It’s a shame Democrats only get balls after they’re retired.
Stumping for Sen. Tarryl Clark in Minnesota yesterday, Bill Clinton pulled few punches, pointing out that the Tea Party movement is a corporate front and calling Michele Bachmann stupid.
“I respect people with a conservative philosophy,” he continued. “This country has been well-served by having two broad traditions within which people can operate. If you have a philosophy, it means you’re generally inclined one way or the other but you’re open to evidence. If you have an ideology, it means everything is determined by dogma and you’re impervious to evidence. Evidence is irrelevant.
“That’s how I see Rep. Bachmann. She’s very attractive in saying all these things she says, but it’s pretty stupid.“
More…
“If you have an ideology… Evidence is irrelevant” I wonder if Bill feels the same way about Southern Baptists?
King George thought his teabaggers were just a corporate front too….
Doesn’t “pull a few punches” mean he refused to hit very hard? >.>
A pulled punch is one that is very light or doesn’t connect because the thrower pulls their arm back at the last moment to lessen the impact.
…Just sayin’.
Doesn’t “pull a few punches” mean he refused to hit very hard? >.>
A pulled punch is one that is very light or doesn’t connect because the thrower pulls their arm back at the last moment to lessen the impact.
…Just sayin’.
Aaaaaannnd double post fail! Woooooo! o/
@3,4,5 – Yes. And so I said he “pulled few punches,” meaning he didn’t hold back. Ya feel me?
@6–
no, i still don’t think you get what that phrase means…
he DIDN’T pull any punches.
Man, why couldn’t that guy ever be president? That would have been awesome.
@3-5, 7 – It took me a few seconds, but notice the difference between “pulled few punches” and “pulled a few punches”, then notice which phrasing Anthony used. While they both imply that he may have held back to some degree (and there’s always more shit to say about the tea party), “pulled few” emphasizes the smallness of the number of punches he pulled.
@6,
Stealingzen and @7 are right… if you want to say he didn’t hold back, then the correct phrasing would be “He didn’t pull any punches”
But anyway, the whole article at Salon is pretty good.
“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about answers.”
Gravity’s Rainbow
Ex presidents are always more effective in certain ways. I actually look forward to Elder Statesman Obama. I bet he’ll be awesome. But hopefully not until 2015.
@12 Are they? Please provide Republican examples.
@13 – Would you accept Lincoln as an answer?
@2: You’ve never read a single book, have you?
the guy can just connect with disinterested undecided voters better than any democrat alive. nobody can beat this guy.
i thought lying to the nation that he didn’t have sex with Ms. Lewinsky took balls. huge balls.
@13 – ha, I was thinking mostly of democrats! But honestly, Senior Bush’s work with Clinton on disaster relief comes to mind. I think the unlikely pairing brought attention and power to their efforts that neither could have garnered alone.
Oh, fuck. The word nerd in me has to address this.
Politicians pull punches all the time. “Clinton pulled few punches” = he was more hard-hitting than you’d expect. Anthony used the phrase correctly.
Clinton’s bluntness is really refreshing to hear. He nails it with the “attractive but stupid” line.
Gotta love the rest of the speech:
“…what they want to do is dismantle government so corporations, big corporations will control our destiny.”
Says the President who gave us welfare “reform,” NAFTA and signed the repeal of Glass-Steagall.
What a psychopath.
Derp; I got it now. Thank you Anthony and MacCrocodile. Apparently my double post wasn’t my only fail right then. Reading comprehension for the win!