Try to remember a time in September when it was reported that the Hillary Clinton campaign showed its "hard-nosed media strategy" by getting GQ magazine to spike a piece on Clinton team in-fighting by threatening to pull access to Bill Clinton for GQ’s planned December "Man of the Year" cover package. Well, that "Man of the Year" issue is out, and there was no bucking, only fawning. The article is titled "Bill Clinton, Public Citizen: On the road with one man who believe that there is no problem on Earth, no matter how complex or horrific, that cannot be solved." GQ spiked the negative article and gave the former president a puff piece so puffy that it will lead to Monica Lewinsky jokes. The editor found Clinton to be Reaganesque.
In his letter from the editor in the December issue, Editor/Spiker-in-Chief Jim Nelson makes no reference to the deal he made with the Clintons. In a note headlined "The Year of the Wide Stance," he summarized the year like this: "It was a year when politicians couldn’t decide what they stood for – or in the case of Larry Craig, what they sat for." Nelson mocked Rudy Giuliani for citing Reagan as a role model and joked candidates should pick a more obscure president to model after, like alcoholic Franklin Pierce. Then he compared Clinton favorably to Reagan:
Say what you will about Kanye West or A-Rod or Bill Clinton or Mike Bloomberg, but these guys have led. Their actions and ideas and performances and bruising hip-hop swagger (I’m talkin’ about you, Bloomberg!) made the crucial difference this year...And I believe they inspired us all to be a little more like Ronald Reagan.
Reporter George Saunders began the puff piece in the Dominican Republic with Clinton as he entered a hospital full of children. He quickly establishes that the tone of this article will be that Bill Clinton is a brilliant savior of a half-millions AIDS sufferers, and anyone who has ever opposed him is an infantile lout for doing so:
Clinton doesn’t say a word as he enters. I’m expecting the affable, gregarious, at ease president of legend to exude a burst of tension-diffusing warmth. But no. He’s tall, thin, white-haired, and solemn, like the ghost of Jimmy Stewart, if death had made Jimmy Stewart watchful and biblically dour.
Clinton nods gravely to a nun, touches one kid on the head, stares at another a beat longer than you would expect, as if he’s met the kid before and is trying to remember where. The silence goes on an uncomfortably long time. It begins to feel, possibly, like sullenness, or confusion. Is he exhausted? Has he had it will all the traveling, the attention, the continual expectation that he will exude bursts of tension-diffusing warmth?
The silence has the effect of bringing the room to attention. The kids go quiet. Even we Press, behind our green rope, stop jostling and photographing and just look. Suddenly, whether it’s accidental, intentional, or some rot of visceral Zen body-sense he’s acquired over many years of doing this kind of thing, we’re all more in the room than we were a few seconds earlier. We’re having – he is causing us to have – a moment.
In this little Clinton-caused moment, something occurs to me: If not for –
At this point, a warning about an encroaching moment of corniness of a type you’ll see again in this story: that which results when a virtuous action, reported objectively, is so virtuous it still sounds corny.
Objectivity has nothing to do with it. Saunders is getting on his knees for his first genuflection:
So: In this little Clinton-caused moment, something occurs to me: If not for the William J. Clinton Foundation, every one of these kids would be dead or dying soon, since every one of them is HIV-positive, and until the foundation intervened, almost no one in the Dominican Republc had access to life-prolonging antiretroviral drugs (ARVs). And for most kids this young, the life expectancy for something with HIV no on ARVs is five years.
"I see a vacant seat in the poor chimney corner, and a crutch without an owner, carefully preserved," the Ghost of Christmas Present says to Scrooge, re Tiny Tim. "If these shadows remain unaltered by the Future, the child will die."
The kids – these twenty altered shadows – present Clinton with a poster: CHILDREN LIVING WITH AIDS. A BIG CHALLENGE FOR THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC.
The teachers count off: "Uno, dos, tres..."
