american political media is not going to rehash bill clinton again. they just aren't.
This could confuse and demoralize Clinton's more lukewarm supporters, turning them to a third party or discouraging them from voting altogether.
there is 0.0% chance of this happening. maybe it should happen! but it won't.
― goole, Wednesday, 29 July 2015 21:38 (eight years ago) link
If there is a credible rape accusation that emerges wrt Bill Clinton the progressive media won't ignore it. It's just impossible in this era imo. The right wing media also won't ignore it - i think it would be a "thing" although i can only speculate on how it would play out exactly
― Treeship, Wednesday, 29 July 2015 21:41 (eight years ago) link
There are also harrassment allegations. Just a bunch of stuff
― Treeship, Wednesday, 29 July 2015 21:46 (eight years ago) link
Treeship, how much is Ken Starr paying you?
― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Wednesday, 29 July 2015 21:47 (eight years ago) link
there were credible rape accusations (which is to say, there were rape accusations) while he was in office and progressive media (hitchens aside) by and large defended him
you're talking about this as if it's some new explosive thing that just showed up and not a very established part of the clintons' life in public for 20 years
― goole, Wednesday, 29 July 2015 21:49 (eight years ago) link
Tell me more about how the living ex-president with the highest "favorable" rating among them all, at 64% as polled by Gallup last year, is going to be an albatross around Hillary's neck. It's fascinating!
― I might like you better if we Yelped together (Phil D.), Wednesday, 29 July 2015 21:49 (eight years ago) link
it's too perfect we're doing this in this thread
― goole, Wednesday, 29 July 2015 21:54 (eight years ago) link
never say never i guess
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3176293/Woman-accused-Bill-Clinton-sexual-harassment-launches-anti-Hillary-website-recruit-victims-chronicle-scandal-day.html
― goole, Wednesday, 29 July 2015 22:00 (eight years ago) link
ha goole otm
― Οὖτις, Wednesday, 29 July 2015 22:19 (eight years ago) link
The media and the culture were extremely different in the 90s, like comparing apples to holograms of oranges
― Treeship, Wednesday, 29 July 2015 23:01 (eight years ago) link
Every generation thinks they are the first to discover sex - and political scandals.
Things were in no way totally different in the 90s, you little rascal. Or are you talking about the 1890s? I'm not sure that would work either.
― Vic Perry, Wednesday, 29 July 2015 23:34 (eight years ago) link
You don't think social media has changed how people read the news and which stories gain traction?
― Treeship, Wednesday, 29 July 2015 23:48 (eight years ago) link
It's just a different news delivery system. Any story that has "gained traction" lately I could probably find several similar 80s-90s stories that also "gained traction" - and for the same basic reasons: sex, violence, moral outrage, spin, & did I mention sex?
― Vic Perry, Wednesday, 29 July 2015 23:51 (eight years ago) link
I guess I don't want these cases to be re-opened bc i don't want a Republican president. But I also don't have much love for the crypto-conservative Clintons so w/e. I have no trouble believing the worst about that dude.
― Treeship, Wednesday, 29 July 2015 23:53 (eight years ago) link
They already got Bill Clinton. It involved a stained dress. They got him as much as they are ever going to get him.
It took years of concerted and mostly failed effort to pin something on him. I remember when the stained dress emerged, I was like, oh my god, finally, they found something. And they made the most of it.
They managed to turn impeachment into a partisan joke. Why did this happen? Because everybody knew that they had spent forever finding it, had done nothing else but look.
By the way, Hitchens attitude on Bill Clinton was merely the first indication he was actually crazy. I'm no Clinton fan, but I did once really admire Hitchens, having read a bunch of his articles in Harpers during their great period (late 80s to late 90s).
― Vic Perry, Thursday, 30 July 2015 00:02 (eight years ago) link
So long as Hitchens kept to Clinton's fiscal and socialpolitical calamities ("welfare reform," the crime bill, DOMA) he was in peak form. If you want to read his Clinton book, stick to those chapters.
― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 30 July 2015 00:04 (eight years ago) link
Oh, Clinton is despicable on that stuff -- does Hitchens make the case particularly well, given that I've seen it many times elsewhere?
Since you're here Alfred, I'll mention the attack on Norman Podhoretz that CH did is just one of the great jugular knifings ever - did you ever read that one?
Hey, back to Paglia, I was one of those people who bought Sexual Personae when it came out and thought it was really interesting. Speaking of Harpers, they thought she was interesting too....then they had to backtrack. I'm going to hide behind Greil Marcus and Harold Bloom now.....um, those guys thought she was okay, don't blame me!
― Vic Perry, Thursday, 30 July 2015 00:07 (eight years ago) link
I don't want to review the horror of those times, but let's not forget how Ken Starr's Whitewater panel transformed into a Starr Chamber when the Paula Jones lawsuit joined forces with it as if they weren't already one and the same (the first independent counsel, Republican Robert Fiske, was treated curtly when in 1994 he found nothing illegal in the Clintons' bungled cattle futures trading). Then there were the leaks to the press, the manipulation of a moronic Newsweek reporter who couldn't see that Linda Tripp had been hanging around Starr's office bringing witnesses since 1993, the SCOTUS decision (for which, regrettably, John Paul Stevens showed no remorse years later) affirming that a sitting president had no immunity against civil actions (I don't oppose the ruling in theory, but the facts dictated that the Court tailor this decision as narrowly as possible).
― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 30 July 2015 00:11 (eight years ago) link
treeship can you explain what you mean by "crypto-conservative" here bc afaik the clintons are kind of completely wysiwyg?
― resulting post (rogermexico.), Thursday, 30 July 2015 01:00 (eight years ago) link
secretly conservative. bill's record is atrocious, from the "welfare reform" to the crime bill to the trade agreements to DOMA and beyond
― Treeship, Thursday, 30 July 2015 01:02 (eight years ago) link
I suppose it might be "secret" to those who imagine Democrats are what they have not been for quite some time now?
― Vic Perry, Thursday, 30 July 2015 01:13 (eight years ago) link
Kind of a big selling point in his view.
― Vic Perry, Thursday, 30 July 2015 01:14 (eight years ago) link
bill was pretty open about his not-liberalness -- he ran as a "new democrat," promised to "end welfare as we know it," was a former DLC chair, and was fairly hawkish.
alfred, do you know of a good book on the clinton impeachment fiasco?
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Thursday, 30 July 2015 01:39 (eight years ago) link
yes right I understand what u mean by "crypto" but I'm not sure what you believe is being concealed
― resulting post (rogermexico.), Thursday, 30 July 2015 01:44 (eight years ago) link
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.)
Ignore the title: http://www.amazon.com/The-Death-American-Virtue-Clinton/dp/0307409457
― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 30 July 2015 01:48 (eight years ago) link
roger, she is concealing it from some people. facebook friends post pro-hillary things alongside articles that bemoan inequality and the militarization of the police, as if hillary's legacy is of having resisted these things. i think she gave a speech in ferguson that people were impressed with. the "new democrat" schtick wouldn't land anymore so clinton is remembered -- dimly of course by my generation -- as simply a democrat/progressive imo.
― Treeship, Thursday, 30 July 2015 01:55 (eight years ago) link
i think people of mine & treesh's generation who became politically aware during gwb presidency were kind of vaguely scooted towards the impression that clinton was a really good liberal president, like idk ppl didn't really tell you "you know bush is awful but bill clinton wasn't so hot either" and teach you about welfare reform and i only became aware of that reputation later in college, like when i was a teenager the only bad thing i knew about him was that he got a beej, which i thought was hilarious
anyways the democratic party is moving left, even if at a glacial pace & whatever her personal politics or history hillary's economic platform will reflect that
― flopson, Thursday, 30 July 2015 02:03 (eight years ago) link
No one talked about Clinton-era policy because the media was trained to regard neoliberalism as gospel, and lots of pundits were stupid enough to think 2000-era Bush drivel about compassionate conservatism represented a genuine, uh, compassionate break from the '90s (and the economy really was booming from '97-'01).
― The burrito of ennui (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Thursday, 30 July 2015 02:13 (eight years ago) link
People were too busy making money (dotcom boom!) to notice how shitty bubba was, plus his enemies were significantly worse
― Οὖτις, Thursday, 30 July 2015 02:15 (eight years ago) link
when we say he was a shitty prez, who are we comparing him to?
― resulting post (rogermexico.), Thursday, 30 July 2015 03:30 (eight years ago) link
there needn't be a comparator. anyone to the left of joe lieberman can look at his record and find it wanting
― usic ally (k3vin k.), Thursday, 30 July 2015 03:58 (eight years ago) link
the democratic party is moving left
still don't see it, email Senate leader Chuck Schumer about it next term
― skateboards are the new combover (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 30 July 2015 04:04 (eight years ago) link
where the hell are Hil's female lovers, that's what me n' Camille wanna know
― skateboards are the new combover (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 30 July 2015 04:05 (eight years ago) link
well, yeah
but someone [who is not ralph nader] has to be president. maybe we need a poll
― resulting post (rogermexico.), Thursday, 30 July 2015 04:42 (eight years ago) link
oh you're one of those
― usic ally (k3vin k.), Thursday, 30 July 2015 04:44 (eight years ago) link
lol
― resulting post (rogermexico.), Thursday, 30 July 2015 05:46 (eight years ago) link
http://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-arts-and-culture/books/227359/camille-paglia-jews-and-feminism apparently paglia voted for sanders in the primaries and stein in the general
― Mordy, Wednesday, 15 March 2017 23:29 (seven years ago) link
thought I was losing my mind. there's more than one thread on her that got updated today. WHYalso BRING BACK SEARCH?
Camille Paglia
― SFTGFOP (El Tomboto), Thursday, 16 March 2017 00:31 (seven years ago) link
So, good for the Jews. xp
As for Trump and his oafishly loose words, liberal Democratic women have been in serious mauvaise foi in their ceaseless attacks on him, given the sycophantish pass they gave to the serial sexist behavior and concrete sexual exploitation and abuse of Bill Clinton (for whom I voted twice). The unwillingness of so many middle-class feminists to hold Hillary Clinton responsible for her cold and demeaning treatment of her husband’s working-class accusers seems inexplicable to me.
Apparently she didn't get the Always Believe the Woman EXCEPT for...memo.
― Supercreditor (Dr Morbius), Thursday, 16 March 2017 00:32 (seven years ago) link
DUUUUUUUUD!
Camille Paglia's Profiles in Cocaine continues with saying Sinéad O'Connor deserved to be abused as a child pic.twitter.com/vLlqVsrOe0— cris (@ilchinealach) June 29, 2023
(just posted same clip in the Sinead thread, but figured it is worth emphasizing here)
― niall horanburger (cryptosicko), Thursday, 27 July 2023 16:52 (nine months ago) link
vile human being
― Blues Guitar Solo Heatmap (Free Download) (upper mississippi sh@kedown), Thursday, 27 July 2023 17:13 (nine months ago) link
paglia was and remains an idiot
― I? not I! He! He! HIM! (akm), Thursday, 27 July 2023 17:20 (nine months ago) link