Their infidels are committing suicide by the hundreds on the gates of Baghdad . . . Be assured, Baghdad is safe, protected. There are no American infidels in Baghdad . . . There is no presence of American infidels in the city of Baghdad. -- Saddam's Information Minister Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf, AKA "Baghdad Bob."
Not bad, Bob. But if you want to see how flackery is done at its supremely sycophantic best, you should have tuned into tonight's "Tucker" to catch Lanny Davis's act, as he defended Bill Clinton's claim to have opposed the Iraq war "from the beginning."
View video here.
On a day when everyone from Chris Matthews to David Shuster to Bill Press for gosh sakes mocked Bill Clinton, and Joan Walsh of Salon.com called him "dishonest," for his bald-faced claim to have opposed the Iraq war "from the beginning," Davis managed to defend his old boss.
In introducing Davis, former Clinton White House Special Counsel, Tucker displayed Clinton's statement from May, 2003: "I supported the president when he asked for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq." Sure doesn't sound like someone who "opposed" the war "from the beginning." Ah, but you're not Lanny Davis.
TUCKER CARLSON: "I supported the president when he asked for authority to stand up against weapons of mass destruction in Iraq." That was the vote on which his wife famously voted yay -- yes -- to support in effect the invasion of Iraq. You're not going to tell me with a straight face, having lived in Washington at that time, that they didn't know what we all knew, which was: that was a vote for war. There's no lying about it now: we remember it very, very clearly. You voted for that, it was a vote for war. Period! He supported it.
LANNY DAVIS: You want to spin the word "authorizing."
CARLSON: It's not spin: it's true!
DAVIS: You want to ignore to your audience the word "authorizing." Is that word there?
CARLSON: Are you sincerely telling me --
DAVIS: Is that word there?
CARLSON [becoming exercised]: I don't know what you're talking about! I just read the quote! "I supported the president when he asked for authority."
DAVIS: The quote is authorizing, authority. So we'll have a respectful disagreement because --
CARLSON: I don't know what we're disagreeing on! OK, let me ask you --
DAVIS: We're disagreeing, there was no vote to intervene and rush to war, rather than -- what did Bill Clinton say?
Tucker could take it no more.
CARLSON: You know what? This is a blizzard of BS.
—Mark Finkelstein is a NewsBusters contributing editor and host of Right Angle. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net.





Their infidels are committing suicide by the hundreds on the gates of Baghdad . . . Be assured, Baghdad is safe, protected. There are no American infidels in Baghdad . . . There is no presence of American infidels in the city of Baghdad. -- Saddam's Information Minister Muhammed Saeed al-Sahaf, AKA "Baghdad Bob."















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
LOL.....Blizzard of BS
November 28, 2007 - 20:34 ET by OldSailor88I love that! That quote runs second only to.....
"That depends on what your definition of "is" is."
If I had emotions
November 28, 2007 - 20:35 ET by SpockIf I had any any emotions at all, I imagine I would be laughing uncontrollably right about now.
Live long and prosper
November 28, 2007 - 20:43 ET by RJ\\\/// ;^>
Excellent, RJ
November 28, 2007 - 20:45 ET by BlondeThat's soooo funny.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
And I didn't have to tape my fingers into position, Blonde
November 28, 2007 - 20:50 ET by RJ...the way Captain Kirk did...
Live Long & Prosper
November 28, 2007 - 20:58 ET by BlondeI love Star Trek, but never watched the "Enterprise" series. They had a marathon on Sci-Fi Channel last weekend, saw a whole bunch of the Vulcan back story. It was great.
Of course, Spock & Sarek were always my favorite characters throughout the various series.
So, thanks, your post was a nice grin after a tough day.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
SPOCK was a Conservative!
November 28, 2007 - 21:07 ET by MrShyConservatives:
Live long and prosper.
Liberals:
Live short or long (it's all relative) and recklessly, if you want, and irresponsibly, and demean those that prosper.