"DENK YOU!" the kids shout.
Saunders projected that Clinton saved the lives of half a million people, reporting that in 2002, only two million of 35 million people in the world with HIV had access to those ARV drugs.
If you’re like me, you vaguely knew about this and took it as proof of the essential powerlessness of man and the cruelty of a universe in which certain horrible problems were simply too complex to solve.
If you were Bill Clinton, you called Ira Magaziner, senior adviser for policy development in your White House and key architect of your universal health plan, and together you went off and brokered a deal with some Indian and South African generic-drug companies, a deal now legendary for the judoistic, zero-sum beauty of its logic.
Clinton convinced generic drug makers to lower their prices by promising to provide purchase the drugs in volume:
The Clinton Foundation estimates that some 750,000 people are now taking reduced-price ARVs purchased under the Clinton HIV-AIDS Initiative-negotiated agreements. The New York Times puts this figure at 400,000.
Either way, it’s huge: half a million people, sentenced to die, given a reprieve.
It would be wise to suspect that Saunders is merely recycling the entire Clinton Foundation publicity pitch. For example, even as they fawned about Clinton’s prodigious talents, Fortune magazine reported some quibbles around the edges for how much credit is warranted. But Saunders confessed he was a longtime Clinton booster, that Bill’s speeches made him cry:
Bill Clinton, the man who was president when my daughters were small, whose inaugural speech ("force the spring") choked me up in my cubicle, whose State of the Unions my wife and I watched year after year in our little house in Rochester; whom I let slip off my radar somewhat during that long second term, because having admired him, I felt let down and sick about the whole mess: his mistakes and the way some people jumped on those mistakes, exulting in what was a complex, personal issue, the infantile streak it revealed in us as a culture.
I'm still amazed that some people can see a man beginning an affair with an intern that's almost his daughter's age as she flashed her thong underwear at him and...call his critics "infantile." Saunders and other Clinton cheerleaders never acknowledge that this "whole mess" was all about a sexual-harassment lawsuit, the charge that he had forced himself on unwilling state employees like Paula Jones and demanded their sexual attention. He settled with Jones to the tune of $850,000.
Still to come: more GQ fawning over Clinton and his foundation staff. See Goo No. 2 here.
—Tim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center















Editor at Large

Comments Policy
Still to come: more GQ
December 7, 2007 - 08:57 ET by motherbeltStill to come: more GQ fawning over Clinton and his foundation staff.
Please Tim, no more!!! I can't take it!!!
I couldn't even get through the entirety of THIS installment!
What on earth is wrong with the guys at GQ, that they think it's such an HONOR to have "the big He" gracing" their pages, that they will.....well, I don't even know what to call this without getting tacky.........
This is pathetic.
BTW, that opening is reminiscent of the the beginning of "Primary Colors." The description of the "candidate" entering a room, the deliberate touching of someone; bring back Klein's description of all the calculated types of the candidate's handshake, depending on what he wanted to convey: (emphasis added).
I've seen him do it two million times now, but I couldn't tell you how he does
it, the right-handed part of it--the strength, quality, duration of it, the
rudiments of pressing the flesh. I can, however, tell you a whole lot about what
he does with his other hand. He is a genius with it. He might put it on your
elbow, or up by your biceps: these are basic, reflexive moves. He is interested
in you. He is honored to meet you. If he gets any higher up your shoulder--if
he, say, drapes his left arm over your back, it is somehow less intimate, more
casual. He'll share a laugh or a secret then--a light secret, not a real
one--flattering you with the illusion of conspiracy. If he doesn't know you all
that well and you've just told him something "important," something earnest or
emotional, he will lock in and honor you with a two-hander, his left hand
overwhelming your wrist and forearm. He'll flash that famous misty look of his.
And he will mean it.
Calculated. Every last, infitessimal, move and expression. It's amazing that people still fall for it. Or maybe they're just fascinated by it.
"What on earth is wrong
December 7, 2007 - 10:44 ET by kg"What on earth is wrong with the guys at GQ?"
Nothing, after Hillary put them in their place. GQ is a good little soldier and wants to please her. They have seen the error of ther ways. Now they can proudly fall in line with the other liberal media as they chant "Go team Hillary, go!"
}}---> GQ
December 7, 2007 - 10:51 ET by Cool ArrowNot to be confused with "REAL MEN" magazine.
I mean, how macho is it for GQ to accept the proposition set forth by Hillary: "I'll let you fellate my husband if you'll quash that story"
Can we rename "GQ" to "Wuss"
Actually, they could change
December 7, 2007 - 11:07 ET by motherbeltActually, they could change it to GM..for "Girly-men." (or is it Girlie? No matter)
However, on thinking it over, I like Ann Coulter's phrase "girly-
BOYS" even better.
delete
December 7, 2007 - 11:06 ET by motherbeltdouble
This must be how it was
December 7, 2007 - 09:14 ET by DontFeedTheTrollsThis must be how it was during the last days of the Roman Empire. The fawning over these self-proclaimed 'gods', the promotion of style over substance, seemingly half the world blind to the destructive 'feel good' behavior. The lies are told and believed by even the liars who tell them. Here we have Bill Clinton, convicted criminal both at home and by the world court, lauded by an onanistic group of elitists. I could just scream.
D
Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.
I've subscribed to GQ for
December 7, 2007 - 12:05 ET by TEI've subscribed to GQ for about 20 years. This latest bit on Boy Clinton is nothing new. With the exception of the writing of its food critic Alan Richman, every sentence (yes, every sentence) of GQ is infused with uber kook leftist fundamentalism. It's flaming Editor-in-Chief Jim Nelson is a combination of Barney Frank, Andrew Sullivan, Che Guevara, Bella Abzug, Al Gore and Cindy Sheehan. He's dumber than rocks but appears to consider himself "brilliant" and "funny". Strange people ....
}}---> TE
December 7, 2007 - 12:14 ET by Cool ArrowAnd they don't even have a foldout?
Are you so rich you would support GQ for 20 years?
P.S. by law, you don't have to actually subscribe to the magazines to get a chance at the Publisher's Clearing House sweepstakes.
Clinton - late to the party
December 7, 2007 - 14:54 ET by Gary HallOh for goodness sake, GQ - let's keep it in perspective here. As president, Bill Clinton was a failure in these issues you are falling all over yourselves over. Unlike Ronald Reagan who, back during the early days of HIV/Aids, may not have early on fully understood the ramifications of where the Aids crisis was heading, Bill Clinton absolutley did understand the crisis during his 8 years. Bill Clinton decided not to lead on the issue as president, and that's according to the left side of the isle. He looked the other way. While the media continues to attack Reagan, year after year for what he did not say for a while as President, this very same media continues to praise Clinton, for what he did not do, and continues to shun President Bush for what he is doing. One view of many:
The Nation's Washington editor, David Corn, in "Too little, too late - How many times is Bill Clinton going to apologize to Africa?":
Bono's partner in Live Aidm Bob Geldof said Mr. Bush is far more committed than Mr. Clinton to fighting AIDS and famine on the continent.
President Bush, on the other hand, came into office like a man on fire. He listened to those who brought the message that it was past time to act, and he jumped in feet first. For starters, he immediately more than doubled Clinton's static (for 8 years, averaged $200+ million) US spending on Aids in Africa, and then pushed the spending into the billions per year - and is not asking for a budget of $6 billion/annually for the next 5 years.
So Saunders wishes to tout that at the end of the Clinton era?
"only two million of 35 million people in the world with HIV had access to those ARV drugs."
Fine. But President Bush's actions started kicking in in 2002, with the big push beginning in 2003. And now:
The result, per UNICEF a couple of months back: