« Links With Your Coffee - Monday | Main | Daily Show Week in Review »

Dave Letterman with Bill Clinton

Quicktime Video 35 MB | Duration: 23'57

Quicktime 7 required
This file is available for download here.
Ctrl-Click and 'Download Linked File' (Mac)
or Rt-Click and 'Save Target As' (PC) the link above.

Late Show w/David Letterman



wow. that was a tepid endorsement of obama at best. you'd never know he was a democrat.

I'm genuinely impressed by Bill when he discusses issues. He has a mastery of details second to none. But he obviously still resents everything that happened during the primary. He could vocalize his support a lot more. Chris Rock who followed Bill went on a long rant about that. He recently went on "The View" and perpetuated the meme that Hillary won the popular vote while Obama secured the superdelegates to win. Whatever the veracity of that claim what is the point of bringing it up this late. On another note Bill had a lot of difficulty with his pronouns (she/I/we).


Stop it. Just stop it. Bill Clinton was great. I’m an Obama supporter but we are losing it for the dems. Bill and Hillary have done nothing but work hard for Obama since she conceded and it is always characterized as “not enough.” Did you not hear him slather praise all over Obama over and over again and loud enough at the Den. Convention? And this from two people who were allowed to be called racist from our camp. You’re lucky they show up at all. Bill has good instincts and they probably tell him if he comes out braying like a love sic pup about a candidate who he argued a few months ago, was not experienced or qualified enough to be leader of the free world, then making a classy conversation is the best thing he can do to be authentic. Chris Rock is like many of us, (Obama supporters that is) arrogant and always complaining about a lack of this or that. Rock’s too ignorant to understand a seasoned pro making a nuanced point to a part of the electorate that has yet to climb on board. Looking as if he’s too enthusiastic is tin-eared and will come off false to those mid-class rural voters. But leave it to Rock and other whiners to pitch a bad game after a home run.

"...when the bubble in high tech stocks burst... in 2001 or so..."

Slick Willy, slick. For the partisans in the audience, it makes the previous economic downturn seem like a GWB thingy as well.

What really pissed me off at the time, was how the Dems sold off PUBLIC bandwidth (to me, like selling off public lands) at mils on the dollar... ostensibly to spur economic growth. The truth was, that AT&T and MCI and Time-Warner, the Bells and such were giving immense sums to Democrats to push for giveaways of public property, and Gore argued and pushed it through every step of the way. He sold it to the public by saying we would get reduced phone bills, cable bills, internet bills, better internet acces, etc, etc, etc... This would help small entrepeneurs to innovate, and the free market would ensure competition between service providers, delivering more options at lower costs to the general public.

Anybody remember this shit?

No less than a year after Gore made that speech my cable bill went up, and I cancelled my TV, to the surprise of Comcast employees - who were astonished that I was turning off my TV, yet not moving. (I did not ask them how they knew I was not moving... but somehow the rep knew, and looked at me... astonished: "YOU'RE NOT MOVING??!" "No", I said... "I'm just cancelling my TV"... and I told her why.) I've never looked back, by the way. Life is so much better without it. Y'all should give it a try.

Anyway, back to slick willy... By 1999 and into 2000 the buyouts between high tech telecomm and silicon valley firms were pretty much done, and the dust had already settled. All that was left was the dust to settle on all the overspeculation that had been generated. By March 2000, not really long enough in the GWB presidency for the chimpo to be culpable, the bubble burst. The market was already deregulated and overspeculated to the point that this was inevitable.

Not a "repug" thingy... it was a Demoshit thingy, with bipartisan support, and payoffs to campaign coffers on both sides -- enough to make everybody happy... except normal folk... the common clay... y'know, idiots. Rubes. People like us.

Anyway, you can check out the NASDAQ composite curve to see the overall health of the system. And keep in mind the instantaneous value of the curve at any point usually reflects forces that are into play months before the buy/sell events.

We've been getting screwed so long... as long as I've been a voter at least... (30 years) that I'm so fucking sick of keeping track. Finally, there's talk of guillotines and taxpayers' revolts, but only because we're funding unwinnable "wars", providing welfare to the military/industrial complex at the same time we are getting ready to lay $700B to CEOs and upper management with no strings attached (you can keep your parachutes and bail any time), and negotiating the bailout of the treasonous auto execs who've sold us down the river as well.

