Bill goes passive-agressive on Hil: "Amazed she's borne up under it."

[Divernan]

This CNN article has quotes from a CNN interview with Bill Clinton, to be aired on Sunday. The line which jumped out at me was: "I actually am amazed that she's borne up under it as well as she has." Now obviously, Bill knows the real Hill - better than anyone else. He saw what she had to handle/bear up under during all his extramarital flings and the concommitant humiliating publicity, during his impeachment proceedings and in her 2008 campaign. Why is he "amazed" that she's bearing up this time around?

Bill is nothing if not a wordsmith: "It depends on what the meaning of 'is' is." So "amaze" is a very telling choice:

AMAZE: verb 1. surprise (someone) greatly; fill with astonishment "he was amazed at how modern everything was" synonyms: astonish, astound, surprise, stun, stagger

And even if he is "amazed", why would he state that publicly? That's where the passive-aggressive action comes in. Damning by faint praise.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/25/politics/bill-clinton-fareed-zakaria-donald-trump-interview/index.html?eref=rss_topstories

"I think that there are lots of people who wanted there to be a race for different reasons. And they thought the only way they could make it a race was a full-scale frontal assault on her. And so this email thing became the biggest story in the world," Clinton said to CNN's Fareed Zakaria in an interview that will air Sunday on "Fareed Zakaria GPS."

"I actually am amazed that she's borne up under it as well as she has. But I have never seen so much expended on so little. ... I trust the people. I think it will be all right. But it's obvious what happened," Clinton added.

The 42nd president said "we're seeing history repeat itself," citing the Whitewater scandal of the 1990s. He also said media coverage of his wife shifted from issues to politics by "people who want a race."

But, he added, "this is a contact sport. They're not giving the job away."

Perhaps the interviewer will pin Bill down on some of these excerpts, which sound awfully argle-bargle to me. Who are the "lots of people" and what exactly are the "different reasons"? Who is/are the "they" who are not giving the job away?

[NWHarkness]

1. Well, this is a new low.

I joined this site when I saw the founders banner during Bush's first Inaugural parade.

Over the years. I've seen a lot of in fighting, but nothing like what goes on now.

Enough.

I'm gone.

Good luck.

[cherokeeprogressive]

11. Bye.

[bigwillq]

13. Bye.

[Hortensis]

16. Surely just a run-of-the-mill low? :) HRC can handle it just fine.

[cui bono]

35. THIS is what makes you leave?

Not the smear mongering calling a candidate a racist, a gunhumper, a pervert... there were more than that. Those were okay?

Now, I think this is a silly OP, but it comes NO WHERE near the Not Enough, Bernie OPs that have been out there.

[haikugal]

52. Very true...

[oasis]

2. Sometimes it really IS what it IS.

Even a husband's reflections on the media manufactured headache his wife has had to endure.

[OKNancy]

3. He is admiring her strength!

Only someone looking for a negative would think anything else.

[MohRokTah]

4. Sanders' biggest problem is his supporters. eom

[Snotcicles]

18. Nah, they are the best. I always feel like I'm in better company when I'm around them. nt

[MohRokTah]

19. That says a lot about you.

I have no need to ever know somebody like you.

Goodbye.

[Snotcicles]

22. Aww, now that was not very nice. nt

[senz]

48. lol -- which says something about various "other" supporters ...

Ah, if only Hillary folk could be just a tad less peevish. All discussions would improve, right across the board.

[haikugal]

54. Just nasty...

[cui bono]

36. So it says on the meme list under #4.

Unless you mean they are not nasty enough like the hillaryclintonsupporters.com are.

[MohRokTah]

37. I don't play YOUR game by YOUR rules. eom

[cui bono]

38. That would be difficult since I'm not playing any games. n/t

[HereSince1628]

5. Or maybe WJC is modelling the attitudes and behavior we are supposed to have toward her.

I'm not sure there is any evidence of his being passive aggressive towards her.

The message seems to be H> is unfairly picked on by a secret cabal who want tv ratings

I have to agree that picking on H> is the best explanation of why the media has gone 24/7 with Trump. But then I really have been unable to see any explanation for why the media has gone 24/7 with Trump.

[MindfulOne]

6. To me, there's an implied "for a woman" in his statement.

His generation, not so much just him, can't help it but frame things from their male-centered POV.

