Bill Clinton: Press Favored Obama Over Hillary in 2008, Weren't Biased Towards Him in 1992
By Noel Sheppard | December 20, 2011 | 21:54
Bill Clinton on Tuesday said the press favored Barack Obama over his wife for president in 2008.
Not surprisingly, he told Fox News’s Bill O’Reilly that he didn’t believe the media were biased towards him when he first ran for president in 1992 (video follows with transcribed highlights and commentary):
In the second segment of the interview, O’Reilly asked the former president, “When your wife was running against Barack Obama in New Hampshire, and this must bring back memories to you, the press favored Obama correct?”
Nodding his head Clinton responded, “Oh, I think yes.”
O’Reilly then asked, “Is that going to happen again? Is the American press going to favor Barack Obama over the Republican candidate?”
Clinton answered, “We’ll just have to wait and see.”
“You know the answer is yes,” said O’Reilly. “Now my question is why? Why does the American press favor the more liberal candidate?”
“Well, I think there was more to it than that last time,” Clinton said.
Unfortunately, when O’Reilly pressed for an elaboration, the former President said he didn’t want to wade into this given his wife being Secretary of State. This led O’Reilly to ask more generally, “Why is the media more liberal than conservative?”
“I don’t know that it’s always been that way,” Clinton answered. “For example, in 1992 when I ran, I was hardly the beneficiary of it in the primary.”
O’Reilly interrupted, “Not in the primary, but in the main you were.”
“I was the flavor of the day,” Clinton said. “You know, they always like what’s new, and they always like a conflict and always like a story. But nothing I can say will contribute to anything good happening in America. So I’m not going to contribute to that.”
Not surprisingly, Clinton didn’t want to address the media’s coverage of the general election after he became the Democratic nominee or how they allowed him to continue to talk about the economy being horrible despite the recession having ended in the 1st quarter of 1991 and actually booming in 1992.
As NewsBusters has reported for years, if the press had been honest about how the economy was doing back then, George H.W. Bush would have easily won reelection.
No one should be surprised that Clinton has no intention of admitting this 20 years later.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Smooth As Silk...
Submitted by bigdaddy on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 10:15pm.
...Lying comes so easy to this jackass...
I couldn't watch it
Submitted by Marsh on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 10:21pm.
because he's still so smarmy. And he does not look well
I detest him and his wife
Submitted by Dingbat on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 11:00pm.
I detest him and his wife (but less so than Barry and his wife) BUT, Bill looked and acted terrible in this. I felt sorry for him. As The Gambler said: you gotta know when to hold them, when to fold them and when to walk away. Bill needs to walk away and become an elder statesman. (But it has to irritate him that Barry says that he is better than him and other Pres's...when, Jimmah is sighing with relief that there is, finally, someone worse than him.)
Slick AGAIN?
Submitted by SaguaroJack on Tue, 12/20/2011 - 11:00pm.
Dude made my skin crawl when he was prez. Now I just throw my boots at the teevee.
Clinton: "I did not have
Submitted by Jerry on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 2:19am.
Clinton: "I did not have favorable coverage from that woman, Ms MainStreamMedia..."
O'Reilly: "But there's a stain on the Blue Press of Ms MainStreamMedia."
"That makes it undeniable that MainStreamMedia was sucking up to you."
"She just didn't swallow everything you spewed."
I hate to agree with der
Submitted by killa37 on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 3:15am.
I hate to agree with der Schlickmeister (because he IS trailer-park trash that hit the bigtime).............but, since Boy Barry was a purported 'black' man (oh jeeeeeez - gag me!!!), and thus was off limits to a lot of scrutiny............and Nurse Ratchett had allready been around the mulberry bush, and wasn't real poplular with a lot of people..............the MSM (obviously) gave a pass to Hussein Soretoro, while doing their best to make Hillarious look bad.
The ironic thing about it was, and is...........they're very similiar in idealology and agenda. They're both from Chicago,they're both Alinsky-ities, they're both commie/socialist/one-world believers....................but, hey............Barry was a 'black' guy (gag me again!!!), and he was 'historic'................so Ratchett had to go.
The only reason Slick Willie would support his 'wife' is if there was something in it for him................and you KNOW that it has NOTHING to do with a domestic relationship!!!
Fake slick Willie
Submitted by MOONSTRUCK on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 8:58am.
Did anyone notice the empty cup he faked sipping from when he was asked a "difficult" question from Bill? And the resting his big head on his hand. Arrogant pompous jerk.
Body Language
Submitted by mikebromo on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 11:35am.