The experiment is over folks. It was over before these shitheads got into power, and this is just the epilogue. Making sure McDepends doesn't leave us with a Pentacostal bitch in charge is definitely key to survival, but we're hosed no matter what way we look at it. I'm outta here. I've had it.

I am curious about your dot com bubble burst explanation. That's not exactly what I thought caused the bubble to burst. I thought it was all the high tech and internet companies in SV. They were getting tons of dough from VCs and no one knew how to turn a profit or had made a profit. (It took Amazon about five years to turn their first profit end of 2001). The best example I saw of how much incompetence was going on was at where they were losing money on every sale and, when they asked the CEO how she was going to change that she said they were going to make it up in volume. Companies were going IPO left and right without real business models (advertising was the big answer for almost all of the internet companies - high tech companies had technology with no applications they could monetize) and they spent money like crazy on everything from custom made imported cubicles to Super Bowl commercials. Investors weren't interested in long-term growth, they wanted to turn a fast profit. Employees had millions of $$ in worthless stock options. That's really the only part I'm familiar with. I know Gerald Levin from Time Warner got caught in the madness with the AOL purchase but I never heard the rest of a telecom blow out.

I'd be interested in finding out more.

I think its interesting to think what the internet would be like today if that bubble never existed.

There was a lot of investment in talent and creativity and now the internet is somewhat central to our way of life and economy.

If that bubble hadn't happened the online market place might be much smaller.

I think you're right. A lot of the people weren't wrong, they just were ahead of their time (the internet sure wasn't going to happen in a big way while everyone was on dial up) and there was so much inexperience (after the bubble burst is when they talked about bringing in gray hairs to help run companies.)

I also think people wouldn't have gotten off dial up if companies hadn't invested.

I don't really think the dot com was a bubble. It was just a long term investment and investers are afraid of anything that doesn't make a short term profit. So they ran.

I only outlined a piece of the puzzle that, at least the way I see it, laid the groundwork for what was to follow (as you so eloquently describe). I was generalizing madly... talking about a symptom of a madness that passes for the way we do business in this country. Worldcom, our 2nd-largest long distance company (next to AT&T) was a huge part of the internet backbone back then. During all the bankruptcy / merger / acquisition madness, when Worldcom acquired MCI, I remember an instance in town (Colorado Springs) that involved MCI outsourcing a major part of their work. Instead of hiring locally (a huge MCI building was in the middle of our high-tech row), they were bringing in Vietnamese on temporary work visas, and cutting corners left and right. Health screening was one of those corners cut. Long story short, they sparked a TB outbreak which our health department had to put out... with public dollars.

It's stuff like this, plus the Las Vegas style no-substance crap that leaves us where we are. Little fish just get gobbled up y big ones, and people take profits out of the mythical money system as fast as they can. It's fluff, built on air. Sometime... check out what kind of bandwidth capacity Japan and France enjoy. The best bandwidth we have in this country seems to be in San Fran, but it pales in comparison to that achieved in Japan and France... where they did REAL work to build infrastructure.

Gotta get to work now...

This only a piece of the puzzle - but an illustration of how we can give a trillion dollars of the spectrum to the private sector, yet still be pretty middling after all the dust settles. In our model, a few people get incredibly wealthy and retire, after siphoning off much of the real capital. Check out how we now rank, with respect to how our internet performs... and how much we pay for it.

Where would we be without a bubble? Well, perhaps if all the waste -- grubbing for mythical money -- were spent in the real world, we'd be more to the left (or #1) in all the following graphs:

I assume the ramping up of the infrastructure is easier in some of the smaller countries, but Japan has also long been a leader in the telecom world and part of that I believe is related to their lifestyle. Also in Europe. Some of the start ups I worked for had to deal with that (I worked in SV from '94 - '02 but only half of that in start ups). And, yes, a lot of big money went in and got their money at the expense of the non-management workers RedSeven was talking about...a lot of that has really turned around. Now there is a whole different world of problems with companies displaced by the internet.

Anyway - I'm drifting off topic. I just wanted to get a little bit more where the government was responsible in the dot bomb....From '98 on, all I remember was everything being drowned out by Monica.

the best part was the chris rock part, right after.

Here is Chris Rock

Yeah, I have trouble respecting this guy anymore.

It used to be I disagreed with his policies but respected his skill and empathy.

Now I can see through his petty agenda like wet cheese cloth.

Pride will kill even the best of us.

He says he likes McCain one more time I am going to throw a rock at the douche bag.

I'm with you as far as being pissed at Clinton. I hereby transfer all of the respect I once held for Clinton (including voting for him twice) and hand it over to Chris Rock (my favorite comedian). Norm should post the great Chris Rock segment just for comparison. Is Clinton still a damn Democrat or not?

[joke spoiler alert in Chris Rock segment: “Have you ever been to Alaska? It's like the The Road Warrior with snow.]

Is Clinton still a damn Democrat or not?

Part of what gets me about this is that I have heard him say in previous interviews that he did not know McCain very well. That Hillary knew him and liked him but he had not had a lot of personal interaction with him.

SO why waste our time telling us how honorable the guy is that you don't know at the same time this "honorable" "good" guy is telling a lie a day to claw his way into the white house to destroy every good thing Clinton ever did.

Makes me dislike Biden too.

Oh - it's hard. I do still really like Bill and I can't think of anyone that makes me feel more confident we can turn this around but man ---- what is wrong with him about Obama? Does he really not think there is a difference between McCain/Palin getting in than Obama/Biden - no matter how he feels about Obama? If he's such a good friend of Biden's, he should be in there pushing for him. I do find it interesting how transparent he is...

You guys want to know why they are being so Nice in discribing's simple, if the Democrates win the White House, they will still need to have the cooperation of some republicans to get things done in Congress...guess who they go to for that? That's right, John McCain! Secondly, the reason Bill is being so nice is because like he said, he is going to need the cooperation of the next President to get things with his Global Inititive done, no matter WHO gets ellected.

I give credit to Bill for his great DNC speech, but it was kind of a bizarre discussion. "Hillary and others have proposed"? It could have been recorded 6 months ago. Without the pro-Hillary comments it reminds me of what Tom Brokaw usually says on talk shows. I didn't think it was so bad at all. In fact on second thought (revising my Rock clip comments) I think Chris Rock was a bit unfair. Clinton is a former president and for most part he acted like it. He also gave people permission to like McCain and vote Obama, which is important when both Obama and McCain have favorable numbers that are well over 50%--a fact that won't change before November.

I loved the game theory comment. The guy is always thinking of things strategically. He's right, too.

Is it just me or there is no way GWB or McCain could have convinced me that they understood the mortgage and subprime thing as well as Bill ?

And we're not even talking about vulgarizing it like that ...

Like N. Klein said on Real Time, ppl should start realizing that intelligence is not such a bad trait when choosing a president (or something like that).

Clinton is an ex president. He is trying to raise money for his initative, his job is NOT to attack McCain. Actually I personally wish that Obama was back on his high road, and stopped this attack McCain crap.

I know all of you think it is necessary, and likey someone has to do it, but i wish Obama did not. He is not confortable with it, neither is McCain and this behaviour is not helping, It is not helping the country or anyone.

McCain is not some devil, Obama has in my opinion, better ideas, MUCH better advisors, and a much clearer temperment for the job of president. Everything we see points me to that decision. He is not some great god, will make mistakes. McCain had a lot of strengths in the past. He sold he sold his soul to the agents of intolerance, but attacking him all the time does nothing for the country. Bill Clinton needs to be above this, Hillary however should be out there showing her stuff.

I wasn't looking for him to attack McCain. There is no need for him to do that. All I was looking for him to do is endorse Obama with conviction - he is the Democratic candidate, if nothing else, and Clinton is a major figure. After what the Republicans have done to the nation these last eight years, all the Democrats should be circling the wagons.


Support this site

Google Ads

Powered by Movable Type Pro

Copyright © 2002-2017 Norman Jenson


Commenting Policy

note: non-authenticated comments are moderated, you can avoid the delay by registering.

Random Quotation

Individual Archives

Monthly Archives