• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Bigfoot: The Invisible Variety

Bill Clinton Goes Both Para and Pro Bigfoot in One Fell Swoop !!
Yipeeeee!

According to the Associated Press, Bill Clinton speaking in Macon, Georgia, on Monday, January 21, 2008, played the cryptozoology card!

The AP is reporting: “Bill Clinton doesn’t want to become the White House’s Sasquatch.”

The news service noted the former president says it would be a mistake for him to have a specific job if he were to return to Washington D.C. with a new Clinton administration.

In remarks to reporters, Clinton said:
I’d be like the Abominable Snowman. I’d be Bigfooting everybody even if I tried not to. There’s almost no way you can avoid that. Whatever I do should be totally transparent.
Bill Clinton, January 21, 2008.

Asked if he would live in the White House, Clinton said, “I would anticipate being there, unless you know something I don’t.”
 
historian said:
Bill Clinton Goes Both Para and Pro Bigfoot in One Fell Swoop !!
Yipeeeee!

According to the Associated Press, Bill Clinton speaking in Macon, Georgia, on Monday, January 21, 2008, played the cryptozoology card!

The AP is reporting: “Bill Clinton doesn’t want to become the White House’s Sasquatch.”

The news service noted the former president says it would be a mistake for him to have a specific job if he were to return to Washington D.C. with a new Clinton administration.

In remarks to reporters, Clinton said:
I’d be like the Abominable Snowman. I’d be Bigfooting everybody even if I tried not to. There’s almost no way you can avoid that. Whatever I do should be totally transparent.
Bill Clinton, January 21, 2008.

Asked if he would live in the White House, Clinton said, “I would anticipate being there, unless you know something I don’t.”
Click to expand...

What does this have to do with the Patterson-Gimlin Film?

Wait... let me guess. In 1967 Bill Clinton went on spring break (yeah, I know, in October -- it makes sense in the Historianverse) to Bluff Creek. While there he shot the footage of "Patty" but didn't inhale and that huckster Patterson conned him out of it and claimed it for his own.
 
Hitch said:
What does this have to do with the Patterson-Gimlin Film?

Wait... let me guess. In 1967 Bill Clinton went on spring break (yeah, I know, in October -- it makes sense in the Historianverse) to Bluff Creek. While there he shot the footage of "Patty" but didn't inhale and that huckster Patterson conned him out of it and claimed it for his own.
Click to expand...

What does it have to do? It means that this is the beginning of the end for the Patterson-Gimlin film debate. It's authenticity is irrelevant, given that we now have 3, count em, 3 former Presidents who have spoken affirmatively in regard to Bigfoot's existence. Teddy Roosevelt, Jimmy Carter, and now Bill Clinton. Life just does not get any sweeter than that.
 
historian said:
Oh, please don't stop there Mr. VIP. Since you have dodged the details, please explain the following in regard your claim that you cornered Carter on the evening of his important speech and asked him 3 questions about BIGFOOT
...(snip)...
I am looking forward to your blow by blow description
Click to expand...
Why are you asking for this, historian? Spektator has posted an image of a note signed by Pres. Carter saying that he has never met a bigfoot. You discount this evidence and yet expect us to honour your hearsay evidence. Would you answer such a series of questions about your bigfoot encounters? No, you wouldn't. You would tell us to go out into the woods for ourselves, wouldn't you.

I suggest that instead of asking such irrelevant questions, you go yourself to the Carter Center when he's speaking and ask him for yourself.
 
Locknar said:
Well it's a first; you actually have a cite that supports your claim...very good :) However, a bit of a stretch to take his comments as anything other then an analogy.

That said, the same criteria would apply to Clinton...if he (as you claim) is speaking factually, what is the cite/reference that supports the comments?
Click to expand...

'a bit of a stretch' ?? You're being very generous there Locknar. It basically requires you to ignore the entire context and content of the comment and simply pick out the words you like.

So you read it as 'blah blah bigfoot blah blah transparent blah blah'

I think it's eminently clear that Clinton was not commenting in any way on the existence or otherwise of Bigfoot, he was making a joke.
 
arthwollipot said:
Why are you asking for this, historian? Spektator has posted an image of a note signed by Pres. Carter saying that he has never met a bigfoot. You discount this evidence and yet expect us to honour your hearsay evidence. Would you answer such a series of questions about your bigfoot encounters? No, you wouldn't. You would tell us to go out into the woods for ourselves, wouldn't you.

I suggest that instead of asking such irrelevant questions, you go yourself to the Carter Center when he's speaking and ask him for yourself.
Click to expand...