"MY end justifies THAT mean." - Shakespeare (not really)
Spock is a Democrat
November 28, 2007 - 21:16 ET by shawn228Well he is not from Earth but if Spock was part of the Federation, he adopted Earth's values. Star Trek is a Liberals wet dream, There is no money in the future, everybody is treated the same, and the tolerence of aliens
There is no money in the
November 28, 2007 - 21:25 ET by JasonCThere is no money in the future, everybody is treated the same, and the tolerence of aliens
And....these are bad things? I thought you'd at least compare liberals to the Borg or something.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
jasonc
November 28, 2007 - 21:28 ET by shawn228I never said they were Jason and If you read any of my other posts, I critique Republicans as much as Dems.
I realize that Shawn, but
November 28, 2007 - 21:37 ET by JasonCI realize that Shawn, but your use of the term "Liberal's wet dream" indicates a negative disposition toward them is all. If I misunderstood, I apologize.
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
JasonC
November 28, 2007 - 21:42 ET by shawn228Well, That is what most Liberals want right? Everybody equal, nobody richer or better than you, for our Federation/Country to involve themselves in other peoples business?
I was just trying to be humourous Jason, I did not mean to offend. Hope after reading my "Liberal Wet Dream" comment you did not feel like this:)
hey Shawn, its all good, I
November 28, 2007 - 21:46 ET by JasonChey Shawn, its all good, I was trying to be humorous with my borg comment too.
Given the context in which you've placed the link, I'm still hesitating about clicking on it...
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
Earth to Jason
November 28, 2007 - 21:43 ET by MrShyYes, we have a negative disposition toward liberals.
"MY end justifies THAT mean." - Shakespeare (not really)
Shy, what are you talking
November 28, 2007 - 21:52 ET by JasonCShy, what are you talking about? Isn't this DailyKos? Aw, crap, I'm always clicking on the wrong bookmark....
"He was, and is yet, most likely, the wearisomest, self-righteous
pharisee that ever ransacked a Bible to rake the promises to himself
and fling the curses on his neighbors." -Emily Bronte
Mr. Shy
November 28, 2007 - 22:06 ET by shawn228"Yes, we have a negative disposition toward liberals."
I know this site is about Liberal Bias, Mr. Shy, but I did not know that gave you the right to speak for all the other members of Newsbusters.
Though I'm sure at least 80 percent will give you their endorsment if you asked for it.
shawn...
November 28, 2007 - 22:12 ET by MrShyAre you stripping me of my constitutional right to free speech?? (which, I'll have you know, includes my right to freely assume things :))
"MY end justifies THAT mean." - Shakespeare (not really)
mr shy
November 29, 2007 - 02:34 ET by shawn228Of course not mr shy. I suggest you get your admittedly smarter liberal brother to come fix your broken tv so you can watch the next debate without the net:-)
But...
November 28, 2007 - 22:10 ET by Prester John... the Federation also had a whole fleet of really cool starships with captains that loved blowing the sh*t out of any alien trash who got in their way.
Facinating...
November 28, 2007 - 23:43 ET by SpockFacinating... I never expected such a large response to such a simple post.
But just so as to set the record straight, we Vulcans pride ourselves in our rich history, values and customs. So I can assure you, I am very much a conservative and a strict constitutionalist. And furthermore, I am here legally.
My apologies to the author of this post for the unintentional thread hi-jack.
-Spock
spock
November 29, 2007 - 02:41 ET by shawn228I am very much a conservative and a strict constitutionalist. And furthermore, I am here legally.
Touch'e. Don't forget Liberal philosophy, "The needs of the many outweight those of the few"
Also saving those whales was very PETA of you.
Thats odd...
November 29, 2007 - 08:25 ET by SpockI was always under the impression that the liberal stance was that: "The needs of the one, outweighs the needs of the many."
Well, this guy learned from
November 28, 2007 - 20:37 ET by RESTLESS 1Well, this guy learned from the best. Was "authorize" in their??? Kind of like the statement "it depends on what your definition of is is".
Authority:Authoritization. Apples to oranges.</sarc> What a kook this one is.
it's plain to me that
November 28, 2007 - 21:13 ET by TruthMongerit's plain to me that "authorizing" the war is actually VEHEMENTLY OPPOSING IT FROM THE BEGINNING:)!
jedi mind tricks work on the weak minded
If war is like sex, then
November 28, 2007 - 23:47 ET by JerryIf war is like sex, then authorizing war is like oral sex, and we all know that oral sex is not sex.