Be it a woman coming out of a firefight in Iraq or a second place winner in a NASCAR race, it would not be surprising for a man to say such a thing:

"Wow, the little lady sure did hold up well in there." I find it disgusting.

Worse, she's his wife and maybe she's even tougher than him, but he can't see that.

Who the fuck is HE to publicly declare how tough she is?

I'm no fan of Hillary Clinton but just on principle, I think Bill should shut the fuck up.

[mak3cats]

21. With just a surface reading of this, that's what I felt...

Being a 5-foot woman, I've had a lot of head-patting in my lifetime. It's never appreciated.

[oasis]

34. (1) Bill has first hand information about HIS wife (2)

He's got more smarts than 99% of the posters on this board.

[snagglepuss]

58. Very interesting observation.

Welcome to DU

[karynnj]

7. shouldn't you wait to see the interview?

Context is everything and even by itself, the meaning of this can be anything from admiration that she can take it in stride to concern that it is too difficult. My guess is the former and that he is pushing this as a measure of her strength.

It could also simply reflect the generation he was born in?
There was never a time where Clinton was not protective of Hillary - even when she didn't need it. I can think of many candidates who were unhappy that their wives and families were attacked. The difference for Clinton is that his wife is the one running. ( seriously Kerry was hit with far worse and they were lies, can you picture a concerned Teresa saying those words. )

The only negative that it could show is that he thinks the negative email stories are unfair. While I would not expect him to be impartial, I would have hoped that his political sense would suggest that dragging this out would makes things worse.

[magical thyme]

20. There was never a time where Clinton was not protective of Hillary

Really? I'd have to disagree with that....

[karynnj]

23. Protective does not mean faithful

Not to mention it goes both ways - not one defended Bill Clinton, wrong or right, more than HRC.

[magical thyme]

24. imo, cheating on your marriage is not protective of your partner

I suppose lying about it after the fact is a sad attempt to protect them from your hurtful and damaging behavior, but in reality? No, I consider it the antithesis of protective.

[PoliticAverse]

8. Nothing as bad as 2008's "I can't make her younger..." n/t

[ljm2002]

9. Sorry, but I think this parsing of his statement is ridiculous...

...saying he is amazed that she has borne up as well as she has is very standard usage IMO and does not in any way imply that he questions her abilities or emotional makeup.

[bigdarryl]

10. And my question is could Sanders holdup as good as Hillary under

This kind of scrutiny.He's never had to run against attacks on him in an election like the Clintons have.They are battle tested.I don't think I can say the same for Sanders or Biden for that matter

[ljm2002]

15. Although he has never run nationally before...

...I do not share your concern about his ability to handle the heat.

[bigdarryl]

17. His problem is he doesn't like to fight back negatively

And that's a huge problem if he were in a general election against the Republicans attack machine

[peacebird]

26. He has never gone negative. Yet he wins, even when others go negative on him.

It's not a problem thAt Bernie refuses to sling mud, it's actually a positive!

[jwirr]

29. I disagree with your statement totally. Just like we are fed

up with the status quo we are also fed up with dirty politics. And fighting back does not have to mean personal attack ads. It can very simply mean clearly stating your own position regarding the attack.

[Major Hogwash]

43. Neither did Obama.

As far as I know, he never ever addressed Sister Sarah's constant accusations of him "palling around with terrorists."
It was such a ludicrous statement that Obama simply ignored it.

Obama's style of campaigning was a different approach to campaigning on a national platform.
Although some old-timers liked the old style pooh-flinging, it did not help advance the country on the important issues of the day, and the discussions turned off a lot of voters.

I am reminded of when LBJ once said that he wanted to accuse his opponent in the election of fucking pigs.
When it was pointed out to him by one of his advisors that it would be ridiculous to make such an accusation, LBJ just smiled and said, "Yeah, but I'd like to see him deny it."

We have gone beyond such tactics in this day and age of instant verification via the internet.

[senz]

50. Good points.

[LuvLoogie]

28. He hasn't had his relationships and family attacked.

He hasn't been attacked out of anti-semitism like Hillary has endured years of misogyny in the press and on Capitol Hill.

He hasn't had trumped up scandals with hundreds of millions spent to drag him down. He hasn't had a hit-piece film made about him in violation of campaign finance law, overruled by a partisan Supreme Court.