That's an excellent point!

There's a old saying, I recall, "Do as you would be done by" :)
 
arthwollipot said:
Why are you asking for this, historian? Spektator has posted an image of a note signed by Pres. Carter saying that he has never met a bigfoot. You discount this evidence and yet expect us to honour your hearsay evidence. Would you answer such a series of questions about your bigfoot encounters? No, you wouldn't. You would tell us to go out into the woods for ourselves, wouldn't you.

I suggest that instead of asking such irrelevant questions, you go yourself to the Carter Center when he's speaking and ask him for yourself.
Click to expand...

I've got historian on ignore, but since he's sarcastically demanding information from me, I will respond with the same thing he told me when I once asked him for a simple page citation:

Do your own legwork.
 
Worm said:
'a bit of a stretch' ?? You're being very generous there Locknar. It basically requires you to ignore the entire context and content of the comment and simply pick out the words you like.

So you read it as 'blah blah bigfoot blah blah transparent blah blah'

I think it's eminently clear that Clinton was not commenting in any way on the existence or otherwise of Bigfoot, he was making a joke.
Click to expand...
Generosity is a flaw of mine *lol*

It is clear to all but the true “woo woo’ers” Clinton was joking. But, “woo woo’ers”, disparate to provide anything to advance their false claims, will hang on this as proof.

Just like Steve Martin was really born “a poor black child” (The Jerk), or Clinton “did not have sexual relations with that woman”, etc.
 
Spektator said:
I've got historian on ignore, but since he's sarcastically demanding information from me, I will respond with the same thing he told me when I once asked him for a simple page citation:

Do your own legwork.
Click to expand...

For those that were sleeping, several weeks AFTER Spektator posted the alleged note scribbled on by Carter, he then made an outrageous claim on this thread that he was able to corner the former President at a public appearance AND ask him 3 Bigfoot questions in public. This didn't seem possible, given the presence of the Secret Service, the press, his wife, real VIP's, etc., etc. So as you can see above, I gave Spektator the opportunity to provide us with the finer details of that meeting, so that we could better evaluate his statement as to it's veracity. Now, Spektator comes back with the BLIND MONKEY excuse in that he cannot see that clarification request. His continued dodging of the questions will be pretty much the last nail in his coffin, in regard to the veracity of all his contributions on this board. But I am not calling Spektator a LIAR, mind you.
 
historian said:
What does it have to do? It means that this is the beginning of the end for the Patterson-Gimlin film debate. It's authenticity is irrelevant, given that we now have 3, count em, 3 former Presidents who have spoken affirmatively in regard to Bigfoot's existence. Teddy Roosevelt, Jimmy Carter, and now Bill Clinton. Life just does not get any sweeter than that.
Click to expand...
Oh holy crap! You read this as a confirmation of invisible bigfoot?
I’d be like the Abominable Snowman. I’d be Bigfooting everybody even if I tried not to. There’s almost no way you can avoid that. Whatever I do should be totally transparent.
-- Bill Clinton
Click to expand...
Allow me to parse that for you, Histo. Here is what the big dog is saying:

He was president for eight years and everything he does is highly scrutinized both by fans and detractors. If he had an official position in the White House it would be controversial and the focus on him would get in the way of work being done by others. "bigfooting" is a colloquial term for this - aka stepping on others toes - aka getting in their way. The transparency he mentions is a reference to a government and management concept that decision making processes should be known and understood by those outside of the process, as opposed to secretive (opaque).

That you consider Clinton's comments as a statement that bigfoot exist and are invisible is really quite telling. I fear for you, Histo.
 
historian said:
For those that were sleeping, several weeks AFTER Spektator posted the alleged note scribbled on by Carter, he then made an outrageous claim on this thread that he was able to corner the former President at a public appearance AND ask him 3 Bigfoot questions in public. This didn't seem possible, given the presence of the Secret Service, the press, his wife, real VIP's, etc., etc. So as you can see above, I gave Spektator the opportunity to provide us with the finer details of that meeting, so that we could better evaluate his statement as to it's veracity. Now, Spektator comes back with the BLIND MONKEY excuse in that he cannot see that clarification request. His continued dodging of the questions will be pretty much the last nail in his coffin, in regard to the veracity of all his contributions on this board. But I am not calling Spektator a LIAR, mind you.
Click to expand...
Spektator has provided more then ample proof; your non-acceptance does not change that fact.

