This is a pretty silly comment, the sort of thing one gets from the person who's always wise after the fact. ("Now, what you should have said was...")
What Goodman actually did by sweeping over a range of topics was show how shallow and puerile Clinton's justifications are. He's not used to questions except from sycophants who exclaim about his "depth of political experience..."
--C. G. Estabrook
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000, Brad DeLong wrote:
> My view was that Amy Goodman didn't know enough to pin the guy down.
>
> For example, Clinton responds to a question about Cuba with: "We were
> really making headway. And then, they illegally shot down those two
> planes, and four people died on the planes. And the Congress passed
> the Helms/Burton bill, so-called. And I don't have flexibility to do
> much more..." The right thing to do is to say in response: "yeah.
> Well you *signed* Helms-Burton, buster. You don't have flexibility now
> because you gave that flexibility away then..."
>
> But American political reporters--even the best of them--do not have
> the depth of policy experience to be able to match someone like
> Clinton across the board...
>
>
> Brad DeLong
>