He has not been on the international political stage for 20-odd years.

I do not think Bernie would take to kindly to having his family attacked and smeared in the press, on talk radio, on the internet.

And the thing about many of Bernie's supporters is that they are counting on those attacks and trumped up scandals that prop up the notion of Hillary as a political pariah. They can't win without the aid of 20 years of political attacks against her.

[jwirr]

30. You say he has not had all these kinds of attacks - they

have tried to attack him on every one of those points. The shit does not stick.

[LuvLoogie]

40. Really? Pick one word in the press in the last six months about Bernie

and one word about Hillary. It's Crowds versus Email. The New York Times ran an outright lie a few weeks ago saying that Hillary was under criminal investigation. And didn't retract it for days.

Someone today right here on DU posted a head line saying that Hillary didn't hand over all the email requested. The fact is she did, and it was the state department who handed more over recently due to the scope of the investigation recently expanding. The state department had them the whole time. State just did a rescreening.

But the headline and spin from yet another hit piece, and it's being shared by an anti-Hillary DUer, is nothing that Bernie has had the pleasure to enjoy. Every email headline from every news source including Breitbart and Newsmax gets shared here. Someone on this board called Hillary a whore. I objected with a two-word profanity and got hidden. The offender's post remains.

This has been going on since the early 90s for Hillary.

It's even in this freakin OP, for Pete's sake!

"Bill goes passive-aggressive on Hil"

[ljm2002]

31. I am well aware of the right wing attack machine...

...and its tactics against both of the Clintons. And yes, we can expect exactly the same kind of attacks against whoever the Democratic nominee is -- hopefully Bernie. But if you think Bernie does not know what he will be up against, I think you are underestimating the man.

As for your comments about "many of Bernie's supporters", save it. Hillary's a big girl and she knows the game. No doubt some of Bernie's supporters are over the top, and no doubt many of Hillary's supporters are too.

[karynnj]

25. What kind of scrutiny?

It is a complete myth that HRC is being attacked more than other Democrats and handles it better. Obama handles it better and is attacked on far deeper levels.

This season the majority of attacks on HRC are because she did something that is very hard to easily justify. It may be that it was easier for Obama (and Kerry) to stand up to the Republican smears because those smears were essentially untrue. Obama was born in the US and Kerry was a war hero and a man of integrity.

Note that HRC's numbers have fallen because she has lost some support among the independents and Democrats. No matter how much she wants to characterize this as just the right wing against her, there are Democrats finding it hard to support or defend her.

As to Sanders, his liabilities are not that he can be attacked as a person. Of course, he can. The hardest thing he has is that he - unlike either Biden or Clinton - is a real vote for change. Yet, really listening to him - I hear echoes of Norman Rockwell America and FDR. The real secret may be that he and a Vt where Chicken pot pie suppers seem to be advertised in many nearby communities are really a return to the best of our past - unpdated to be more diverse. (Bernie led VT to cast its votes for Jesse Jackson and led Vt to be a refugee resettlement community. )

Biden has run many many elections and he is tested. He has his flaws - everyone does - but at heart he is seen as an honest man. THAT will help him when he is attacked - and if he runs the first people to attack him will be the Clinton surrogates.

What is amazing is that HRC has twice had the nomination basically handed to her on a silver platter by the powers that be. Now and in 2008, she had the party support, the money, and the media. Yet, here is Bill Clinton whining that people are not fair to HRC.

[senz]

45. Excellent analysis. Well worth reading.

Re Hillary and the media, I get the impression that the media -- for the most part -- are not so much "out to get her" as they are puzzled at her lackluster performance and falling numbers. She gets more attention than other Dem candidates because she has long been considered the Dem front runner, not because the media hates her.

It appears that Bill is doing damage control and trying to garner sympathy for Hillary. But oddly enough, the fact that he feels the need to do this just underscores how badly she is doing. It would have been smarter to deny that anything is amiss and then talk up her strengths.

[cherokeeprogressive]

12. He's amazed she's bearing up... and the primaries haven't even begun.

Wait till the GOP is running eleventy hundred negative ads per day. If Bubba is amazed she's holding up now, just wait. It's going to get eleventy bazillion times worse.

