“Rolling Stone: Have you seen “Fahrenheit 9/11”?
Clinton: I have.
Rolling Stone: What did you think?
Clinton: I think every American ought to see it. As far as I know, there are no factual errors in it, but it may connect the dots a little too close — about the Saudis and the Bushes, and the terror and all. I’d like to see it again before making a judgment about whether I think it’s totally fair.” – from Rolling Stone’s interview with the former president.
WHAT CLINTON GOT RIGHT: I have to say, though, that part of Clinton’s analysis of the past two years is spot on. Here’s where I thought he got it right:
RS: I’m interested that you expressed a cautious admiration for [the Bush administration’s] political skill. Any other places where you looked and said, “Boy, that’s good”?
Clinton: Well, no. I would say, though — you know, one of the great things in politics that you have to know is when not to play a card — because you might win a hand and lose the match. And that’s the mistake, I think, they made in 2002. President Bush would have been far better off in his reelection if he’d let the natural rhythm of 2002 unfold and let the Democrats pick up a few seats. We would have held the Senate and maybe increased our margin by one or two; the House would be very close. But it would have compelled him to take a more moderate position.
That’s why I think the Dems may do better this year than expected, both in the Congress and the presidential race. Usually, discontent with a president is vented in mid-term elections – especially the kind of discontent fostered by something like the 2000 recount. But that didn’t happen. In fact, there’s been no electoral venting at Bush yet. Just as Clinton was paradoxically saved by the 1994 Republican victory, Bush may be damned by the 2002 results – and the Rove-orchestrated hubris they spawned.
The Dish 