The Clinton Wars (Hardcover)

by Sidney Blumenthal (Author) "Bill Clinton had been president for only a few weeks, less than half of the fabled First Hundred Days by which all presidents have been..." (more)
Key Phrases: illegal leaks, regressive tax cut, scandal coverage, White House, New York, United States (more...)

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review
The title of journalist turned-embattled-White House aide Sidney Blumenthal's memoir/history of his tumultuous years inside the Clinton presidency is both literal and figurative, if something of an understatement; "apocalypse" would seem more to the point. Erudite and fiercely unapologetic, Blumenthal belatedly provides the overwrought saga's protagonists what they so often publicly lacked in its historical context: passionate advocacy and precious perspective. No mere presidential history, the battles chronicled here transcend politics as usual, bitter partisan campaigns whose roots Blumenthal forcefully argues extend beneath lingering class and generational resentments into the darkest heart of America's Southern racist past. Hillary Clinton's accusations of a "vast right-wing conspiracy" garnered cynical chuckles in its heyday; Blumenthal (whose own teasing White House nickname was "Grassy Knoll") merely cuts its treachery down to size, documenting the usual suspects, dates, and places with amply footnoted vengeance. There's irony to burn, from unexpected early Clinton supporters (former GOP standard bearer Barry Goldwater) and the blatant moral hypocrisy of his Congressional accusers to the Supreme Court's sole dissenting voice in arguments to reinstate the Special Prosecutor statute, Justice Scalia (who presciently warned it could easily become the tool of political witch hunts), and the heretical notion that the Clintons may have been the least cynical players in the entire drama; they certainly seem it's most tragically human. It's hardly surprising that much of the Washington news establishment has attacked Blumenthal's tome with equal ferocity; in Blumenthal's telling, the D.C. press corps that zealously safeguarded democracy during Watergate had by the advent of Clinton devolved into an insular faux aristocracy resentful of perceived carpetbaggers (especially from Arkansas) and suckers for any politically-motivated leak, rumor, or innuendo that might give them a leg up on the competition. The media's inept handling of the story is even more ironic considering much of what Blumenthal does here derives from the simple advice Watergate informer "Deep Throat" gave reporters during that crisis: "Follow the money." --Jerry McCulley

From Publishers Weekly
Blumenthal's 800-page gorilla of a book is the former Clinton adviser's indictment of his, and his boss's, pursuers: Republicans in Congress, Kenneth Starr and his minions and the journalists he says were their patsies. It's also a defense of his own role in the Clinton scandals and a loyal account of Clinton's presidency as a highly successful one dedicated to progressive values. The heart of the book is an often tediously detailed account of the Whitewater investigation, the Lewinsky scandal and the impeachment, in which his own role was notable-accused of smearing the opposition, he was known to the anti-Clintonites as "Sid Vicious" and was the only presidential aide called to a deposition at the Senate impeachment hearings (which culminate in a hilarious "Alice in Wonderland" q&a session). The scandals are sandwiched between drier, partisan accounts of Clinton's policies and actions both before and after impeachment, but with only rare glimpses of Clinton the man. Blumenthal argues that there was "an Italianate conspiracy" arrayed against Clinton, "an intricate, covert, amoral operation bent on power," funded by Richard Mellon Scaife and fronted by a ruthlessly vindictive Starr. But Blumenthal is most damning about his onetime colleagues in the press (he wrote for the New Republic and the Washington Post); journalists admitted to him, he says, that they couldn't criticize Starr because they needed leaks from his staff for their stories. Blumenthal paints nasty portraits of Matt Drudge (who accused him of wife-beating), the late Michael Kelly (who here displays an irrational hatred of him) and Christopher Hitchens ("capable of doing harm without conscience or regret"). Often fascinating and undoubtedly controversial, Blumenthal's book will receive much media attention, but most readers will wish it were a whole lot shorter.
Copyright 2003 Reed Business Information, Inc.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 822 pages
• Publisher: Farrar, Straus and Giroux; 1 edition (May 20, 2003)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0374125023
• ISBN-13: 978-0374125028
• Product Dimensions: 9.1 x 6.2 x 1.8 inches
• Shipping Weight: 2.8 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.0 out of 5 stars See all reviews (92 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #342,416 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in these categories: (What's this?)

  #32 in	Books > Biographies & Memoirs > People, A-Z > ( C ) > Clinton, Bill
  #40 in	Books > Nonfiction > Social Sciences > Political Science > United States > Federal System

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

30 of 35 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars President Clinton's place in history, December 10, 2003

By	J. Brown (Orange County, CA USA) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

I was unable to finish Joe Conason's and Gene Lyons' book "The Hunting of the President" it was so upsetting. Their book is a factual recounting of the events. Sydney Blumenthal's book has been easier to read. He gives us more of the historical context and draws parallels to other progressive presidents who were attacked and smeared with equal ferocity (but without the internet!) in their time. In retrospect these are the greatest presidents to have served us and I'm sure that history will be kinder to Mr. Clinton than Rupert Murdoch has been. Although I am still angry about the GOP's underhanded tactics as well as the Democrats' lackadaisical defense, I'm comforted by seeing the bigger picture.