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
Please, Lanny, you're a
November 28, 2007 - 20:42 ET by SMGalbraithPlease, Lanny, you're a good guy (for the most part) but you're just full of cheap, expired 7-11 baloney. Bush didn't need "authority" to threaten the use of force against Saddam. He needed the "authority" to use the force.
When Congress authorized the use of force, it wasn't telling Bush "You can threaten Iraq with force", it was telling Bush "You are authorized to use force." Everyone knew at the time what the resolution was about. It was about telling Bush that he was authorized to use the military against Iraq.
Carville said it best: "Defending the Clintons is like being in the Mafia. Once you're with them, you're with them for life."
Maybe Lanny was hearing "Don't Stop Believing" by Journey in his head.
SMG
SMG: I agree that for
November 28, 2007 - 20:45 ET by Mark FinkelsteinSMG: I agree that for whatever reason, Davis isn't detestable. But this kind of sycophancy in the face of facts is, literally, pathetic.
Mark
November 28, 2007 - 20:50 ET by RESTLESS 1Wouldn't that be "liberally pathetic"? ;>)
Rush calls it denial
November 28, 2007 - 21:14 ET by TruthMongerRush calls it denial
"Defending the Clintons is
November 28, 2007 - 23:56 ET by Jerry"Defending the Clintons is like being in the Mafia..." - Carville
"Turning on the Clintons is like turning on the Mafia.." - Ron Brown
"Knowing secrets on the Clintons is like knowing secrets on the Mafia.." - Vince Foster
"Threatening to be an informant on the Clintons is like threatening to be an informant on the Mafia.." - James McDougal
"Being a stooge for the Clintons is like being a stooge for the Mafia.." - Sandy Berger
"Being a fall guy for the Clintons is like being a fall guy for the Mafia.." - Web Hubbell
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
This may seem...
November 28, 2007 - 20:57 ET by heldmyw...like "Just another Clintonian BS gaffe".
But I will go out on a limb and predict that this is the breaking point for Hillary. "A Lie Too Far", as it were.
She just lost.
This is the event where America is slapped in the face with the cold, dead fish of slippery, history changing rubbish that Clintonia has gotten away with for decades. Oh, we smelled it! But it was just "something off the river", or "swamp gas". No more.
Bill is a liar (duh) and there is WAY too much footage to prove it.
She's toast. He did it.
Thanks Bill! I knew you wouldn't let us down! But I really thought that "Little Willie" would be the cause.
(BTW: What are you screwing these days? ... besides your wife's career in politics, that is?)
One day after a poll is
November 28, 2007 - 20:56 ET by Right2thePointOne day after a poll is shown to have them down in the dumps one of their best steps out and is caught stacking cow pies and calling them a multi layer cake.
Yo Hillary you got troubles and thats with a capital T.
What is NOT surprising is
November 28, 2007 - 20:58 ET by Right2thePointWhat is NOT surprising is that Media Matters has been almost silent on this issue.
Even they haven't figured out how to spin it.
just ignoring works great
November 28, 2007 - 21:16 ET by TruthMongerjust ignoring works great most of the time
and a lot of people still only have TV's - without cable:(
they tend to vote overwhelmingly Democrat
Why has no one noticed
November 28, 2007 - 21:01 ET by Lame CherryWhy has no one noticed this strategy of Hillary which is absolutely insane. Bill has come out lying again and made himself the story instead of Hillary flip flopping.
This will not get Hillary any votes and only drop her in the polls reminding everyone what a bastard their real elected national daddy is for abandoning them to national mommy Hillary dearest.
So has once again Bill cleverly attempted a second torpedo into his wife's campaign to keep his fake legacy?
Tune in next week to As the Clinton Turns when we hear Cousin Lanny say, "Bill is suffering from VD brain disfunction enhanced by the plane load of coke he and brother Roger snorted up their noses as Hillary bounced lamps off his head."
