Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
06.03.2008 12:46 pm

B. Clinton unchained: Reporter nemesis “sleazy,” “slimy,” “scumbag”

WASHINGTON _ The drip, drip torture of superdelegates deciding for Barack Obama must be getting to Bill Clinton.

You’d think that an ex-two term president and renowned political brain might be able to hold himself in check a tad better. Especially when talking about the husband of your former press secretary.

But that wasn’t the case yesterday when he lambasted Vanity Fair writer Todd Purdum, the former New York Times reporter who wrote a source story in this month’s magazine quoting unnamed Clinton allies as criticizing the 61-year-old former president for damaging Hillary Clinton’s campaign and hanging with a fast crowd.

Clinton called Purdum “sleazy,” according to a blog in Huffington Post, and went on to say: “He’s a really dishonest reporter. And one of our guys talked to him . . . And I haven’t read [the article]. But he told me there’s five or six just blatant lies in there. But he’s a real slimy guy.”

Clinton wasn’t fazed when reminded that Purdum is the spouse of Dee Dee Myers, who was his long-time spokeswoman.

“That’s all right– he’s still a scumbag,” Clinton said. ” Let me tell ya– he’s one of the guys — he’s one of the guys that propagated all those lies about Whitewater to Kenneth Starr. He’s just a dishonest guy– can’t help it.”

Clinton went on to repeat his charge about the press being biased toward Obama. His outburst brought this apology from a campaign spokesman: “President Clinton was understandably upset about an outrageously unfair article, but the language today was inappropriate and he wishes he had not used it.”

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (5 votes, average: 3.4 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...
16 comments

Comments are closed.

I personally will be very glad to say goodbye to Bill and Hillary. They have definitely outstayed their welcome. Their propensity to lie about the delegate and popular vote count reminds me of some past politicians, the bigger the lie, just keep repeating it louder and more often, maybe someone will believe it.

— Janet Cook
2:06 pm June 3rd, 2008

It must be that vast right-wing, I mean, left-wing conspiracy.

— Steve
2:15 pm June 3rd, 2008

Bill Clinton… calling somebody a liar? pot and kettle… ..but oh yeah, he didn’t inhale…

— Brad
2:43 pm June 3rd, 2008

Bill did great things during his 8 year reign, what is so harsh about the word “slimy”, oooh, so vicious. It seems media is so hell bent on a wow factor that even the mildest gesture is deemed incredible bash fodder. I believe, as many have stated, that Obama/Hillary ticket with a little of bill on the side might do great things….at least help with the Bush Damage Control, which in that, american politics, foreign policy, etc. could take all the help we can get…..of course there are some that believe abstinence in the name of ANYTHING productive is a perrogative [repubilican intention at heart], that carries onto their own lives, that being said, obviously their are just those out their that have never gotten over Bill’s sexuality issues….oh my …..imagine.. sex in the white house….how’d THAT ever happen??

— Bill Bobaggits
2:53 pm June 3rd, 2008

I’ll have to believe the ex-president on his summation of the character of his former press secretary’s spouse. As it takes one to know one, Bill Clinton would be the expert on being a “just a dishonest guy - can’t help it.”

— James
3:02 pm June 3rd, 2008

AP reported earlier that Hillary is “open” to the VP spot. Let’s hope Obama shows good judgement by showing her out the door along with Bill. By the way…Monica Lewinsky’s birthday is this week.

— Orlon
3:05 pm June 3rd, 2008

Vanity Fair is a typical New York, yellow journalism scandal sheet that is slimy, scummy et all as often as not. It generates news to be in the news & generate money. This dialogue helps. Dee Dee Myers may be great. Her husband may be a scumbag. So what? Vanity Fair is, was & will be worfless!
Futhamo, Bill’s “regret” on the language he used does not an apology make. When will the media stop instructing readers/viewers on what has just been read or seen? Oh, yeah, I forgot: never.

— Robert Wintner
3:07 pm June 3rd, 2008

Todd Purdum is a scumbag. He wants to make money since he and his dunked wife can’t seem to find employment. Why not make money with a book. Dee Dee Myers should hang her head in shame. She married trash. But then again, she is a drunk, can’t think straight. It is true that the media was biased toward Obama. Every thing that the Catholic priest said about Senator Clinton, was said by Maureen Dowd, Christ Matthews and the criminally complicit media, especially MSNBC. But they say a people only gets the government they deserve. They deserve lying, Obama.

— Z. Sohl
3:09 pm June 3rd, 2008

Sadly, Bill Clinton’s words may be actionable as well. Don’t be surprised if his comments soon draw a defamation or false light lawsuit from Purdum.

— A Dem who will NEVER support Obama
3:10 pm June 3rd, 2008

Well the Clintons aren’t generally credible with denials but Purdum’s said to have 39 quotes attributed to no one. The question I have is the timing? What’s the motivation for it? If you have to cite 39 people whose names you cannot mention, what’s the urgency to get the story out now? What’s the magazine’s motive? What’s the author’s motive? I get that it’s spicy entertaining public literature but only in a sadistic kind of heartless way. I don’t say this as a voter who has any wish to see the Clintons in the White House again. That said, I don’t think the timing serves the process in any responsible way.

— Gaias Child
3:18 pm June 3rd, 2008

Pages: [1] 2 » Show All