dean.

The way the Times article worded it was the complete opposite of what he said! And surprise, surprise, they twisted reality to just what they wanted it to be.

instead of what the Times said:

Mr. Clinton and Mr. From remain close allies and they confer regularly about party strategies. The former president's blunt warning about shifting too far to the left comes at a time when no clear Democratic front-runner has emerged and the centrist-leaning DLC is locked in battle with liberals for political dominance of the party. ~ Clinton was in bed with From & dissing Dean

the author who talked to Clinton and wrote the article the Times quoted said:

{Clinton saying that} the centrists have sometimes gone overboard in criticisms of liberals is pretty obviously an implicit criticism of Joe Lieberman and Al From, the head of the Democratic Leadership Council (DLC). ~ Clinton was criticizing From

just so anyone who doesn't already know it, now knows this was a lie (the false story has run the gamut of right wing propaganda outlets all day)

:kick:

The interview isn't available online but I can find it in the stacks and read it myself tomorrow.

The last thing I want to think about is another reason to be annoyed with Clinton lately.