Mr. Blumenthal is also a wonderful and compelling writer and makes this complex and lengthy tale highly readable. Besides the Conason and Lyons book, Susan McDougal's book is simpler story worth reading for those who are interested in these recent events.

15 of 16 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars Biased, but Valuable and Insightful, October 11, 2003

By A Customer

I have been amused by those on both the political left and the right when it comes to their views of the Clinton years. Here the author shares some first hand experiences which are both enlightening and fascinating. His bias is obvious throughout this long book, but most of the readers tackling this work will benefit despite that. In fact I would have been disappointed if he had not been passionate about the ideas that he believes in. Overall it is a good first-hand account of the Clinton years from an insider.

21 of 24 people found the following review helpful:

4.0 out of 5 stars A President Under Siege, June 16, 2003

By	Robert Payne (Los Angeles, CA United States) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

I came to Sidney Blumenthal's "The Clinton Wars" hoping that the book would shed some light upon why so many people hated -- and still hate -- the 42nd president with such passion and venom. Given that Bill Clinton's administration produced great prosperity, given that he himself was obviously a hard worker and inspiring speaker, and given that the intial accusations against him were so dubious, why do so many people despise him and assume the worst about him? Regrettably, "The Clinton Wars" doesn't look very deeply into that question. Blumenthal matter-of-factly explains it as people who dislike the 1960s counterculture focusing their hostility upon a (wrongly) perceived representative of that movement, a political interloper that they never recognized as legitimate. Not a wholly satisfying answer.

As a liberal Democrat and Clinton supporter, I liked reading "The Clinton Wars" because it affirmed many things that I believe: Whitewater was a fraud; Kenneth Starr was politically motivated from the get-go to remove Clinton from office; Clinton was a capable commander-in-chief; George W. Bush stole the 2000 presidential election, etc. Furthermore, without explicitly saying so, this book implies something even more disturbing: Starr's legal harassment of Clinton drained the anti-terrorism activities of the FBI and State Department and enabled Osama bin Laden to carry out the horrifying events of September 11, 2001. But at the same time, I could tell that I was in the company of a starry-eyed Clinton admirer whose biases might cloud his retelling of events.

Usually, when a conservative reads "facts" that support his/her beliefs, he/she accepts them at face value but takes less comforting "facts" with a grain of salt. It's the same with us liberals: Data that back up my beliefs are to be believed; those that don't are not. But despite my eagerness to accept Blumenthal's account as completely veracious, I decided to surf the 'Net for opposing viewpoints. The negative reviews at Amazon.com are largely dismissive, petulant ad hominem attacks on Blumenthal and repeat some accusations that he already addressed in his book -- not very helpful. Michael Isikoff's critical review of "The Clinton Wars" is itself criticized by Slate.com. In an on-line essay, conservative activist David Horowitz defends his organization against Blumenthal's characterization of it as a "front" organization for Richard Mellon Scaife. He also decries Blumenthal's "vindictive tort against Matt Drudge" as an assault on the First Amendment. But -- tellingly -- Horowitz doesn't mention the incident that provoked the lawsuit in the first place: Without evidence, Drudge on his widely read Web site accused Blumenthal of beating his wife. It's hard for me to see how responding to such a scurrilous, inflammatory accusation via the legal system endangers free speech, and Horowitz's omission of this inciting incident makes me question his own veracity.

On the whole, "The Clinton Wars" is engaging as an affirmation of Clinton's strengths and an indictment of the Starr witch hunt. On the down side, it's too uncritical of Clinton's moral lapses and his voracious fund raising. Blumenthal forgives Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal for "being human." But one wishes that the author would admonish Clinton about how appallingly *stupid* it was for him to have conducted himself in such a capricious way when an over-reaching prosecutor was trying to dig up dirt on him.

Some may split hairs with Blumenthal on certain particulars of his account about the Starr investigation. But nothing that anyone has said about "The Clinton Wars" has shaken this conviction of mine: Starr's investigation of Clinton was utterly unnecessary, politically vindictive, and a waste of this country's valuable resources. And in their rush to be the next Woodward and Bernstein, the press became willing dupes of Starr's illegal leaks. Democrats abided Republicans in the White House for the 12 years of Reagan/Bush, granting them at least minimal respect as leaders of the country, but Republicans could not show Clinton the same courtesy. It had to be presumed that he was guilty of unspeakable acts. He had to be driven from office by hook or by crook. Republicans still condemn Clinton for "lying under oath," but the fact that he was entrapped to do so by a hostile, politically motivated ideologue using police-state tactics seems unimportant to them. Clinton's personal behavior in office was deplorable; Starr's official behavior was frightening. And I'm still astounded that so many self-proclaimed conservatives can't see that.