In the end, Spektator will never provide enough proof to satisfy your objections as you will discount any and all such documentation. Even if Carter got on national TV today and said “I’ve never seen a BF, never had contact with a BF, never have made any claims that I have…I 100% deny this fictional creature exists” you’d create excuses, or other false reasons, to discount his very own words.

For that matter, I am not sure what is so hard to believe that a forum member might be in the position to have contact with someone like Carter; who is very accessible when it comes to his Habitat for Humanity projects.

All that said, your discounting Spektator’s claims/proof wrt Carter does nothing to advance your own “woo woo” and obviously false claims/lies.

At every turn, you have been proven wrong. Oh, you’ll rant, attack/bully forum members, munch corn dogs, perhaps even consult the Corn Gods….but you’ll never provide anything to support your made-up claims.
 
silvereagle responds:
January 22nd, 2008 at 3:03 pm
And with that statement, Bill Clinton just GOT BANNED FROM VIRTUALLY EVERY BIGFOOT CHAT ROOM IN THE COUNTRY. Obviously Bill Clinton had access to the TOP SECRET DoD Bigfoot captivity study performed during the 60’s, at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Essentially, Bill appears to mean that “he will be a neutral observer but he will remain invisible despite pleas for him to do otherwise”. Since transparent means invisible in most English dictionaries, this is a major blow below the belt for just about every Bigfoot researcher in the United States of America. They will eventually get over it, just like a blow below the belt. But not without feeling like everything that they believed in, had just come crashing down.
Click to expand...

You actually think that "transparent" means invisible?

Glass is not invisible.

What dictionary defines transparent as invisible?

Here is Merriam-Webster's definition:

Main Entry: trans·par·ent
Pronunciation: \tran(t)s-ˈper-ənt\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Medieval Latin transparent-, transparens, present participle of transparēre to show through, from Latin trans- + parēre to show oneself
Date: 15th century
1 a (1): having the property of transmitting light without appreciable scattering so that bodies lying beyond are seen clearly : pellucid (2): allowing the passage of a specified form of radiation (as X-rays or ultraviolet light) b: fine or sheer enough to be seen through : diaphanous
2 a: free from pretense or deceit : frank b: easily detected or seen through : obvious c: readily understood d: characterized by visibility or accessibility of information especially concerning business practices
synonyms see clear
— trans·par·ent·ly adverb
— trans·par·ent·ness noun
Click to expand...
 
The first five articles that came up when I did a Google search for "bill clinton white house sasquatch" are all word-for-word identical, and read as follows:

ATLANTA (AP) - Bill Clinton doesn't want to become the White House's Sasquatch.
The former president says it would be a mistake for him to have a specific job if he were to return to Washington with a new Clinton administration.
"I'd be like the abominable snowman," Clinton told reporters Monday. "I'd be Bigfooting everybody even if I tried not to. There's almost no way you can avoid that."
Clinton said his best use on behalf of his wife, Democratic candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton, were she president, would be "to try to help her talk through all these problems and then to be available for very specific assignments that would not in any way undermine the authority of the vice president or the secretary of state."
Asked if he would live in the White House, Clinton said, "I would anticipate being there, unless you know something I don't."
Click to expand...
This clearly a standard AP feed, since it was repeated word-for-word on Yahoo, Netscape, the International Business Times, the Guardian and USTI News. Note that this feed says nothing about "transparency".

Historian has latched onto the mere word, and not the meaning. And I have no idea where he got the quote about "transparency" from, since it's not mentioned on the five websites above.
 
arthwollipot said:
The first five articles that came up when I did a Google search for "bill clinton white house sasquatch" are all word-for-word identical, and read as follows:

This clearly a standard AP feed, since it was repeated word-for-word on Yahoo, Netscape, the International Business Times, the Guardian and USTI News. Note that this feed says nothing about "transparency".

Historian has latched onto the mere word, and not the meaning. And I have no idea where he got the quote about "transparency" from, since it's not mentioned on the five websites above.
Click to expand...
Surly you are not suggesting that Historian has embellished the Bill Clinton "Sasquatch" story, creating the "transparent" portion of it are you?

Why, I bet Historian would no problem at all providing a link to a main stream news source that would support this.
 
I searched for "Bill Clinton" "whatever I do should be totally transparent" and found three sites listing a story from AP writer Shannon McCaffrey.

Topix.com
Examiner.com
Ledger-Enquirer


So it could well be a part of the story - interesting that a lot of the main sites didn't include that part of it though.
 
Yes, the line is in some versions of the AP story, but it bears no resemblance to Historian's claims about the line or the word transparent itself.

Historian, what dictionary defines transparent as invisible?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom