April 8, 2016

Bill Clinton almost wants to apologize.

Today, in Erie, Pennsylvania:
"Now I like and believe in protests. I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't 'cause I engaged in some when I was a kid.... But I never thought I should drown anybody else out. And I confess, maybe it's just a sign of old age, but it bothers me now when that happens. So I did something yesterday in Philadelphia. I almost want to apologize for it, but I want to use it as an example of the danger threatening our country.... I rather vigorously defended my wife, as I am wont to do, and I realized, finally, I was talking past [the protester] the way she was talking past me. We gotta stop that in this country. We gotta listen to each other again."
ADDED: I just want to say that I love the phrasing "I almost want to apologize." It's just lovely snark. It's emphatically not a nonapology (which would be something like "I'm sorry if you were offended"). He's making a point of withholding the apology. He's considered it and decided it's not called for. But he "almost wants" because he's an open, warm-hearted guy who cares about other people. He feels your pain. But the want is incomplete. He's got some restraint. The mind rules over impulse, and an apology is just not deserved.

46 comments:

Sebastian said...

"We gotta listen to each other again." Compounding his mistake. Exerting white privilege again. Sorry, Bubba, get your Prog story straight.

The Bergall said...

So the context of what he said doesn't matter?

coupe said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
jr565 said...

He has nothing to apologize for. He was the speaker. She was interrupting him. He at least gave her a few seconds to scream out her point and then answered it. Was she in turn respecting his right to speak? No she tried to drown out the speaker. He was in the right; she was in the wrong. There was no talk on past each other. It wasn't a dialogue. People were there to hear bill speak. Not the other way around.

buwaya said...

They aren't talking past each other.
This is just the "make nice" sort of speech meant to excuse well-understood positions by implying misunderstanding. Everyone understands everyone else perfectly well.

They all, underneath, simply hate each others guts.

Clinton, and all such excuse-makers, do it because they are really addressing yet another group who, though they understand the situation just as well, are squeamish, and would rather not hear it. They are cowards.

Brando said...

No apology necessary. They interrupted him and the fact that he didn't offer them a cold glass of STFU and actually engaged them on the merits is more than they deserve. Protest outside, hold your signs inside, but don't interrupt the speaker or you're just a rude tool who clearly never learned manners.

And those protesters were wrong on the merits. There may be problems with "three strikes" laws and other aspects of the Crime Bill, but none of them are responsible for black people (and frankly, the white people who are actually the majority of unarmed people shot by cops) who die at the hands of the police. Bill was right that blacks face a far greater threat to their lives due to the predators in their own communities, and a better relation with the cops would do a lot more to prevent those deaths. And the fact that they only seem to think black lives matter when it's a white person taking the life just shows that they are bigoted idiots first and concerned about blacks a distant second.

Good for Bill, much as I can't stand him in most other contexts he's in the right here. To hell with these BLM children.

Bay Area Guy said...

"We gotta stop that in this country. We gotta listen to each other again."

I agree with this sentiment, in theory.

In practice, I see a lot of left-wing groups (e.g., BLM) shouting down Republican speakers/candidates and, on occasion, shouting down Hillary, Bill and Bernie, but not very often.

Has anyone seen a bunch of Trump supporters go to a Hillary or Bernie rally and try to shout the speakers down or disrupt it?

[crickets]

If this starts to happen, I will criticize it as well.

David Begley said...

The Left specializes in shouting down and shutting up their political opponents. Those that disagree must be demonized. Just check out what various State AG's are doing to those that don't agree with the CAGW scam. Gotta punish those deniers until they get their minds right.

dwick said...

"Now I like and believe in protests. I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't 'cause I engaged in some when I was a kid.... But I never thought I should drown anybody else out..."

Right... just like Bill Clinton never inhaled and never had sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.
Notice the Clintonian "I never THOUGHT I should drown anybody else out" - like Hillary's "I always TRIED to tell the truth..."

Quaestor said...

No principles.

How could we expect more?

Beldar said...

The Democratic Party's leading figures more and more remind me of the Soviet gerontocracy that immediately preceded Gorbachev.

JAORE said...

Gotta go with Slick on this one. The protestor was off base.

But he and Hillary are in an interesting spot. They want to recall the glory days of the reign of Bill. Yet they want to ignore the more troubling aspects like NAFTA, DOMA, Don't Ask Don't Tell, Welfare to Work and - as highlighted by the BLM folk - the Crime Bill.

So Hillary is running (partially) on Bill's record and (partially) against Bill's record.

Of course she is threading the same needle with Obama's foreign policy record.

Luckily many of her core constituency share traits with three monkeys.

Meade said...

I wonder if Bill Clinton has ever attended a Black Lives Matter meeting. I have. They aren't so bad. But I don't know how it might be for him — he's quite a bit whiter than I am.

jdniner said...

I am under the impression all these Soros based proggressive protestors are very low on listening skills. Their job is to agitate not listen. When they ask you to listen to them however that is just because they are setting you up to be sucker punched. Its a power game using guilty to put you off balance. Don't fall for it.

Brando said...

Now the conspiracy theory--if the Clintons wanted to pivot to the general election and appeal more to the white voters who tended GOP the last few cycles, what better way to do so than to have some BLM activists act rudely and get a sensible rebuttal from Slick Willie?

I mean, this probably wasn't orchestrated, but look how well this works out for them.

Maybe we should get used to saying "President Hillary Clinton".

The Godfather said...

Has he apologized to Sister Souljah yet?

StephenFearby said...

Meade said...

"I wonder if Bill Clinton has ever attended a Black Lives Matter meeting. I have. They aren't so bad. But I don't know how it might be for him — he's quite a bit whiter than I am."

But like beauty, whiter is in the eye of the beholder.

Slick Willie, he don't look all dat healthy these days, even after going off his vegan diet.

Let's say, like many old gezzers with impaired blood circulation, he got da pallor!

chuck said...

> We gotta listen to each other again.

I don't care what he says, I'm not going to read Salon.

gadfly said...

Bill Clinton's problem is that he is a shadow (or perhaps a shaky stick figure) of his old self. In the old days, Slick Willie smiled and women swooned but now he has become a card-carrying member of Jerry Epstein's Mile High Club, doing it on Epstein's jet with under-age "sex slaves."

Ambrose said...

This is so Clintonesque - pretending to be all things to all people. If you don't like BLMers, look at Thursday's tape. If you don't like that, look at today's.

Bay Area Guy said...

Bill looks pale and frail. If he won't apologize to these clowns, maybe he should apologize to Juanita Broderick?

I guess paying $850,000 to settle Paula Jones' sexual harassment civil action is pretty close to an admission.

Carol said...

That crowd is totally lacking in the altruism and humility he takes for granted. That's the diff between the early boomer or silent gen and what we've got now.

fivewheels said...

This is what an apology looks like when the campaign tells you that you have to apologize to key constituents but you know you were in the right.

Jonathan Graehl said...

a clinton hasn't showed this much integrity in years

so he scored (rightly) against the selfish ignoramus hecklers.

and he's trying to score with them, too. or at least soften the affront.

anyway, what are they gonna do - go to *sanders*?

Writ Small said...

Now the conspiracy theory--if the Clintons wanted to pivot to the general election and appeal more to the white voters who tended GOP the last few cycles, what better way to do so than to have some BLM activists act rudely and get a sensible rebuttal from Slick Willie?

I mean, this probably wasn't orchestrated, but look how well this works out for them.


On the other hand, the main reason Hillary isn't sweating the recent losses to Sanders is that she clobbers him among non-whites. If that demographic were to get a little more skeptical of the Clintons, Hillary could be in real trouble. The race isn't quite over, and it is too soon for Sister Souljah unless you're trying to throw it.

I can think of a number of reasons why Bill would not want Hillary to win including a very short leash and unfavorable comparisons.

Bob Boyd said...

The Clintons want to distance themselves from Obama-ism in many ways, and who can blame them, "But that's not what's worrying me. It's how to do it. These things must be done delicately, or you hurt the spell."

It's a witch thing.

John Henry said...

I am almost sorry for Bill Clinton and the mess he and his wife have made for themselves. Almost sorry but not quite sorry at all.

I did a lot of stuff in my youth that I grew out of. If I do not accept that behavior still, I am a hypocrite? I used to hammer down half a dozen beers then go out at 3AM and drive my Sportster motorcycle 120mph down a 2 lane highway. Is it hypocritical now for me to say that maybe that was not a good idea? That other folks should not do it?