[senz]

14. Hope Bill appreciates that Bernie never goes negative on his wife

yet she has already sent her henchmen out for Bernie.

'Cause that's just the way she is.

Bet Bill knows that, too.

[restorefreedom]

44. bernies wife is also now under attack

the clintons and their mercenaries know no boundaries

thank goodness after bernie takes the first few primaries, they will be gone from politics forever.
bye, clintons..,enjoy retirement

[tularetom]

27. Don't forget, if she is defeated it will make HIM look like a chump

Conversely, in the increasingly slim chance that she might be elected, to him it will be an affirmation of HIS presidency.

[sadoldgirl]

32. To be fair she tried to protect him when

he was in trouble, and now he tries to do the same for her.
Let's face it this is a political marriage, and has been so for years.
Nothing wrong with that, if that is how they stay together.

What they say privately to each other is nobody's business.
After all FDR's marriage was no fairytale either, yet they
relied on each other; however I am sure that Eleanor gave
him hell more than once.

I have different issues with HRC than that particular
story, but I can see that the repugs will use it to
the last drop. Should she become the nominee, then
that worries me, because it will be used to reinforce
the distrust of her.

[oasis]

39. Hillary protected the votes of Americans who elected Bill.

Had she not stood by Bill during the impeachment proceedings, the 1996 election would have been voided.

Public opinion heavily favored BC during that period, because Hillary was solidly behind him. IMO, Hillary hate was born from the right's thwarted attempt to remove Bill Clinton from the Oval Office.

[karynnj]

49. Are you really suggesting that had HRC seperated from BC in August 1998, that

enough Democrats would have voted to impeach? Some time in 2005 or so, when I learned how to access the Senate record, I spent a fascinating amount of time reading the speeches that Democratic Senators gave.

What was fascinating is the window they provided on each of the Senators. Most followed the pattern of first describing Clinton's actions very negatively - some dwelling on the obstruction of justice / lying to the grand jury; others the inappropriateness of his actions with Lewinsky. THEN, they each transitioned in some way and gave reasons why this did not reach the level of high crimes and misdemeanors - the threshold for voting him out.

Second, another reason this would not invalidate the election is that had he been removed - Gore would have become President - not the Republicans who led the effort. No one says that LBJ becoming President invalidated the election of 1960.

Not to mention arguing that HRC deserves credit for keeping herself First Lady when her husband was impeached is not a strong argument to make. In fact, it never fails to amaze me that the Clinton wing of the party often has not given their full support to candidates they are not enamored with even though the Kennedy wing of the party strongly defended Bill Clinton when he needed it.

[jeff47]

57. Uh...no.

"I didn't vote for Clinton...or her husband either" bumper stickers were quite popular in 1993. "Hillary hate" did not start with impeachment.

[JoePhilly]

33. This might be one of the dumbest OPs ever on DU.

You should frame it.

[Divernan]

41. The Guardian: "Clinton gave a half-hearted endorsement of his wife."

Bill, who has been kept under wraps by the campaign so far, was brought out to give the interview to make the news - whether you like the content of it or not.

The surprising part of the interview came when Clinton gave a half-hearted endorsement of his wife while seeming to undermine his own judgment of US politics.

Asked if Trump – who he described as master brander – could be the Republican nominee for president in 2016, Clinton said: “I think so.”

As Zakaria could be heard saying “Wow”, Clinton backtracked: “I mean, I don’t know. I don’t understand any of it very well. Look, I’ve been out of politics a long time. I haven’t run for office in 20 years.

“I love my foundation,” he continued. “I’m proud of Hillary. I’ll do what I can do to help her, but I am not the best pundit anymore. I don’t have a good feel for this. All I know is what I think is good for the country.

“I think Hillary would be a great president but I have … I have no confidence in my political feel anymore. I’ve been out of it a long time and I’m not mad at anybody. I’m just happy to be here.”

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/26/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-bill-clinton

(The article also included the portions I quoted in my OP, particularly, " 'I actually am amazed that she’s borne up under it as well as she has,” he said.')

I agree with this comment following the article:

nataliesutler/30m ago

"This was all part of the Clinton's deal. She wouldn't dump him over the repeated infidelities and he would support her bid for the presidency. Any woman of substance and integrity would have left Bill Clinton long ago. She chose to stay and be humiliated repeatedly because she wanted power. Not a great role model for women."