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
Oh, you mean like diverting
November 28, 2007 - 21:04 ET by RESTLESS 1Oh, you mean like diverting a nation's attention from a sexual scandal by bombing as aspirin factory? Slick would NEVER do such a thing. </sarc>
now THAT was a justifiable
November 28, 2007 - 22:16 ET by TruthMongernow THAT was a justifiable war - they were saving Clinton's political ass, not something completely bogus like Bush fighting terrorism
TruthMonger & Restless
November 28, 2007 - 22:24 ET by MrShyDid that bombing really happen right at a crucial point, or even day, of the whole Lewinsky scandal? Just asking as I don't know dates.... and I've heard this a lot.
Wouldn't surprise me in the least... also considering how the bombing was so half-assed and asthetic only, as if to say "there, we did something!" ("and now let me get back to, um, my important Oral, sorry, Oval Office duties...")
"MY end justifies THAT mean." - Shakespeare (not really)
all I remember is very
November 28, 2007 - 22:58 ET by TruthMongerall I remember is very shortly after the Lewinsky thing became public Bill and the Dems were suddenly incredibly gung ho about kicking some military ass around the globe (see the film "Wagging the Dog")
and the drooling anti-war moonbats were strangely silent - DEAFENINGLY SILENT...
and the MSM was suddenly very patriotic and pro-US-military - "look! we kick military ass too, conservative American voters:)!"
So we bombed the hell out of little old defenseless Kosovo and a few of their neighbors from the air for a few months - killed thousands of innocent civilians in the process unfortunately - but it sure helped distract from the damn "BJ-in-the-WH" thing that was embarassing the Democrats, the feminists, etc, etc, etc - as the entire bogus military campaign was solely designed to do:)
http://home.comcast.net/~jimsondergeld/TheWarofClintonsLegacy.html
MrShy, Right before
November 28, 2007 - 23:42 ET by JerryMrShy,
Right before Monica was to testify for the first time, Clinton decided to bomb a Sudanese aspirin factory.
Right before Congress was to vote on articles of impeachment, Clinton decided that Sadaam was indeed a threat, and began bombing Iraq. Congress initially delayed the vote, so as not to hamper the war effort (Clinton's ploy worked). When pressed on an exit strategy, Clinton would only say that the bombing would go on indefinitely. After several days, Congress decided to proceed with the vote anyway, at which time, Clinton immediately stopped the bombing, saying that all objectives had been met. If that's not a wag the dog situation, then there never was one.
When asked if he went to war with Iraq to derail the impeachment vote: “I don’t think any serious person would believe that any President would do such a thing." - President Clinton (Dec 1998).
Wouldn't you know the
November 28, 2007 - 21:04 ET by Right2thePointWouldn't you know the moment I said that Media Matters popped up in my RSS reader
On the November 27 edition of MSNBC's Tucker, host Tucker Carlson called
Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL) "a wuss," citing an interview
that aired on the November 26 edition of ABC's Nightline, during which
co-host Terry Moran asked Obama, "What does the word 'Clintonian' mean to you?"
Obama responded: "I didn't know that that was a verb or an adjective," later
adding, "[I]t's something that probably bounces around on the cable shows, and I
don't watch them enough to know. I haven't heard it used on Nightline
that much. Be more precise." Teasing his segment on Obama, Tucker asserted:
"Barack Obama says he doesn't know what the word 'Clintonian' means, and yet --
and here's the irony, ladies and gentlemen -- he's a master of Clintonian
answers." Introducing the segment, Carlson stated: "[I]f there were ever a
Clintonian answer to the question of defining the word 'Clintonian,' Barack
Obama gave it to Terry Moran. Here to determine if Obama's Clintonian answer on
'Clintonianism' makes him an honorary Clinton, we welcome back associate editor
of The Hill, A.B. Stoddard, and Democratic strategist and MSNBC political
analyst Hilary Rosen."
Man talking about trying to point another way just to do anything to deflect.
is reaganomics a
November 28, 2007 - 21:18 ET by TruthMongeris reaganomics a word?
what about karlrovian?
How's this for spin?
November 28, 2007 - 21:04 ET by mattmNo, you see he only supported the president when he asked for authority to stand up against WMD. Not to give him authority, but just to support his asking for it, at that time. Besides, "standing up" merely means you're not sitting down.
Sex addict
November 28, 2007 - 21:08 ET by dboFor a guy who claims he never had sex with Monica Lewsinsky, he sures has a lot of sex with the American public.
dbo
November 28, 2007 - 21:12 ET by MrShyHe didn't claim he had sex with Monica Lewinsky.... don't you remember? He said:
"I did not have sexual relations with that woman."
"MY end justifies THAT mean." - Shakespeare (not really)
he authorized it - and then
November 28, 2007 - 21:20 ET by TruthMongerhe authorized it - and then "vehemently" opposed it - and then it happened anyway!
and so he was technically not guilty of it:)
"clintonian"
I remember that when he
November 28, 2007 - 21:41 ET by FishFace222I remember that when he said that, some thought he may really have been talking to Lewinsky about Hillary.
But he never said "that
November 29, 2007 - 18:17 ET by mattmBut he never said "that woman never had sexual relations with me."
Lying to the public,
November 28, 2007 - 21:14 ET by ScrapironOld, Retired and glad of it.
When you lie to the public you should lie about something the public knows nothing or little about, at least a small part of the public shouldn't know. Slick has became so mentally ill he must now stand in front of a mirrow and lie to himself. Calling a bunch of people stupid hayseeds while trying for their vote is not a smart thing to do, Unless the people of Iowa are really as stupid as Slick says/thinks they are.
On second thought screw
November 28, 2007 - 21:16 ET by Right2thePointOn second thought screw Media Matters , they are a given, I can't wait to see how FireDogLake and HufPo try to spin this, now that will have to be a piece of work.
No wonder BJ Clinton parsed
November 28, 2007 - 21:33 ET by fitzfongNo wonder BJ Clinton parsed for the meaning of the word "is".
Lanny Davis is a died-in-the-wool creep hustler. One of the funniest segments I've ever heard on radio was when he went on the John & Ken Show in Los Angeles to speak on behalf of multi-murderer Kevin Cooper. Cooper was scheduled to be executed and this shyster shows up in California to gum up the works. John & Ken had him on and were sorting him out but good. The little coward hung up on them, called back, hung up, called back once more and hung up! This all happened within about 5 minutes. By the end, the hosts were just laughing at him, mocking his impulsiveness and cowardice. Unfortunately, Davis and his goons won the battle as they managed to put a halt to the Cooper execution.
The more this scumbag appears on behalf of the Clintons, the worse they're going to look.
Your Call
November 28, 2007 - 21:54 ET by BarkerCall them liberals, call them progressives, call them leftists, socialists, secularists, collectivists, communists, humanists.......hell, call them antichrists.
Their masks are falling off.
And it's getting ugly.
Sorry to interrupt the tag
November 29, 2007 - 01:49 ET by JerSorry to interrupt the tag team pounding being administered to Clinton--it does look like fun--but it was possible of course to support the grant of conditional authority to the President to go to war, and later [upon the commencement of military action] dispute the fulfillment of that condition.
The question is "what did Clinton say, and when did he say it"?
Jer
the Founders were smarter than most politicians of today...
November 29, 2007 - 09:55 ET by sarcasmoAbout actually-declaring wars & actually paying attention to ALL of the words in the US Constitution. They were wise enough to avoid even the possibility of this exact kind of divisive political BS later. Nah! It couldn't be that our problem is not paying attention to history and the Constitution! Not with such wonderful and prescient and fiscally-conservative politicians like the ones we're blessed-with these days!!
Obviously, I'm delusional, because I'm unable to find anything in the Constitution about congress granting the "conditional authority" to declare a war. Or maybe I'm just very sarcastic...
JMR
Rally online with fans of Dr. Ron Paul.
I guess it depends on what
November 29, 2007 - 13:06 ET by fitzfongI guess it depends on what the meaning of "is" is.
Old Lanny was sinning like a
November 29, 2007 - 13:26 ET by Airforce_5_OOld Lanny was spinning like a top on H & C last night too. This guy is going to have to be screwed in the ground when he dies.
I give it to Tucker, he doesn't back down to these chesses when they come on.
The only thing you should feel when shooting insurgents is the rifle recoil.