Why can't I say "I was youthful and didn't really think about what I was doing. Now I can't believe I actually did that shit! God must really love me for letting me live through it."



I do mean that part about God loving me. I thank him every night for getting me through those crazy years. Which lasted far to long past my actual chronological youth.

John Henry

JAORE said...

"...my Sportster motorcycle 120mph..."

If that was a stock Sporty you had her really wrung out.

Fun. Riding fast still was until about 10 years ago when I totaled my BMW bike in a curve with a wee patch o' gravel. But I was young and foolish too..... not quite 55 at the time.

The 6 beer part would have scared me though....

Meade said...

#almostwonttodo

Laslo Spatula said...

Haven't read comments yet:

" He's making a point of withholding the apology. He's considered it and decided it's not called for. But he "almost wants" because he's an open, warm-hearted guy who cares about other people. He feels your pain. But the want is incomplete. He's got some restraint. The mind rules over impulse, and an apology is just not deserved."

This is why I love Althouse.

I am Laslo.

Laslo Spatula said...

"This is why I love Althouse."

Do know why I love Meade?

Ancient Chinese Secret.

(do i really need to link to the commercial?")

I am laslo.

eddie willers said...

Hypocrisy is a great crime to the young.
As you get older, you realize that its necessary.

eddie willers said...

"...my Sportster motorcycle 120mph..."

Though I remained a drunk for thirty more years, I learned something after I laid down my 90cc Vespa motor scooter in 3 seconds at 2 mph after downing a bottle of Ripple wine.

I learned if I want to drive drunk I needed 4 wheels.

mccullough said...

Violent crime dropped in half between 1992 and 2014. There have been a lot of theories about what factors contributed to this big drop, including higher incarceration rates and longer prison sentences (at state and federal level). But nothing is conclusive. But Clinton is right that the lives saved as a result in the drop in homicides were disproportionately black lives. He's also right that disruptive tactics are not a legitimate form of protest.

John said...

Jaore,

It was a stock Sporty, 72(?) the first year they made it 1000cc.

I was 25 and was still convinced that I was indestructible. There was a long straight stretch between Luquillo and Fajardo, empty at 3AM coming back from San Juan. So yeah, really wrung out. Twist the throttle as far as I could, put my head down and just wail...

I also had a 250cc Pursang that I rode motocross. More or less the same way, spending a lot of time in the weeds.

I spent a number of years, when he was a teen, explaining to my son why he could have a motorcycle over my dead body. He'd keep pulling out photos of me up in the air and calling me a hypocrite.

Then he did a rotation in an ER in med school and apologized, thanking me for being right in this.

John Henry

John said...

Only injury I ever had on my Sportster was when I fell off trying to start it. No electric starter and it was a real bear to kick over. I slipped and cracked a bone in my leg. The Navy doctor put me in a hip to toe cast. He told me I didn't need it but he was damned if he was gonna let me ride that bike.

That I made it alive through owning that beast is pure dumb luck and God looking out for me.

John Henry

Irwin Chusid said...

"Almost want to apologize" = "I'm not sure which—apologizing or not apologizing—would cost my wife more votes."

Skeptical Voter said...

I can't tell here whether the "almost" refers to inertia in or pulling out of a cranial rectal insertion. I saw the video. Slick was a pale imitation of his former self. But you could see that he still had a tiny bit of his old style. Even that tiny bit of smiling charm on display was more than Hillary has exhibited in her whole life.

M Jordan said...

There is a scene in an old PBS "Take of Two Cities" where M. Defarge is sitting at his table, troubled, wincing as images of beheadings flash in his mind. And finally, he pounds the table: "Enough!" Of course his diabolical wife, Madam Defarge, is not so ready to quit the revenge bloodbath.

Sometimes I get the feeling that old Bill is sitting at the table, seeing what demons the liberal ethos hath wrought, and he wants to pound his fist on the table and cry, "Enough!" I'm not sure Hillary's there yet.

But all of us, as we age, begin to understand the bitter harvest of the seeds we sewed in our youth. We learn, as Creon of Antigone said, "when we are old."

kentuckyliz said...