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/26/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-bill-clinton

And now Bill is on the fund-raising circuit.

President Bill Clinton will headline a fundraiser for his wife's presidential campaign in Michigan next month, The Detroit News has learned.

The former president will headline an October 7 fundraiser in Bingham Farms at the home of Doreen Hermelin. Tickets to the two-hour event cost $500, and attendees can get a photo with former President Clinton by making a $2700 contribution. People can cohost the event by raising $10,000.

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2015/09/26/clinton-fundraiser-bingham-farms/72877586/

[Metric System]

53. You agree with that BS comment? It's like something I'm used to seeing from right-wingers

regarding the Clintons' marriage. What goes on in their marriage and why they stayed together is nobody's business.

[Divernan]

55. I quote the Guardian, the world's leading liberal voice

http://www.theguardian.com/uk

[Metric System]

56. No, I'm referring to the comment you quoted from the comments section and said you agreed with.

[Major Hogwash]

42. Don't you feel sorry for her now?

Won't you vote for her now?
Because I think that is the entire reason Bill made the statement: "I actually am amazed that she's borne up under it as well as she has."

Hell, I'm surprised that anyone would still consider Hillary to be a viable candidate to become the President.
Because it seems to me that she has been running for that office for the last 16 years.
And so, I would think people would have grown weary of her by now.
If for nothing more than her absolutely naked ambition to be the President, that seems to me to be so damn obvious.

Yet, let's parse Bill's other statements the same way Bill always does.
When he said, "I think that there are lots of people who wanted there to be a race for different reasons."

Well, yeah.
We Democrats just don't automagically hand over the crown and coronate the person next in line someone else thinks deserves it at the time.
See the primary election of 2008 to learn more.

Then Bill said, "And they thought the only way they could make it a race was a full-scale frontal assault on her."
We are currently involved relatively early on in the primary season in order to pick the party's candidate for President, so who the heck is Bill referring to when he says "they"?
No Democrats I am aware of have made ANY full-scale frontal assaults on Hillary.

Last, but not least, then Bill said, "And so this email thing became the biggest story in the world."
Well, no one in the Democratic party helped that 'thing' become what it is today more than your wife, Bill!
Yet, to refer to her email scandal as a 'thing', is not going to help her get out of it one whit.
Adults don't refer to scandals like that as a 'thing'.
And I am not so sure that it is the biggest story in the world, but maybe one has to live in Clinton's world to believe that, I guess.

[senz]

47. Very insightful. I was a little amazed at the load of pity

Bill is heaping on Hillary. Her situation is not so good, but it's not that bad (although I personally agree with your second paragraph, our opinion doesn't seem to be widely shared). I agree with your observation about Bill's intentions. He's trying to change the narrative in hopes of garnering sympathy for Hillary. That could really backfire, too.

[Divernan]

51. Comparing the email matter to the Whitewater scandal? Huge mistake by Bill.

Is Bill taking direction from Hillary's inept campaign strategizers now? Or is he just slipping? He certainly expresses a lot of self doubt about his political instincts in this interview. By conflating the 2, he basically states that we can all expect this email hot mess, like Whitewater, to drag on for 6 years until some peripheral matter comes along to trigger impeachment proceedings.

Now the campaign is using him for the private fund-raising soirees where there will be no pesky journos to quote his comments.

President Bill Clinton will headline a fundraiser for his wife's presidential campaign in Michigan next month, The Detroit News has learned.

The former president will headline an October 7 fundraiser in Bingham Farms at the home of Doreen Hermelin. Tickets to the two-hour event cost $500, and attendees can get a photo with former President Clinton by making a $2700 contribution. People can cohost the event by raising $10,000.

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2015/09/26/clinton-fundraiser-bingham-farms/72877586/

I also note that the campaign has cut in half the minimum donation required to attend one of these gated estate gatherings. The minimum used be $1,000. Now it's been cut to $500. Although the price of a single photo with the guest of honor remains $2700.

[senz]

46. K&R because this is an interesting thread.

If people can focus on the subject, it could lead to good discussion and useful insights. The Clintons are not mere sacred cows; they're complex politicians worth paying attention to. I think everyone can learn something by observing them.