Usually don't care for the body language lady, but her analys of Clinton should be good. I wondered about Clinton resting his head in his hand too, as if he's saying I'm bored with the questions.
Agree on body language lady
Submitted by StarAZ on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 12:22pm.
The Russian language lady is fun, but that one with the know-it-all, pro-Obama stance, nah.
The press had almost coronated HRC in early 2008 . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 11:34am.
. . . until the Obama phenomenon emerged. Most of the MSM then jilted her and rushed to kiss BHO.
It appears that Slick is trying to plant the seed of a myth that had it not been for media bias, his wife would've been elected President and we wouldn't be in the mess we're in now.
At this stage in his life, it seems Slick Willie isn't satisfied with amassing wealth by doing presumably good deeds. He is intent on revising recent history so as to erase the stain he left on his Presidency and our nation, and replace it with a sense of collective guilt that we didn't allow the Clintons to perform the miracles they had in store for us.
The goal is to convince future generations that the Clintons were a blessing to America, and that because of this, they were vilified (dare we say crucified) by the Right, the MSM, and even wobbly Democrats. This is the JFK-Camelot model: Redefining persons and events to mold a false and lofty image of what had been, and melding it to a glorious vision of what would be had evil conspiracies and events not disrupted the Clinton-plotted course to our utopian destiny.
And there is little doubt that some historians will regurgitate their 'narrative.'
Could not have been said
Submitted by celator on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 12:38pm.
Could not have been said better. "...a sense of collective guilt that we didn't allow the Clintons to perform the miracles they had in store for us." This is the core of the Clinton revisionist history, which will be picked up in high school and college textbooks, as well as the MSM drumbeaters. As, who was it, Sidney Bloomberg, once said (paraphrasing) , "the Clintons are the best liars I've ever seen. They lie when they don't even have to lie."
Blumethal ought to know . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 3:59pm.
. . . He earned his pay in the Clinton WH spreading their lies and lying about their accusers..
One of the stranger aspects of our culture is that its short attention span and memory allow devious, self-indulgent liars like the Clintons to reinvent their pasts. Slick is more popular out of office then he was in it, and Hillary is credited with having crafted and delivered some nebulous (non-existent) foreign policy achievements.
Everything out of this man's
Submitted by Semus on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 10:53am.
Everything out of this man's pie hole is either a lie or a half truth.
Yes, he looked terrible
Submitted by StarAZ on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 12:38pm.
I guess it's from grazing on arugula all the time--no protein--and I suppose you dear folks over here who can't wait to bash him will bash me, but I would take the money I had then in a heartbeat. You know--before I rode the Middle Class into the ditch or out here, the Big Canyon.
Press and Bill?
Submitted by TangoUniform on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 1:39pm.
Noel, kind of disagree with you on this. If Ross Perot had not entered the picture, Billy would have spent the 90's still trolling trailer parks. But ole Ross jumped on the bandwagon with the perceived economy, too. It all started with Buchanan in the primaries, showing where Bush was vulnerable and Perot and Clinton found the "out of touch" view of Bush. This could be the same scenario this election cycle with Ron Paul, if he decides to 3rd party it. Any mainstream Republican will be toast with the split vote, and we can look forward to four more years of the current disaster. But then again if Ralph Nader had not taken votes away from crazy ole Gore in Florida, no question, robot boy would have taken Florida. Take the good with the bad.
I wouldn't worry about Ron Paul as 3rd Party candidate
Submitted by Galvanic on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 4:35pm.
But there are bound to be others, and those candidates could attract votes away from Obama, the GOP candidate, or both. The history of candidacies like those of Perot and Nader spook the hell out of campaign managers.
He lies even when unnecessary
Submitted by jawbone on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 4:45pm.
- Even though I don't follow NewsBusters, they are so right about the 1992 election: All the economic indicators turned up in mid-1992, so strongly that, even with the earlier months factored in, the year as a whole was up 3 to 4 percent, depending on the indicator you use. The press chose to not report this, instead parroting Clinton's line about the weakest economy in 50 years.
- As to the Obama-Hillary primary race, the press strongly favored Obama, and this was at least in part a plan, not just group-think or coincidence, as revealed by Journolist.
The press savaged Bill Clinton too
Submitted by T D on Wed, 12/21/2011 - 6:00pm.
The press savaged Bill Clinton too in the 2008 primaries. Remember them calling him a racist?
It wasn't only Hillary. The disgraceful conduct of the press was more apparent than usual in 2008 because they also savaged their own previous favorites in order to pick the winner.
The press has long, sharp knives, and Bill, Hillary and Chelsea are still big targets if they don't play nice.