Only two people at the rally were BLMers. The rest were Hillary supporters shouting them down by chanting Hillary and holding up their signs to cover theirs. (Trump supporters, take note.)

Bill should invite those two over to his house for a beer summit.

William said...

If Hillary responds in too meek a fashion to these protests, it will cost her votes. Plus, she won't be able to speak. On the other hand, all the pundits tell me that Trump's response to the protests is racist and that no decent person will vote for him because of those responses......I would be grateful if someone from BLM would explain what is the exact right response to a protest. Bernie gave them the mic. Is that the proper response?

Rhythm and Balls said...

Well... whatever. How much "parsing" does it really need? He said what he needed to say. BLM can be obnoxious, but the Clintons' record and history of using people is definitely an issue. And then there's always the issue of what does Bill Clinton (or Hillary, who copied her personality from his as best she could) really mean? He goes spouting off (pun intended) all the time. It's just how he is. He's like a spigot of emotional overblow, and can't help it. He should learn to integrate passion and logic better, but that doesn't seem to be something he's capable of. If he could then they could honestly claim the capacity for successful visions such as those that America needs and loves, but his attention span is too short for that. He needs to make love to every voter sentiment as frantically as possible, and then pull out. He's not into making a marriage out of his romance with America's fleeting political whims. He's into seizing upon the most shallow ones he can find, and then kicking the country out of his bed as soon as he's done.

This morning I thought it would be really hilarious if he just told everyone what he really thought and told America to "suck it." But in pleading, Clintonian way that he does so well.

Bill Clinton's relationship with the American body politic is as a series of one-night-stands. And just as meaningless. He needs a dog house to live in, attached to the mainland by a chain. Maybe exile him to one of the Catalina Islands, or something. With no women and only a pillow to hump at night, and a moon to howl at.

Sharc said...

"The mind rules over impulse"

Right. A Clinton staple.

Jon Burack said...

This was the best moment so far in this pathetic campaign, either side. I am fine with Clinton's typical triangulation in appearing to but not walking it back. I hope it means BLM will hit Hillary harder from now on, and that she will have to hit back. If she does, there is hope of restoring the Democratic Party to sanity. If not, it will all help Trump, who nevertheless for all his vicious bluster at weak targets like immigrants, has not come close to taking on the malevolent p.c. culture in the clean crisp abd courageous way Clinton did here. I have never liked Clinton much, but his Democratic Party was a success, especially regarding crime and welfare. The party may be too far gone to benefit from what he did, but I hope not.

Sammy Finkelman said...

Beck, a Cruz supporter, was there to argue that if there's an open convention, the delegates should be limited to choosing between Trump and Cruz (and should pick Cruz).

You know what I said. They are going to try to make that a convention Rule.

There will be a Trump package of rules, a Cruz package of rules, and a standard package of rules.

The Trump rules will say whoever gets the most votes on the first ballot gets the nomination.

The Cruz rules will say there will a two-man runoff in the second ballot between the two top finishers. If there are absentions, so that no one gets 1,237 votes, you go to more ballots, but still the top two finishers.

The standard rules will say any delegate can vote for anyone at all on the second and subsequent ballots except for when their pledges extend past the first ballot, as they do, for instance, in California, where they go to the second ballot, and all votes are counted.

The Trump rules will be put up first, and lose, unless for strategic reasons people opposed to Cruz decide to vote for it.

The Cruz rules will come up second. This may turn out to be the key vote of the convention. All people truly for Cruz will vote for it. If Cruz would win on the second ballot, and even maybe if he wouldn't, ot wins. If Trump buys in, it
wins.

The standard rules will come up third. It may lose, too.

The Chairman of the convention, House speaker Paul Ryan, will have alot to do wih how this goes down. The convention will probably be operating under temporary rules at first. For instance, if the Cruz rules come up first, it's much more likely to win. Kasich and the uncommitted's are probably for the standard rules.

Sammy Finkelman said...

If the Trump rules win, Cruz and everybody not really for Trump will walk out. (It won't win, unless some people anticipate a Cruz nomination otherwise, and want to stop it, and are planning a few steps ahead. There an be amotion to change the rules etc.)

If the Cruz rules win, the establishment could walk out, and Trump will walk out if he doesn't win the runoff.

If the standard rules win, Trump could walk out.