I would like to state first of all that I am not, by any means, a Clinton-head, Clinton fanatic, or Clinton groupie.
While I do not dislike Bill or Hillary, I do consider myself more of a Barack proponent.
That said, your article on Bill Clinton in your February 4th issue was completely preposterous.
Your article begins with your own reporters proclaiming their own stupidity by admittedly badgering our former President with irrelevant and spiteful questions whose only purpose is to ignite a feisty response. Even written from the perspective of your reporters, the “journalist” comes off as an annoying idiot. The former President, however, reacted in an entirely appropriate manner for someone who is defending himself against an annoying idiot.
The article even states, in print, Mr. Clinton’s perfectly valid point that “This is all (the fault of the reporter) because you want conflict instead of to deal with what these people are really interested in.”
You incited an insult about yourself and then printed it. I’m confused as to why the exemplary hypocrisy of your reporter is news.
Ms. Smalley, your last name is appropriate, because your petty minutia and trivial, ignorant nagging has no place in real, grown-up political journalism.
An argument is based on facts, not on your patented “anger-meter,” which I do not think is very scientific. It lists instances in which President Clinton acted completely appropriately as someone who is backing a political candidate. And, more specifically, he’s RIGHT about Fox News having a right-wing tilt. Have you ever SEEN Fox News?
Your sensationalized Bill Clinton media moments – none of which exhibits anything out of the ordinary for someone who is supporting his wife as she runs for President – are reminiscent of a trashy gossip magazine chronicling the skirt lengths of Britney Spears.
Get your act together, NEWSWEEK.
How about printing some news?
In the words of our former President. “Print the facts. Nobody ever prints the facts.”
Comedian and VH1 VJ
New York, NY